Ki, Kokyu, and Attitudes

[mikesigman@eart]

"Internal strength" - posted at length here-and-there, done by very few - more rarified and specialized a skill as virtuoso piano playing. I think the majority of what people claim is internal strength is simply #3 exerted against those who cannot tell the difference and are simply awed by virtuosity in skill. (I'm sure there is overlap between all of these, at times)
In E. J. Harrison's, THE FIGHTING SPIRIT OF JAPAN, he devotes two chapters to a "master" of aiki/kiai (his terms) Kunishige Nobuyuki. Well worth reading, because, among other things, he describes some highly "unnatural" methods of training to develop aiki. And it's also refreshing to read this term used referring to a martial art unrelated to DR/aikido. At the end of the chapter, he writes the following, which illustrates the distinction I was trying to make, in response to Dan Harden, back quite away now. Here, he is quoting a letter from R.E. West, written to R.W. Smith in 1954. This is heavily cut, but it is pages 126-128 in my edition:
Jiro Nango (about 130 lb.) . . . called me to his office. he was small and old and was the nephew of Kano. . . . . then he asked whether I had any questions. I said, 'Yes, I would like to know how to develop the tanden.' He expressed surprise at my knowledew of its existence and said that it was not part of the regular Judo College teaching, but that he woudl give me a demonstration of it's effrectiveness. DESCRIPTION CONTINUES AS HE DOES SO. ESSENTIALLY, I BELIEVE IT IS WHAT OTHERS HAVE REFERRED TO AS ROOTING OR GROUND FORCE. WEST CONCLUDES. . . .In closing regarding this, Nango was hard to throw normally because of excellent tai-sabaki (turning movement in judo), but when he utilized the power of the tanden, he was impossible to throw.

The skills to do these things are, I would agree, *relatively* hard to find in the overall scheme of things, but given the size of Asian martial arts, the skills or aspects of them aren't all that rare. Although I first saw and felt some people with the ki/kokyu (same as qi/jin, in this usage) skills in Aikido, I wound up having to go to the Chinese martial arts to acquire what meagre skills I could...information is hard to find there, also. So coming back into the Japanese martial arts for a quick look-around during the last few years (as sort of a last check before starting a how-to book on these skills), I found that there are actually more skill available than I had originally thought. My late realization about these skills was because I had the unfortunate preconception that the "internal strength" skills were so closely guarded by the Chinese (it was a death penalty offense to show some "secrets of China" to foreigners, at times in Chinese history), that few if any Japanese ever got access to this sort of information.

The quote from Ellis was fairly mind-boggling when I read those things in Harrison's book. It means that the years of Judo I did were bereft of some core knowledge and I had been totally unaware of it. I had studied Uechi-Ryu on Okinawa at one time and piecing together what I had seen and what others reported, I have realized and accepted that once again, while I knew a lot about katas, application, kobudo, yada, yada, yada, I had missed something core to real karate (and a remebrance of my sensei showing me a kokyu trick one night in the dojo which I didn't understand at the time haunts me, too).

I did Aikido for a number of years and I thought there were a few bits and pieces borrowed from some access to Chinese knowledge, but during the last year of re-visiting Aikido (I had left Aikido and studied Chinese martial arts for a number of years) I've come to realize this knowledge was to be found sparingly, but to a greater degree of sophistication than I'd thought, in not only Aikido, but most of the so-called "koryu" and related arts.

From the literature and doka, it appears obvious that Ueshiba knew about these things and he knew how to drop the common and vague "hints that I know about this special information". Where Ueshiba got that information is an open discussion. The theory that Ueshiba picked up Chinese knowledge from China got some legs (and mis-led a number of us) from the very fact that Ueshiba went to China a couple of times.

However, Rob John has come onto the scene with his "Aunkai" stuff from Akuzawa. Purportedly, Akuzawa gathered his information from Daito-Ryu and a couple of other sources and Akuzawa is now teaching a system containing what he knows. So the "rare" knowledge is finding an outlet through Akuzawa and I believe that other sources are opening up as well, if the grapevine can be believed.

The interesting thing about the "A Un" nomenclature is that it made me go back and look at the historical sources. The "A Un" gods (Google a picture of the kongourikishi statues, if you don't know what they are) go back a long time in Japanese history, well before the Ueshiba and many of the other common things we would normally discuss about judo, Aikido, karate, koryu arts, etc. Kongourikishi translates via kanji to the Chinese "Jin Gang Li Shi". The "Jin Gang" are what are called "Buddha's Warrior Attendants" (The Jin Gang Dau Dui posture I mentioned from the Chen Taiji yesterday is "Buddha's Warrior Attendant Pounds Mortar" and is closely related to "Shiko", I feel almost certain).

"A" and "Un" have an equivalent in Chinese martial arts that is specifically tied into the qi and jin training through breathing methods. In China, the pronunciation is "Ha" and "Heng". The scowling Yin and Yang vestiges and appearances of "A" and "Un" kongourikishi is commonly seen on the lions guarding many Chinese edifices... open-mouth, closed-mouth, strected up, contracted, and so on. I.e., these representations of the physical yin and yang postures in relation to the breathing methods goes way back.

The point I'm making with these preliminary observations is that there is and there has been an availability of these skills not only recently in Japan, but apparently much further back than I would have guessed even a year ago. Ueshiba didn't need to go to China for these things. The traditional arts (and hence DR, Judo, etc.) have had access to them for some time. Reading one of two koryu-related books, I find the standard references to these skills.

The problem is that even though these skills have been around within the higher levels of the Japanese arts for a lot longer that would be apparent on the surface, there are still very few (comparatively) who know how to do these things or even know what they are, in most instances. Which gets to the part in my heading about "attitude". How do you tell some person who has been "doing martial art X" for 20 or 30 years or more that he may be missing a key element? All the normal defensive responses, not to mention the acquired pride,pomp, "status", etc., will come into play. You can see it on this forum. I've seen it on others.

If you simply "don't make waves" and mention these things, you're essentially slighting all the upcoming students and enthusiasts at the schools of all of these people. If you try to bring it up so that the noise gets some attention, there is no way to avoid the ego-centered reactions. If you don't bring it up and you happen to supposedly care for martial arts, you're not doing well by the very thing you profess to care for. And so on. It's a thorny issue. Sooner or later, though, as more information sources come online, people are going to have wider access to the information. All the teachers, books, etc., which today don't mention these skills and how to do them as part of the basics will be shrugged off in the future with "Oh, he didn't know", just as happens with some of the Asian books today, when knowledgeable martial artists of Asia discuss them. BTW, it's simply an accepted fact that "most people don't know" how to do these things.

But anyway, I think for the moment, the 3 issues in the header are inextricably bound up and any discussion of ki and kokyu issues rightfully needs to consider "attitude" within the current hierarchies. It makes a good discussion, IMO.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

[Itten]

If you simply "don't make waves" and mention these things, you're essentially slighting all the upcoming students and enthusiasts at the schools of all of these people. If you try to bring it up so that the noise gets some attention, there is no way to avoid the ego-centered reactions. If you don't bring it up and you happen to supposedly care for martial arts, you're not doing well by the very thing you profess to care for. And so on. It's a thorny issue. Sooner or later, though, as more information sources come online, people are going to have wider access to the information. All the teachers, books, etc., which today don't mention these skills and how to do them as part of the basics will be shrugged off in the future with "Oh, he didn't know", just as happens with some of the Asian books today, when knowledgeable martial artists of Asia discuss them. BTW, it's simply an accepted fact that "most people don't know" how to do these things.


Mike,
I appreciate your fervour, even though i don't always agree with your manner, but thats neither here nor there. The Sufis, who really do exist outside of story books, have a number of very pertinant sayings relating to the phenomena of transmission of inner teachings.

There would be no such thing as fools gold if real gold did not exist.

When the student is ready the teachers appears

Every teacher gets the students they deserve, every student gets the teacher they deserve.

I don't see the need to convert anyone to anything, those who are looking will see whats out there, and if not, fine. the last thing i want personally is more people clamouring for what they are not prepared to work for.
all the best, Alec

[cxt]

Mike

Could you please, please, pretty please, give this a rest??

You have jumped the SAME topic to and from at least 3-4 different threads.

You still owe me an answer to YOUR claim that "ki" and "kyuko" have--and I quote "simple physics" to explain how they work.

I answered your question---time to man-up and answer mine.

Please post the "simple physics" you claim.

Tell me Mike if it was a "death penalty offense" to show "secrets of China to forginers" then how did the Japanese/Okinwan karate-ka and Aikido-ka develop them??

Also, since you have ALSO claimed that such skills are "prevelent" then that direcdtly contridicts your assertion above that people were not taught the skills.

If Ueshiba "picked up his skills in China"

A-Then it was NOT a "death penalty" thing then?

B-Where did Takeda get his training?
By all reports he was just as good if not better than Ueshiba--could do the same sort of things.

C-Did not Ueshiba pass on his info to his lifelong students??

So Ueshiba failed to pass this "secret" info onto his OWN son, and men that trained with him for more years than you have been alive---but YOU, know the "secrets" that he refused to everyone else??

That sound plausable to you there Mike????

Ok, I know its sounds plausable to YOU---your the guy that "knows the secret handshake" after all.

What I should be asking is if that really makes rational sense to anyone else.


Chris Thomas

[mikesigman@eart]

I appreciate your fervour, even though i don't always agree with your manner, but thats neither here nor there. Then why bring it up? I have an attitude. In fact, I've had several attitudes over a period of time. The first attitude I had was to approach the "names" and "experts" who had "been teaching for many years" types and I was very polite, making every effort to say, "All of us here are 'judging' people at tournaments but none of the judging criteria is using these basic and demonstrable skills". Because I was polite and not pushy, they simply ignored me, even when you could see the realization hit them.... they were not about to jeopardize the status, role-playing, etc., to logic when it could be safely ignored. The problem I had with that was that the ultimate insult for their decision immediately flows downhill to the "students" of these people. So bear in mind that I'm usually not talking to the person you see me corresponding to on the net... I'm talking to the students behind him/her or the few unseen lurkers who are really trying to get information.

I deliberately changed my "manner" after that. After all, I'm one of those people in the martial arts that has actually been in a lot of fights and competition and I don't mind a little contention and checking someone's oil. To borrow from Chas Clements' famous sayings: "A group of martial artists get together... a fight breaks out. Quelle surprise". Most of the people doing the "teaching" are more into "being a teacher" and protecting that status and notoriety than they are in getting to the heart of a martial art. So I admittedly have an attitude about those kinds of people and it affects my "manner". Naturally, they have an attitude about anyone who offers an idea which may threaten their status. So you have 2 attitudes, to consider, Alec.... not just mine. Whose attitude is the more justified? If you go back and look at most of my posts on the internet, you'll see that any contention I get into is almost invariably reactionary and not initiated by me. Consider my viewpoint about the people I'm often debating when you consider any other perspective that seems to one-sidedly focus on *my* "attitude" or "manner". Most of all consider the students of all these "teachers" when you consider the superficial argument about "manner". The idea that any group of "teachers" in various arts rate more concern because they have declared themselves experts than do the students of these people .... that's an interesting argument. I hope you can at least theoretically see why my concern goes to the students of these people. I've *been* the student of people like this and wasted years of my life, BTW.
The Sufis, who really do exist outside of story books, have a number of very pertinant sayings relating to the phenomena of transmission of inner teachings.

There would be no such thing as fools gold if real gold did not exist.

When the student is ready the teachers appears

Every teacher gets the students they deserve, every student gets the teacher they deserve. I'm not sure what you're saying, Alec. Using that sort of logic, a municipality shouldn't bother to supervise the operations of used-car dealerships because it's the will of fate if someone happens to buy a misrepresented product and it's up to the buyer whether he gets a good one or not. Or a good used car will appear when the buyer is ready. Or people get the used car they deserve. I think your sayings are interesting as sayings that sound applicable in a metaphysical world, but I disagree with the idea that we should just shrug if a student innocently winds up with a bogus teacher. There is a section of this forum dealing with bogus teachers, so obviously other people think bogus teachers should be decried, also.
I don't see the need to convert anyone to anything, those who are looking will see whats out there, and if not, fine. the last thing i want personally is more people clamouring for what they are not prepared to work for. Fair enough. I'm simply putting the topic out for debate and I have no real vested interest other than in the debate... I happen to get myself into a thinking mode (which helps my personal progress, understanding, and data acquisition) by using these debates. I don't have much vested emotion or animus, even though my lack of obeisance to rituals and protocols may give that impression to someone used to a certain amount of affectation in their own martial arts. It makes me look like I have some sort of "manner" while at the same time it appears to me (and many others) that a lot of "teachers" have an "attitude". ;) Maybe if we try to establish the winner of the "mannerism" debate by whose perspective is the most correct, we can have an interesting discussion, eh?

All the Best.

Mike

[cxt]

Mike

You call the above "thinking mode" do you?

If you want to "debate" then by all means--lets do so.

Start with the "simple physics" you claim to have that explain "ki."

Then answer the rest of my questions--including the ones based upon Occams Razor--you know, or maybe you don't, the "Cliffs Notes" version is that generally the simplist answer is usually the correct one.



Chris Thomas

[mikesigman@eart]

Incidentally, if the thread can't be moderated in this area of the forum, maybe we can move it to another area, since the topic could fit into other categories fairly easily.

[cxt]

Mike

What areas are left Mike???

You have already run away from the very "debates" you claim to want to have on 3-4 other threads.

Man-up and answer some direct questions---or does "knowing the secret handshake" exempt you from the very debate you claim to want??


Chris Thomas

[mikesigman@eart]

You call the above "thinking mode" do you?

If you want to "debate" then by all means--lets do so.

Start with the "simple physics" you claim to have that explain "ki." If you're simply going to drag baggage from one thread to another, Chris, and if you want to join in the discussion, you need to carry the thread of logic and quit injecting your somewhat "unique" personality into the discussions.

Your initial positions were "ki and kokyu, who needs 'em". After further discussions, you allowed as how you "did some of that stuff". When asked for at least something beyond the assertion that "Oh yeah, I did some of that stuff", you began demanding that I say what it is. I asked you to at least participate in the discussion if you "already did some of that stuff" by using at least simple physics to get the ball rolling.

Now I don't mind explaining some things as part of a discussion or debate, but I'm not going to respond to the idea that I can be rudely challenged and bullied into doing so. If, as you tried to imply, you already know how to do some of these things, then participate by throwing out a few things you know. I suggested you start with the basics of how to "move from the center" as kokyu does. If you can't get that particular ball rolling and be a part of the debate, then character assassination and challenges/demands aren't going to incentivize me into telling you how to do things. If you can't debate civilly, then just lurk.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

[Itten]

I'm not sure what you're saying, Alec. Using that sort of logic, a municipality shouldn't bother to supervise the operations of used-car dealerships because it's the will of fate if someone happens to buy a misrepresented product and it's up to the buyer whether he gets a good one or not. Or a good used car will appear when the buyer is ready. Or people get the used car they deserve. I think your sayings are interesting as sayings that sound applicable in a metaphysical world, but I disagree with the idea that we should just shrug if a student innocently winds up with a bogus teacher. There is a section of this forum dealing with bogus teachers, so obviously other people think bogus teachers should be decried, also.

To some extent, yes. Its not the will of fate, but it is probably laziness and greed. If a student "innocently" winds up with the "wrong" teacher, with all the info out there, maybe they are a good fit. You suggest that you wasted time before you began your "real" training, maybe that was the preparation you needed to appreciate what you met. Yes, i think it's good that some people feel the need to decry bogus teachers, but maybe if we all put more time in training and less time in blowing off steam, the bogus teachers would be so obvious they would just disappear. I hope the guy who comes to my dojo looking for a black belt in 3 years finds one down the road, much less of a nuisance to me and the serious students.;)

[mikesigman@eart]

To some extent, yes. Its not the will of fate, but it is probably laziness and greed. If a student "innocently" winds up with the "wrong" teacher, with all the info out there, maybe they are a good fit. You suggest that you wasted time before you began your "real" training, maybe that was the preparation you needed to appreciate what you met. Yes, i think it's good that some people feel the need to decry bogus teachers, but maybe if we all put more time in training and less time in blowing off steam, the bogus teachers would be so obvious they would just disappear. I hope the guy who comes to my dojo looking for a black belt in 3 years finds one down the road, much less of a nuisance to me and the serious students.;) Alec, while I understand what you're saying, I disagree. If your son wants to learn to be an electronics technician and he goes to a school for 2 years and it turns out that the teacher wasn't really qualified and didn't know the subject, it's sort of fatalistic to say "it's all just part of the grand design".... I say bogus electronics schools are NOT something I would shrug off as "kismet" and I don't shrug off with "kismet" the idea "bogus martial arts schools only exist because the student had it coming" in some way. ;)

My opinion, FWIW

Mike

[cxt]

Mike

Its not "baggage" --its expecting people to answer questions that are put to them.

I answered your questions on YOU claiming "special" skills--as you demanded I do.

Then you ran away and refused to anwser my questions--ON THE SAME TOPIC concerning your claims that "simple physics" can explain "ki" etc.

Your the one whom keeps reposting the SAME topic on multiple threads.

And if you wish to keep things "in the now" so to speak---then please address the various problems I raised with your "logic" concerning claims of Ueshiba, the "death penalty" and other errors in your "logic."

Gathering up your skirts and running away is not going to save you Mike.

You want a "debate??"

Please lets do so.

And you can start by answering my questions and addressing the problems with your "logic."



Chris Thomas

[mikesigman@eart]

Man-up and answer some direct questions---or does "knowing the secret handshake" exempt you from the very debate you claim to want??
Chris, my opinion is that you're one of those teachers that *doesn't* know any of this stuff. You injected the idea that you do, so I take you at your word. I'll be glad to *share* in the discussion, but since you have claimed to know some of this stuff, lay it out and quit *demanding* that I one-sidedly am required to answer your questions. Either tell us something factual to which I can respond, or admit that you really don't know what this topic is about and civilly approach the conversation from that level. Any more personal attacks from you and I'll ignore the rest of your posts.

Mike Sigman

[Ron Tisdale]

You know what?

If people want a civil answer, they'd better learn to ask a civil question.

We know the people who disagree with Mike's "manner", his "posting style" and his "info". Fine. Duly noted. Your objections will be taken down for the record. From this point, why don't you go whine about it somewhere else, and let those who want to discuss these things do it?

Best,
Ron

[cxt]

Mike


Then PLEASE "share."

I am still waiting for you to post the "simple physics" that explain "ki"

Would also like you to "share" the ratonal for your post concerning Ueshiba etc.

For a guy that feel does not know "much" I certianly have posited a number of questions that YOU---a guy that does claim to "know" quite a bit, simply can't address.

What does that tell you???

Oh, I'd be carfeul about demanding that I "show you something factual" if I were you.

The last time you asked me to do that, it was in regard to YOUR claim that the "standared bearer" of the Chen style Taiji said you were the "ONLY westerner" that understood how to move in Taiji.

Which I did.

Still waiting on the verification for that.

Besides, I have asked you repeated questions--ones that you either can't or won't answer.

Why should I show you any more courtesy than you have shown me???


Chris Thomas

[cxt]

Ron

I have asked any number of quite "civil" questions and asked any number of times--quite politly that Mike address various problems with his "logic."

And he remains either unwilling or unable to do either.

I still await his "simple physics" that explain "ki" etc and for him to address the various problems with his "logic" concerning Ueshiba, the "death penalty" etc above.

Nothing insulting about the above at all--its a quite "civil" questions and a very poilite posit about his post.

And he has compounded his failure with insult and invictive---things that you are now doing as well.

I give what I get---pretty simple concept, in martial arts AND debate.

Oh, and I AM one of the "people that want to discuss these things" and as such I wish the discussion to based in reality---I have little interest in wasting time with posits that make no sense and detract from honest discourse.



Chris Thomas

[Ron Tisdale]

So why can't you just say

"I win"

and go? You don't buy what he's selling. Fine. Let others discuss. We now know how you feel.


insult and invictive---things that you are now doing as well.

And where do I do this??? The use of the word whine is not an insult.

Best,
Ron

[cxt]

Ron

Like I said, I wish to have a discussion that is based somewhat in reality.

I don't feel that groundless, unsupported, illogical conjucture advances discussions concerning topics like "ki" and "kokyo."

Too much "dragon ball Z" taint about such talk already.

And allowing things to slip into the realm of "cause I say so" only HURTS it further.

If your honestly interested in having an honest discusion, then you should be doing EVERYTHING you can keep things on the "up and up" so to speak.

You should have no more tolerence for sloppy logic and poor reasoning than I do.

If there is "simple physics" that explain "ki" etc then you should be ASKING to see it----just like I am.

Oh, and I am pretty sure that catagorizing peoples posts as "whining" is in point of fact meant to be an insult.
If it was not--you would not be using a descriptive with a negative meaning now would you.


Chris Thomas

[Mark Murray]

Okay, I'm not the moderator for this forum, but I *am* asking for a short time-out on the back and forth postings. (On-topic posts are fine.)

Chris, PM the moderator and take your issues up with him.

Mike, I think at least one of Chris's questions was valid in this thread. Your defining of ki/kokyu. You mention it in reference to Japanese martial arts in your first post. It'd be nice to read about your definition of those words.

Thanks,
Mark

[Ron Tisdale]

To treat with gross insensitivity, insolence, or contemptuous rudeness. See Synonyms at offend.
To affront or demean: an absurd speech that insulted the intelligence of the audience.
Obsolete. To make an attack on.

I have not done this. whatever, flame on...
Best,
Ron

[cxt]

Ron

And as the person that you address the comment to--I feel that mis-charcterizing my direct questions as "whining" to be both "contemptous" and "rude."

Nice that you ignore 95% of my post in order to argue definations

Directly on topic AGAIN.

I simply wish to have the "simple physics" that explain "ki" to be posted.

As should you!!!!!

I also would like to have my questions concerning Ueshiba, the "death penalty" for teaching outsiders, etc answered.

If Ueshiba was able to learn the skills in China than clearly people were not frightened of a "death penalty" NOT to treach them.
And if they would do so then--then why not at other times??

It also begs the question as to where/how Takeda developed HIS skills--which were at the very least the equal of Ueshiba's--and Takeda did not go to China to learn them.
Yet its been suggested that the Japanese/Okinwans ie outsiders, did NOT learn them.

Which either way you cut means that that posit is seriously flawed.

It also begs the questions as to why Ueshiba did not pass the skills onto his own son, or the people that trained with him for decades, or anyone else.

But folks like Mike claim to have learned them.

Lots of serious questions here,

No answers.

And if your serious about having a discussion on this topic--you should be standing over here with me, asking that these questions to be answered.



Chris Thomas

[mikesigman@eart]

In a lot of ways, Ron, I see Chris' attitude to be part of what I was talking about at the inception-post of the thread. Despite previously trying to assert that he knew and used some of these things, he's in a bad situation. He can't very easily lay out a basic part of the discussion and have a viable dialogue because he pretty obviously is lost. So he resorts to an offensive approach and this is pretty much what I said happens.

Now, not everyone is ignorant. But some of us are more ignorant than others and nobody knows it all (well, I have seen a few people that maybe know almost all of it). Some other poster could probably easily lay out a scenario of "moving from the center", even if Chris can't, so there is no implication that "everyone is ignorant", as Chris is trying to imply.

But let's take the kokyu/jin issue in the martial context and see what happens in the discussion. I'll try to lay out the start in order to indicate that this can be dealt with using physics, kinesiology, etc., but the point in starting the thread was that I wanted to have "attitude" measured in relation to the discussion. And let's carefully watch that part, particularly from people who represent themselves as "teachers" in these arts that should contain elements of ki and kokyu-power.

The kokyu/jin skills are the easiest to explain, but the hardest to do at goodly skill levels. It's like stretching a string between 2 nails and plucking it. Technically, you could say that you have "made music". But then look at the person who plays nouveau-flamenco guitar and realize that he too is "only plucking strings".... yet the difference between the 2 examples is huge. Same with kokyu/jin skill. You can "move something with your dantien", for instance a table, by just walking up to it, putting your belt-buckle agains the edge of the table, and then moving forward. Or you can learn to take the arm of uke and push him forward in "ikkyo" using the legs walking the body forward and say you "use moving from the hara all the time". However, Kokyu/jin skills go way up in sophistication. There are usages in the store-and-release of great sudden-power, the ability to stand still and yet manipulate moving vector-directions of force, and so on... and all of these can legitimately be compared to moving that table with your belt buckle, just as the guitar-player is technically doing the same thing as the guy who plucked the string stretched between two nails.

So having said that, what differentiates the use of kokyu/jin power from normal movement? The most comprehensive explanation, in my opinion (well, it's used by a lot of Chinese, too, TBH), is that you're sourcing your force from the lower-body/ground or from your weight.

As an example, consider holding a liter-bottle of water in both hands, out comfortably in front of your chest. Most people use their frame as some sort of "tower" and the shoulders/arms work off of that tower to hold the bottle. In a kokyu/jin description, the actual originating force comes from the ground so that the vector resultants take pretty much the shortest distance from the ground to the waist to the bottle and the shoulder/arms and torso do no more that convey or "transmit" that artificially-directed force origin. I.e., the bottle could be pictured (in the kokyu/jin example) as sitting at the apex of a triangle that has a base between the two feet, the sides go from each foot to the corresponding side of the pelvis/midsection/hara and then the sides bent out to and meet at the hands holding the bottle.

Moving the bottle in a small up-down, side-to-side circle involves adjusting the forces from the ground by manipulating the legs and the waist. That is what "moving from the center" means, in using a very simple example. It can get quite complicated.

The problem is that to convince your mind to begin accepting this new usage of force origins so that it becomes automatic takes a deliberate re-training of the body over a long period of time (and BTW, that's why a Taiji form is done so slowly at first). Someone who plays arbitrarily with a few coarse examples of "using the center" is not really even in the game. A person who moves honestly using the center a few minutes a week and then the rest of the week uses normal motion will never re-train the mind and body to accept the new form of motion (which is the major reason why weight-training, etc., is discouraged for beginners). It's easy to feel (if you have the experience)even in someone's handshake whether they have acquired this different skill of movement... so the "I already do that" people often unknowingly make themselves the butt of sideways glances in some martial arts circles.

Kokyu/jin is said to be the physical manifestation of ki/qi, so this discussion can get unbelievably complex. But this simple example should be a start for the discussion of whether these things are really missing in most western versions of Asians martial arts.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

[mikesigman@eart]

Oh, and just to use my very basic example above.... why bother to do things this way, Chris has asked in the past. Just to give ONE reason why: if you use the mind to arrange the force-carrying paths so that the solidity of the ground is simply conveyed through the bones (and the resultant vectors, sometimes), then the ground can "hold" things rather than your having to use your other musculature to initiate power/forces to hold something. So what happens is that manipulating this kind of forces for your power, instead of needing strong arms, etc., can make a relatively small person quite strong, once he has conditioned his body to "carry" the power of the ground (or weight), rather than "initiate" power to oppose forces.

FWIW


Mike

[Mark Murray]

I simply wish to have the "simple physics" that explain "ki" to be posted.


Done. If you'd like to share your views, that'd be fine, too.



I also would like to have my questions concerning Ueshiba, the "death penalty" for teaching outsiders, etc answered.

If Ueshiba was able to learn the skills in China than clearly people were not frightened of a "death penalty" NOT to treach them.
And if they would do so then--then why not at other times??


The way I read Mike's statement is in no way how you took it. And I've also heard that "at times in Chinese history", it was forbidden to share those skills. China's big and has a long history. If you can refute that claim for all of China's history, I'd like to hear about it. Besides the fact that Mike did say this, "My late realization about these skills was because I had the unfortunate preconception that the "internal strength" skills were so closely guarded by the Chinese ..."

Note "unfortunate preconception". I'm not sure where you take that Mike was signifying that it was written in stone and immutable.



It also begs the question as to where/how Takeda developed HIS skills--which were at the very least the equal of Ueshiba's--and Takeda did not go to China to learn them.
Yet its been suggested that the Japanese/Okinwans ie outsiders, did NOT learn them.

Which either way you cut means that that posit is seriously flawed.

It also begs the questions as to why Ueshiba did not pass the skills onto his own son, or the people that trained with him for decades, or anyone else.


Off topic. If you want to talk about those issues, open a new thread for them. Or do a search to see if they've been talked about before.

[cxt]

Mike

Then PLEASE HELP me.

Please post the "simple physics" that explain "ki" you claim to have.

And PLEASE address the various holes, errors, and unsupported conjecture in your posts concerning the "death penalty" for treaching outsiders, the conjucture concerning Ueshiba etc.

You have taken the time to post A LOT of stuff that fails to adress either question.

All I am doing is asking for your help.

If you can't or won't answer the questions for the "debate" you also claim to want to have.

Then answer them to help those of us that are asking for the information.

A "simple physics" that would explain "ki" would be solid gold to people.

Why on earth would you claim that such "simple physics" exsist--yet can't or won't provide it?????????

Or did I just answer my own question?


Chris Thomas

[kimiwane]

ki/kokyu (same as qi/jin, in this usage)


Mmmmm. Nope.

ki/qi are equivalent, but jin/kokyu are not.

Kokyu is an organization of mind, body and ki with the breath. It is NOT an "issued" power.

Once you have kokyu, yes, you can issue jin, but kokyu is NOT a "power". It's just an integration. Once you have it, you can channel power through the organized body, but kokyu, itself, is just a specific organization of self.

[cxt]

Murry

Actually they ARE VERY MUCH ON TOPIC--they were brought up by Mike himself on his post on THIS topic on page 1.
All go directly to the conjuctures that Mike raised.
He wants to argue when and how and where Ueshiba learned what he knew--then he has to consider all the other people/locations etc.

(If Mike does not wish to deal with "other" explainations for his baseless conjucture--then he should not have introduced them in the first place.)

Plus if he wishes to establish China as where Ueishba learned the "secrets" then Mike himself must explain where Takeda learned them.

See, Mike sets up China as where Ueshiba got his power--yet Takeda, Ueshiba's main teacher did not go there--and he had the same abilties.
Thus the most logical explanation is China NOT being needed at all.

And in answer to your question-

Because if the "death penalty" was "sometimes" in force and "sometimes" not then that there was "penalty" at all is irrelevnt to the conjucture that the Chinese did not teach the Japanese/Okinwans.
Maybe they just taught them during one of the "sometimes not."
Or maybe some folks just were not scared.
Stright Occams Razor answer to the conjucture.

In any case I have yet to read any proof that that a formal or informal "death penalty" even existed for teaching outsiders.

One that applies to ALL chinese of all styles in all locations.

Or any proof that NO-ONE in the WHOLE of China, througout all of its 1000's of years of history, would ever break that rule.
Not a single monk, all pissed that the gov burned down his temple and murdered his fellow monks would EVER even consider teaching outsiders?
Not one single displaced gov offical fleeing from the Mongols or the Manchu would teach outsiders to maybe fight his bitter enemies??

I mean come on.



Chris Thomas

[M. McPherson]

And if your serious about having a discussion on this topic--you should be standing over here with me, asking that these questions to be answered.

Mr. Thomas,

Are you suggesting that serious discussion on this board (well, anywhere for that matter), and one's participation therein, is dependent upon agreement with your perspective, or challenging assertions in a way that you see fit? I'm fairly certain you didn't mean to suggest that. However, the vitriol of your responses (okay, and the wording of the above quote) has me wondering.
So much for a free and civil exchange of ideas, if so.
I have no horse in this race, but consider this a plea from the peanut gallery: if Mike Sigman's perspective, and his challenges to orthodoxy (suggested, overt, however you want to look at them) incense you so, then why not meet with him and see what works or doesn't? Because you seem to be spending an inordinate amount of energy challenging him on this board. I'll echo Ron's question and sentiment and ask, why should you care? None of this is going to be resolved over the internet, nor through the written word. Mike Sigman has given seminars on this, and will probably do so again, so why not attend one? If he's full of it, you'll actually know, and can report here in due fashion. Maybe he'll teach you something, or maybe you'll teach him something. Maybe, as seems to be the case when dueling internet folks meet, you'll realize that, in person, you're not such bad guys, and end up having a beer together.
I'm just dropping in my own two cents because this subject interests me greatly, and I'm getting tired of the incessant noise, the ad hominems and their heated responses that get interjected when people feel like their faith is being challenged. Hop in your car, get on a plane, in a bus, whatever, and feel this (or not) for yourself. Lots of people here go *great* distances for practice and seminars - consider it that, or at least an interesting opportunity. But until that laying on of hands, why bother?
I see that Mr. Sigman has provided not one, but two posts that elucidate (yet again) what he is talking about. I'd like to hope that we can take that as a neutral starting point for discussion, and leave the friction elsewhere.

[mikesigman@eart]

Mmmmm. Nope.

ki/qi are equivalent, but jin/kokyu are not.

Kokyu is an organization of mind, body and ki with the breath. It is NOT an "issued" power.

Once you have kokyu, yes, you can issue jin, but kokyu is NOT a "power". It's just an integration. Once you have it, you can channel power through the organized body, but kokyu, itself, is just a specific organization of self. So, David.... I laid out the physics for you. In another thread I gave you a direct example of a Japanese Aikido sensei using "kokyu" just as I described it. I say he trumps you and your faith in Feldenkrais as an active part of what kokyu is. If you want to debate me, do it with something other than your simple assertions.

I'll have to see if I can go re-find it in a quick search, but even on AikiWeb I believe someone mentioned that a well-known sensei said that kokyu was the manifestation of ki. Other places list kokyu as "ki power".

But why don't you explain why the Japanese sensei demonstrated heavy body power and called it "kokyu"? Either go to the physics and reproducible results or come up with something besides your simple assertions.

And by the way, you have attempted to imply you already knew these things... now's the chance to show that you have something other than attitude. The foundations are laid out in my posted example of a *simple* kokyu example.

Mike Sigman

[Ron Tisdale]

It also seems to help in absorbing a stronger person's power, right? I find that often in aikido at least, I'm in a position where to do a technique, if I can't absorb or even 're-route' my partner's power, and if they are stronger than I am, I can't really do the technique consistantly.

Best,
Ron

[mikesigman@eart]

It also seems to help in absorbing a stronger person's power, right? I find that often in aikido at least, I'm in a position where to do a technique, if I can't absorb or even 're-route' my partner's power, and if they are stronger than I am, I can't really do the technique consistantly. Hi Ron:

Sure. A force-path (which is really what "jin" means in its best martially-related definition) can work either way. To absorb an incoming force or to be the path where you "extend the ground outward like a telescoping tube" in a hit, push, etc. If you can just relax and let the leg (preferably the back leg, but NOT in the formation where it's simply acting as a brace out behind you) accept 100% responsibilty for taking someone's push, etc., you will find that it's not long before you become very difficult for people to move.

FWIW

Mike

[cxt]

Murry

No, I am very clearly suggesting that honest discourse requires honest participation.

In this case claims have been advanced that "simple physics" exsist that explain 'ki" etc.

A claim of fact requires that the facts be produced.

Thats not "my" intepretation--that simply the way intellegent discussion works.

I also suggest that you re-read Mikes post--he asked for, and I quote a "debate" on the subject.

And facts are required in a debate.

"Cause I say so" does not meet the standard for debates OR discussions.

As an educated fellow--you "speak" well here, you probably realize that you have edged into a couple of lines of fallcious reasoning above.
Such as the "appeal to authority"--that Mike has done seminars all over has no relevence to the claims of fact SANS fact that he has made.
Nor does asking me in effect "feel Mikes tech" in any way compensate his lack of logical support for conjuctures.
By that standard Mike Tyson is an unimpeachable source--after all he is both famous and skilled.

Again, the "fricton" is not coming from me--its coming from Mike and his "cause I say so" mode of discussion.

One that hurts rather than helps discussion about a topic already viewed as "suspect" by many.


Chris Thomas

[Ron Tisdale]

See, Mike sets up China as where Ueshiba got his power--yet Takeda, Ueshiba's main teacher did not go there--and he had the same abilties.


What is really remarkable to me, is that Mike SPECIFICALLY DOES NOT SAY THIS.


Where Ueshiba got that information is an open discussion. The theory that Ueshiba picked up Chinese knowledge from China got some legs (and mis-led a number of us) from the very fact that Ueshiba went to China a couple of times.

Mike is saying that people were mis-led by the fact that Ueshiba went to china. Not that this skill came from his trips to the mainland.

You are so emotionally involved in this discussion that you are MIS-READING what people write. When I find myself doing that...I STOP PARTICIPATING.

Best,
Ron

[cxt]

Mike

If you "laid out the physics" elsewhere for david already---then why can't you lay them out again for me???

Seems to me that if you have already done it once then doing it a second time would be even easier??

Or can you point me to the thread they are already on????

If you can't---why not??

Scared that you made a mistake in your math??

What logical reason would you have NOT to present infromation you claim exisits???

Or is it just that such "simple physic's" don't exsist?

The "lady" seems to be protesting quite a bit.

And no Mike--I don't really consider you a "lady" at all.


Chris Thomas

[Ron Tisdale]

Hi Mike,


preferably the back leg, but NOT in the formation where it's simply acting as a brace out behind you...

This is where I run into a problem. Yoshinkan form keeps that back leg pretty straight, and it's easy to figure you are translating power from the ground when what you are really doing is bracing. I know you've discussed this before, but could you speak to some ways of checking yourself while training to ensure that you are not bracing?

Best,
Ron

[cxt]

Ron

Your mis-reading the posit.

I never said Mike said that--I said that Mike suggests that Ueshiba got his power in China---thus "other" explainations become relevent.

A very resonable conclusion based upons Mikes post.

In any case the highlighted statement you post makes little sense--taken in context and if read as written.

Follow me here--if it means what you claim it does, then what point is there about a supposed Chinese "death penalty" for teaching certain skills to outsiders??

See, that don't make no sense at all.

So which is it--did they or did they not teach the Japanese/Okinwans?

Did Ueshiba learn it in China or did he learn it elsewhere and from whom?

If "you" are so emotionally involved that you can no longer be critical of your mates poor logic then please, remove YOURSELF from the discussion.


Chris Thomas

[mikesigman@eart]

This is where I run into a problem. Yoshinkan form keeps that back leg pretty straight, and it's easy to figure you are translating power from the ground when what you are really doing is bracing. I know you've discussed this before, but could you speak to some ways of checking yourself while training to ensure that you are not bracing? I just looked at "Dynamic Aikido" (which of course I carry in a pocket over my heart in a gold-foil wrapping.... not ;) ) and I have a couple of comments. Shioda's stance was never as pronounced as I see so commonly done in Yoshinkan, so I would quibble about what "Yoshinkan does", in some instances. Another factor is that Yoshinkan emphasizes a kenjutsu stance, so as much as I personally don't like it, I have to concede that it's there.

The problem is that establishing jin/kokyu paths is a skill that can be hampered by things like too much muscle, incorrectly sourcing forces, use of the shoulders (if you want a jin path to go from ground-to-hara-to-hand, using the shoulder to initiate part of your force will kill the ground vector force), etc. Having that back leg behind you to push off of makes you dependent on that forward-pointing "brace" so it will stop someone from developing the true and full path from the ground to the hands. Offhand, I'd suggest that you let someone push on your forearm and let your "brace" hold 100% of the push. Then gradually begin pulling that brace in (keep the upper body and lower-back relaxed and let his push go straight in toward your hara) until you can stand with your full weight over the back foot and the back leg is absorbing his push. That way you can start with the correct feel and then begin developing this path.

Regards,

Mike

[kokumo]

But why don't you explain why the Japanese sensei demonstrated heavy body power and called it "kokyu"? Either go to the physics and reproducible results or come up with something besides your simple assertions.

I'm not David but that's quite simple. In Japanese usage, "kokyu" covers a much broader territory than "jin."

That heavy body power can be an aspect of kokyu without being every aspect of kokyu.

"Kote" includes the wrist, it's true. But it also includes most of the forearm. And if you were to say that "'kote' IS wrist" you would be......somewhat limited in your accuracy.

So there's no "one-to-one" correspondence between Japanese and English with regard to that term.

Asserting a one-to-one correspondence between "jin" and "kokyu" may be similarly mistaken, even if everything under "jin" is subsumed within "kokyu," there are some other meanings of kokyu that just don't reduce to "jin." (Though I suspect there are some meanings of 'jin' that don't reduce to kokyu either.)

Another way to say this is to suggest that if you substitute "'jin' is a critical aspect of kokyu and if you aren't developing jin you're shortchanging your kokyu development" for "'jin' is kokyu" you avoid a very likely error and also push fewer emotional buttons.

This is an old problem. It took three hundred years of acculturation for Buddhism to be understood on its own terms in China, rather than in terms of partially correct but not entirely accurate "matching concepts" that were initially used. Since we're only a century into the introduction of East Asian martial arts to the west, we may have to be patient......

FL

[cxt]

Mike

So Shioda and the all the "other" Yoshinkan guys are doing it wrong then??

They are all failing to develop true power because they don't hold their legs right.

So let me get this stright--Shioda, a direct student of Ueshiba for many years is doing it wrong.

But you, without the benefit of being a direct student of Ueshiba are doing it correctly???


Chris Thomas

[Ron Tisdale]

Yeah, I'm slooooowly working on getting the front/top of the shoulders more and more out of the picture. They stop any of the 'good' force like a rock in a stream. ;) And cause all kinds of tensions that aren't pleasant in the long run.

On Bracing: My problem is that the yoshinkan method is very forward focus (and yes, I acknowledge the differentiation between Shioda and the Yoshinkan in general). We typically don't have our weight back...but I think I can find some venues where I can try this out specifically. I'm also finding ways that are interesting to keep the focus forward without necessarily having the weight forward, but there are other martial problems with that for me (if the weight is already forward, I can release and move very quickly). I guess you really have to separate some of the training methods. More of what Dan callls 'homework!'

Thanks,
Ron

[Ron Tisdale]

Chris, what Mike is suggesting is that Shioda did it right, but, as with Ueshiba, may not have passed all of what he could do on to all of his students. I'm not saying I necessarily agree with that, but I am willing to entertain it for the sake of the discussion.

As it happens, my instructor is one of the students of Shioda. So if I can not take it personally, perhaps others can do the same.

Ron (sheesh)

Hi Fred,


"'jin' is a critical aspect of kokyu and if you aren't developing jin you're shortchanging your kokyu development"

I think Mike has said pretty much that exact statement somewhere on aikiweb...or something pretty close to it. I don't remember that the reaction was all that different, though... ;)

Best,
Ron

[mikesigman@eart]

I'm not David but that's quite simple. In Japanese usage, "kokyu" covers a much broader territory than "jin." From post #21, I said: "But let's take the kokyu/jin issue in the martial context". Does that help?
Asserting a one-to-one correspondence between "jin" and "kokyu" may be similarly mistaken, even if everything under "jin" is subsumed within "kokyu," there are some other meanings of kokyu that just don't reduce to "jin." (Though I suspect there are some meanings of 'jin' that don't reduce to kokyu either.) Well, every instance of "kokyu power" I've seen that is legitimately done (not just someone's "take" on it) has been jin. "Kokyu" as used in the example I gave from a private mail, describing the Japanese sensei's literal and physical usage of "kokyu" was exactly jin. Nothing more, nothing less. Some Japanese prefer to say "ki power", "ki", and other things. It's an idiomatic usage... I don't quarrel with that... but I would suggest that the if I walked into the dojo's of a number of sensei's in Japan that can use these same skills and I say "kokyu", there won't be any misunderstanding at all.

Regards,

Mike

[mikesigman@eart]

Another way to say this is to suggest that if you substitute "'jin' is a critical aspect of kokyu and if you aren't developing jin you're shortchanging your kokyu development" for "'jin' is kokyu" you avoid a very likely error and also push fewer emotional buttons. So, in regard to my making "attitudes" a part of this thread, and my comment above about how I've already established in another thread that "kokyu" is a legitimate idiomatic way of describing this form of force-vector control... why would there be "emotional buttons" involved with this discussion? Offhand, the only reason I can see is that someone is not familiar with this power and/or not familiar with the idiom. "Kokyu" (the idiom for the force-vector skill) as a basis for "kokyu power" is fairly well known. What has been apparently misconstrued by many westerners is the idea that "kokyu" usually refers only to breath (and sometimes, idiomatically!!!!!, timing).

Regards,

Mike

[dbotari]

Kokyu is an organization of mind, body and ki with the breath. It is NOT an "issued" power.

Once you have kokyu, yes, you can issue jin, but kokyu is NOT a "power". It's just an integration. Once you have it, you can channel power through the organized body, but kokyu, itself, is just a specific organization of self.

In my reading of gozo Shioda's books where he tries to explain Kokyu-ryoku, he essentially describes it as a coordination of mind, body, technique, speed, timing and focused power. So in reading David's response I am inclined to agree that kokyu is "integration" or "organization" of the body.

[mikesigman@eart]

Yeah, I'm slooooowly working on getting the front/top of the shoulders more and more out of the picture. They stop any of the 'good' force like a rock in a stream. ;) And cause all kinds of tensions that aren't pleasant in the long run. Look at it like this, Ron. Here's a picture of a stiff, bent wire with me pushing a ball with the end of it. http://www.neijia.com/AirPush.jpg As far as the ball can feel, there is a vector force coming straight from my hand to the ball. If the wire is strong enough, the ball (if it had its eyes shut ;) ) would not know that the wire was bent. If the wire is too weak at the "stress area" (read "shoulder") the push won't be transmitted very well. The thing you have to do is let a push come into you so that it feels like the push is actually to your middle, which in turn is directly attached to the ground.
On Bracing: My problem is that the yoshinkan method is very forward focus (and yes, I acknowledge the differentiation between Shioda and the Yoshinkan in general). We typically don't have our weight back...but I think I can find some venues where I can try this out specifically. I'm also finding ways that are interesting to keep the focus forward without necessarily having the weight forward, but there are other martial problems with that for me (if the weight is already forward, I can release and move very quickly). I guess you really have to separate some of the training methods. Well, without getting too far ahead of ourselves, six-directions training and forces are critical to the function and theory of Aikido and "aiki". So any force that is in one direction is not in "harmony" with the universe or in the "balance" from which Aiki spontaneously is supposed to derive. That's from the Holy Book, Ron.... so I'm using that appeal to authority to beg you to change your ways and become an honest man. :)

Regards,

Mike

[M. McPherson]

you probably realize that you have edged into a couple of lines of fallcious reasoning above.
Such as the "appeal to authority"--that Mike has done seminars all over has no relevence to the claims of fact SANS fact that he has made.

Mr. Thomas,

Actually, I didn't. My suggestion was not predicated upon Mike's authority at all. Rather, it was upon his availability. He may be the biggest flim-flam man, for all I know. But if he's giving a seminar, you know where he'll be (as well as what he's teaching, that there are people there to witness things, etc). The experiment then comes with some manner of controls. So why should you have to go to him, and not the other way around? I don't know - life's unfair like that. Throw a seminar of your own, or invite him to your dojo. But, again, it's an opportunity. Maybe if he's a real mensch, he'll refund your fee if you're not fully satisfied. Given what I know of running seminars, probably not. It's a huge cost for most involved; you pay your money, you take your chances. I've been to a few seminars where the star of the show was lacking. Live and learn. Seriously - even the charlatans give you something to ponder, if even what *not* to aspire to.
From what I've heard, though, you might be in for a surprise (and, hey, I'm not preaching the gospel here - I reserve any final judgement until I've worked directly with someone).

[mikesigman@eart]

In my reading of gozo Shioda's books where he tries to explain Kokyu-ryoku, he essentially describes it as a coordination of mind, body, technique, speed, timing and focused power. So in reading David's response I am inclined to agree that kokyu is "integration" or "organization" of the body. Like I said, I don't mind Shioda's interpretations ... but bear in mind that these are his students' writings translated (with potential loss of meaning) into English. The key issue is this coordination of mind and body, if you want to infer that David Orange's words of "integration" or "organization" is the same thing. You're more or less saying that a vague terminology covers that bases. What I'm saying is, fine, now tell me exactly what is coordinated, integrated, or organized. I pretty much laid it out already, so if David (or you) disagree with what I defined, then tell me what the real definition of that coordination is and how it works on physical objects. I can show this fairly simple stuff over and over. David disagreed with my definition, so I'm asking for him to say how kokyu power is used. The two instances I'd suggest would be either explain something like Tohei's standing on one leg while someone tries to push him over OR how kokyu is used to push someone over in a simply kokyu throw (they're ALL kokyu throws, in the final analysis).

Regards,

Mike

[cxt]

Murrey

Again, if you understand the point I am making why do you keep bring up seminars???

They have nothing to do with highly questionable claims of fact made by Mike sans the actual "facts" of the matter.

I am asking him to post the "simple physics" that explain 'ki"--as he claimed that he could.

And to address the various errors and holes and mistakes in his spacious conjecture's concerning "death penalties" Ueshiba etc.

That has NOTHING to do with a given persons skills.

Besides, Mike has ALREADY eatablished that he CAN'T personally demonstrate the skills he talks about.
I have already directly asked him "why can't he show me" and he was unable or unwilling to answer.

Which is kinda a pattern.



Chris Thomas

[mikesigman@eart]

But if he's giving a seminar, you know where he'll be (as well as what he's teaching, that there are people there to witness things, etc). Just to keep the "Attitudes" part of this thread continually alive, let me note that I do workshops sporadically and at whim (i.e., when I feel like it). I don't do any aspect of martial arts for a living.... it's a fun hobby and a lifelong interest. Think how this affects my attitude and interests as compared to someone who is a "teacher" and whose status and livelihood is dependent upon martial arts. So when you see some of the vituperative outbursts in a discussion which suggests that some long-term *professional* martial artist may be missing some basic element, the "attitudes" may play around this factor.

FWIW

Mike

[mikesigman@eart]

Besides, Mike has ALREADY eatablished that he CAN'T personally demonstrate the skills he talks about.
I have already directly asked him "why can't he show me" and he was unable or unwilling to answer. I didn't mean to leave you with the wrong impression by not anwering to your satisfaction. I CAN demonstrate these things. The reason I didn't reply is because I think you're a whack job and you're stalking me from thread to thread.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

[dbotari]

You're more or less saying that a vague terminology covers that bases. What I'm saying is, fine, now tell me exactly what is coordinated, integrated, or organized. I pretty much laid it out already, so if David (or you) disagree with what I defined, then tell me what the real definition of that coordination is and how it works on physical objects.



I like your simple explaination of kokyu outlined earlier. My point was simply that David's comment reflected statements made by (or attributed to) Shioda. I look at that "vague terminology" as a starting point. The specifics in your example are for me the next step in understanding. I like to progress from a "general understanding" to "specifics" - thats the way I incorporate things. Just because I am, exposed to some specifics doesn't mean my general understanding is no longer valid. Does it?

Thanks for your response,

[cxt]

Mike

Dude, can you not even keep your OWN stories stright??

I already asked you--on one of the other many threads you have invaded and torched with your "ki" thing--why you could not personally show the kills you claim.

And you kept reffering me to some other guy.

So a few days ago you lacked the skills--and now you have them???

Makes little sense.

Oh, and when did I ever claim to be "professional teacher????"

And "I" think your an egomanical blowhard that runs from thread to thread as he slowly gets shut down on one thread after another for his inane posits and spacious lines of "reasoning."

The main difference between my opinion and yours is that I can present requested proofs of my statements of fact.

You "simply" can't.



Chris Thomas

[Ron Tisdale]

Hi Dan,

I'm in the same boat with you in many ways. I accept my teacher's traditions and training, and enjoy the methodology and form of the yoshinkan style of training. For me, it's my home. So I have to fit the things that I find along the way in my journeys outside of the yoshinkan into that framework.

Personally, I see no contradiction between most of what Mike talks about and the best of what my teacher does. I see some big contradictions between how I represent both what my teacher has taught me and the things Mike speaks of and what I do as well. :( just more grist for the mill.

I think Shioda Sensei's books give us a very good framework and way of looking at this topic...but when you get down to the specifics of HOW you organize your body to do these things, it gets harder. But I think you have hit a key here...it really is about HOW you organize your body both when recieving power and when issuing power.

Best,
Ron

[dbotari]

Ron,

Yes the devil is always in the details. I like Mike's explainations and can see how they apply in most cases. There is, however, one question that still nags me that perhaps you and/or Mike can assist me with. I understand (conceptually) how kokyu works in a static position (the establishment of a ground path etc), my issue is how to apply that concept when executing a throw where you need to follow through with a step. How does one keep a ground path while moving? Is it a matter of shifting that ground path between the feet (i.e. whichever foot is on the ground establishes the path). So for example when walking your ground path is intantaneously shifting from foot to foot?

I'm afraid all I have are questions at this point. Any insight is always welcome.

Thanks,

[cxt]

Ron

Your mistaken that I take it "personally"--I don't.

The only thing I take "personally" is sloppy logic being passed off as titular fact.

I also object to statements of fact being made without the actual facts being presented.

Both reduced the "debate" Mike wanted to have to "cause I say."

If Mike wishs to argue the various shortcomings of Yoshinkan aikido--as he sees it, by all means lets do so.

But lets keep it to what can be shown and supported shall we?

If not what is the point?

I mean should not SOMEONE be asking if the shortcomings Mike notes in Yoshinkan and thus the conclusions he draws are valid?

Should not someone be looking at the statements and seeing if they are at all supported?

Should not someone take a bit of time and take a hard look at just how such conclusions are put togather?

If not--then this is not a discussion at all--much less the "debate" Mike asked for.

Its just a bunch of guys that feel pretty much the same way sitting around stroking each others ego's and reinforcing each others worldview.

One that seems to have little tolerence for any degree of critical examination or expectations of valid proofs and valid lines of reasoning.

Frankly I had hoped for a bit more.



Chris Thomas

[Ron Tisdale]

If searching out the truth of a method of practice is stroking my ego, then so be it.

If exploring different, and possilby better ways to organize my movement and my body is stroking my ego, then so be it.

Look, you and I are not going to agree on this topic. So I'll just put you on ignore for now, and continue the discussion with interested parties. Then when I'm more or less done with the topic, I'll take you back off ignore.

Best,
Ron

[kimiwane]

The problem is that even though these skills have been around within the higher levels of the Japanese arts for a lot longer that would be apparent on the surface, there are still very few (comparatively) who know how to do these things or even know what they are, in most instances. Which gets to the part in my heading about "attitude". All the normal defensive responses, not to mention the acquired pride,pomp, "status", etc., will come into play. You can see it on this forum. I've seen it on others.

That's a tough question, Mike. It's sort of like "how do you get kuzushi?" isn't it?

Or is it more like "How do I make Dad understand that he's just not hip anymore?"

Well, reading your post carefully, let me just quote you exactly again, "How do you tell some person who has been "doing martial art X" for 20 or 30 years or more that he may be missing a key element?"

Seems that just telling him "You may be missing a key element" should do it, huh? Are you hurt if he doesn't take your word for it.

Or is it possible that, having trained in the matter you discuss for 20 or 30 years, that person may know the subject better than you perceive after reading a comment on a message board? If he can miss something in his intimate studies of 20 or 30 years, maybe you can miss something about him in your 20 or 30 seconds of "considering" what he has to say?

Or maybe he really does understand the subject better than you? You have admitted of a wide but spotty, on-and-off association with Japanese martial arts over many years, obviously with very different teachers of many different levels, each with his own limited understanding of whatever art you mention. Could it be that you never really attained what can be gotten out of 30 years of following a single great teacher, who was an acknowledged master of all the Japanese arts you have studied and could relate them all to one another in proper perspective?

Maybe it's your mistake for thinking you are qualified to tell such a person he's missing something that you, with your piecemeal training and reading of such things as Ueshiba's doka (in Japanese?) have apprehended.


If you simply "don't make waves" and mention these things, you're essentially slighting all the upcoming students and enthusiasts at the schools of all of these people.

Or it could be, that by keeping quiet, you would actually help them by letting them find out for themselves.

I think your real problem with that is that you just don't know how to discuss things with people. You begin with the #1 assumption that you know better than they. So what do you expect to hear?

So your motivation isn't discussion, either. I think you'd just rather argue than be ignored.


If you don't bring it up and you happen to supposedly care for martial arts, you're not doing well by the very thing you profess to care for.

Mike, here's the truth: if you care that much about it, stop reading the doka and go find Akira Tezuka (Shizuoka City, Japan) to show you the truth of aikido. If you want to do good for martial arts, then train and study. Don't presume to set other people straight whom you've never met.


But anyway, I think for the moment, the 3 issues in the header are inextricably bound up and any discussion of ki and kokyu issues rightfully needs to consider "attitude" within the current hierarchies. It makes a good discussion, IMO.

You could make a more interesting discussion of something you understand. Kokyu is not in that category. Why don't you post on 'jin'?

Very best of wishes to you.

[mikesigman@eart]

David, look at your post. There is not one single substantive comment in there. You again only make statements and assertions. Here's your chance.... I laid it out. You dissect it and tell me where the physical understanding is wrong. You've been raised and called.

Mike Sigman

[mikesigman@eart]

I understand (conceptually) how kokyu works in a static position (the establishment of a ground path etc), my issue is how to apply that concept when executing a throw where you need to follow through with a step. How does one keep a ground path while moving? Is it a matter of shifting that ground path between the feet (i.e. whichever foot is on the ground establishes the path). So for example when walking your ground path is intantaneously shifting from foot to foot?Well, these things are tough over the internet. OK, try this. Stand in a ai-migi-hanmi with a partner in front of you and his right hand is pushing against your belly. Let him push with, say, 10 pounds and try to keep it constant. You may have to slightly inflate or *slightly* stiffen your stomach so it presents a firm surface. Reach around behind his right elbow with your right hand so you can help keep his arm straight. **Let his push go fully into your back leg so that he is pushing against the ground**. Now empathize and think what he is feeling.... if you are letting his push be held by the ground, then he is feeling the solid ground through you. What you want to do is focus on keeping the ground in his hand constantly as you begin to push/move forward with slow, natural steps. Worry only about what he's feeling with his palm. The ground will shift automatically from leg to leg as you move forward if you do that.

If you can do that, you may be able to understand that moving and keeping kokyu on uke as you go forward is the same thing. Hope it helps.

Mike

[kimiwane]

Most of all consider the students of all these "teachers" when you consider the superficial argument about "manner". The idea that any group of "teachers" in various arts rate more concern because they have declared themselves experts than do the students of these people ....

There's your big fallacy, Mike. I mean, other than your "attitude". "These people" did NOT declare themselves experts, did they? Unless you are ranting about self-made-sokes, everyone on these boards, at least, was approved by a teacher who was very hard on him and very critical. You seem never to have experienced that and never to have been approved by any teacher. Oh, except Chen, who said you were the ONLY Westerner who knew how to move for tai chi....

Who is declaring himself an expert, here, Mike?


I've *been* the student of people like this and wasted years of my life, BTW.

Yet, still, somehow, you were better off with them than under your own tutelage.


I'm not sure what you're saying, Alec. Using that sort of logic, a municipality shouldn't bother to supervise the operations of used-car dealerships because it's the will of fate if someone happens to buy a misrepresented product and it's up to the buyer whether he gets a good one or not.

So you the Sheriff o'martial arts schools now? You are a municipality, ELECTED and CHARGED with the responsibility to do this?

It's true. "Inside every revolutionary is a policeman."

You take the cake.

[kimiwane]

If your son wants to learn to be an electronics technician and he goes to a school for 2 years and it turns out that the teacher wasn't really qualified and didn't know the subject, it's sort of fatalistic to say "it's all just part of the grand design".... I say bogus electronics schools are NOT something I would shrug off as "kismet"

But your "chance" mention of electronics schools could be "kismet".

I think your real "niche" in life would be sniffing out and exposing all the fake electronics teachers out there!

Alec was right. You want MA to be better? TRAIN more and criticize less.

[cxt]

Ron

How can you claim a "search for truth" when hard questions are not asked?

And when they are--answers are not forthcoming???

That is not anywhere close to a "seach for the truth."

Its a "search for the truth" UNLESS PEOPLE ASK TOUGH QUESTIONS FOR WHICH I DON'T HAVE ANY GOOD ANSWERS FOR AND UNLESS PEOPLE ACTUALLY EXPECT ME TO BACK UP MY CLAIMS.

If Mike has in fact the "simple physics" that explain "ki"---then providing them WOULD be a real "seach."

Allowing him to make that claim without demanding to see the proof---that's not a "search for the truth" that a "COVER UP" every bit as dark and sinister as the ones he suggests are "really" behind people keeping certian skills out of people hands.

Please don't sit there and pontificate about your supposed noble "seach for the truth" while you allow folks to make "cause I say so" the method of discussion.

Its makes your "seach for the truth" nothing but a lie.

Oh, feel free to ignore me----folks spinning yarns do their level best to ignore "little things" like facts and hard logic.

I feel like I should be thanking you for helping to prove my point;)



Chris Thomas

[mikesigman@eart]

Who is declaring himself an expert, here, Mike?Er, I assume anyone who teaches, without offering caveats or reservations, is declaring himself an expert with "expertise", David. That's why I don't teach any martial arts, BTW. I'm not expert in any and I don't want to teach hash-do (even though I'm pretty good at it).

Mike Sigman

[cxt]

Mike

You expert enough to provide the "simple physics" that you claim explains "ki????"

Or is actually posting the proofs you claim to have beyond your skills???

If so, you probably should not have claimed that you could.

Just a tip.


Chris Thomas

[mikesigman@eart]

But your "chance" mention of electronics schools could be "kismet".. Still nothing but blather in your posts, David. Not a single how-to fact in all your posts. Only blather. You said my exposition was wrong, but you ran like a scalded dog when asked to clarify. You are one of those people I talk about when I mention "attitudes". You want to be a teacher and tell people how they're wrong... but you apparently have nothing to back it up.

Mike Sigman

[cxt]

Mike

Why castigate David for not providing "how to" facts WHEN YOU REFUSE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT ALL.

I have been asking your forever for the "simple physics" that you claim explain "ki."

And I see NOTHING from you.

Why should you be given the very courtesy you refuse to extend to anyone else???

That makes no sense.

"Do as I say not as I do" makes perfect sense to a 4 year old.

Should not we expect better from you???


Chris Thomas

[kimiwane]

So having said that, what differentiates the use of kokyu/jin power from normal movement? The most comprehensive explanation, in my opinion (well, it's used by a lot of Chinese, too, TBH), is that you're sourcing your force from the lower-body/ground or from your weight.

Again, Mike, you are grounded in fallacy. This time the fallacy is that "normal" movement does not get its power from lower-body/ground or weight. I've illustrated many times how original (natural) human movement works entirely from the ground. Why do you insist that everyone other than you is saying something different?


As an example, consider holding a liter-bottle of water in both hands, out comfortably in front of your chest. Most people use their frame as some sort of "tower" and the shoulders/arms work off of that tower to hold the bottle.

And "most" people lost their original movement years or decades before. You are not describing "normal" movement, but neurotic movement.


In a kokyu/jin description, the actual originating force comes from the ground so that the vector resultants take pretty much the shortest distance from the ground to the waist to the bottle and the shoulder/arms and torso do no more that convey or "transmit" that artificially-directed force origin.

Could be an exact quote from Feldenkrais.....except for that, how shall we say????.....little "error" of equating kokyu with jin. That's a quaint little error that keeps coming up. Why don't you just call it "jin" since you seem to actually understand something about 'jin'? I'm just guessing, of course...could be you're as confused about jin as about kokyu.

But, seriously. Why try to equate these unrelated concepts? Why not just say you're a CMA guy and use the terms you understand? Trying to overlay the Japanese with the Chinese is a VERY BAD USED CAR.


I.e., the bottle could be pictured (in the kokyu/jin example) as sitting at the apex of a triangle that has a base between the two feet, the sides go from each foot to the corresponding side of the pelvis/midsection/hara and then the sides bent out to and meet at the hands holding the bottle. Moving the bottle in a small up-down, side-to-side circle involves adjusting the forces from the ground by manipulating the legs and the waist. That is what "moving from the center" means, in using a very simple example. It can get quite complicated.

But not as thick. No, not as thick.


The problem is that to convince your mind to begin accepting this new usage of force origins so that it becomes automatic takes a deliberate re-training of the body over a long period of time

Not if you have a good teacher, who really understands his art, and a good student, who has not become neurotic and quirky. If the teacher is good and the student is good, the teacher only has to cultivate what the student already has in his natural movement.


Someone who plays arbitrarily with a few coarse examples of "using the center" is not really even in the game. A person who moves honestly using the center a few minutes a week and then the rest of the week uses normal motion will never re-train the mind and body to accept the new form of motion

Yes, you are a backward thinker, all right. Re-training attitude shows that you think your conditioning can actually replace the human nervous system. First, ANY conditioned response will fade and disappear once conditioning is stopped. But when you cultivate nature, it will only get stronger. You don't realize that the deepest truth is in nature. You are wasting everyone's time.


the "I already do that" people often unknowingly make themselves the butt of sideways glances in some martial arts circles.

You mean "The Know-It-All Boys"?

Yeah, a scary bunch, that one.

But you should really put some thought on your own statement about making yourself the unknowing butt of sideways glances.


Kokyu/jin is said to be the physical manifestation of ki/qi, so this discussion can get unbelievably complex.

Said by whom?

You persist in WRONG use of the term "kokyu". You're undermining your own thread the further you go.


But this simple example should be a start for the discussion of whether these things are really missing in most western versions of Asians martial arts.


In most Western versions, I'm sure it is. But I thought we were discussing REAL martial arts and masters.

[mikesigman@eart]

Sometimes I feel like one of those ultrasonic whistles that makes all the dogs in the neighborhood bark.

[kimiwane]

I have no horse in this race, but consider this a plea from the peanut gallery: if Mike Sigman's perspective, and his challenges to orthodoxy (suggested, overt, however you want to look at them) incense you so, then why not meet with him and see what works or doesn't? Because you seem to be spending an inordinate amount of energy challenging him on this board.

Murray,

I understand your comments, but I don't know how much perspective you have on what Mike has been doing here for the past few weeks.

I never heard of him until then, when I was participating in the "What is Ki?" thread on the Meditation Forum. He and Asura "challenged" me so many times and flatly said I didn't know what I was talking about, etc., that I started a thread on "kuzushi" on the aikido forum. And Mike came to that (see "the rest of the kuzushi thread" on the aikido forum) and wouldn't address the topic. He had insisted on discussing kuzushi on the ki thread, but on the kuzushi thread he wanted to discuss whatever it is he does. The threads are still up, so you should realize (if you don't already) that Chris is still responding to some of the negativity and challenges Mike spewed on very recent active threads.

Mike's on an interesting line but he starts with the unfounded certainty that no one else knows these things and that no other teacher teaches them. Then you find he's very confused about relations between Japanese and Chinese concepts which he never clearly defines and uses in a way no one else does. He's the Sheriff of Used Martial Arts Schools, if you know what I mean.

Further, he prefers to be nasty. I've made several attempts to get on a more civil basis with him and he just will not do it. Maybe he's a tough guy but he's very spotty in what he says about Japanese martial arts.

He started this thread largely to "explain" and "justify" his OWN attitude, which is just as I described it: nasty, confrontational and presumptive. And he makes claims that he will never account for.

Just so you know it's not all Chris' aggression.

[cxt]

Mike

Depends---if your "whistle" is firmly set to "BS" then all sorts of "dogs" start barking.

Amazing how some "dogs" know right off whom can be trusted and whom you have to watch.

Again please provide the requested "simple physics" that explains "ki" that you claim you have--and I am sure that the "barking" will cease.

Unless of course its bogus.



Chris Thomas

[kimiwane]

So, David.... I laid out the physics for you.

No you didn't, Mike. You just posted a story. You have never laid out any "physics" of ki or kokyu and you have NOT defined it properly. Quote a source.


In another thread I gave you a direct example of a Japanese Aikido sensei using "kokyu" just as I described it.

Well, there's your bald fallacy: he didn't "use" kokyu. He did the technique with kokyu organization and without it. When his body was organized with kokyu, it was stronger and "more solid" than without. But the kokyu was NOT a "force" that "shot out of him" and "hit the other guy". Kokyu is NOT a force and you don't "emit" or "issue" it. It is an organization of the body, mind and ki through breath.


I say he trumps you

Ummmhmmm.. And "he" is...??? Who?

Oh, yeah. That guy at 'a Japanese dojo' who sent you a PM....Mr. Anonymous?


I say he trumps you and your faith in Feldenkrais as an active part of what kokyu is. If you want to debate me, do it with something other than your simple assertions.

You are a barrel of laughs, Mike.


I'll have to see if I can go re-find it in a quick search, but even on AikiWeb I believe someone mentioned that a well-known sensei said that kokyu was the manifestation of ki. Other places list kokyu as "ki power".

Oh, well that does trump me, then. "A well known sensei." Can't beat that, huh? And you have references from "other places", too.

But, Mike: those things are nothing but YOUR simple assertions. Name names. Cite sources. Lay out the physics. STATE YOUR CREDENTIALS...????

Don't worry. I don't expect any educated answers.


But why don't you explain why the Japanese sensei demonstrated heavy body power and called it "kokyu"?

He called it kokyu. YOU called it "power". I'm sorry if you don't recognize the difference. Maybe we can use an electronics example:

The Lady of the House insists that "radio waves" are what make her light bulbs light when she flips her switch.

We know it's really "electricity" but what's the harm of her thinking it's "radio waves"? Aren't radio waves a form of electro-magnetic energy?

I think there's a difference. And if I want to know it, you sound like you could answer the question.

But where the subject is ki and Japanese martial arts....you're like th Lady of the House.


And by the way, you have attempted to imply you already knew these things... now's the chance to show that you have something other than attitude. The foundations are laid out in my posted example of a *simple* kokyu example.

Did you post that on THIS thread? Or are you NOW asking me to go drag baggage from another thread????

As I say, you are always good for a laugh.

Hoping good things for you, Mike Sigman.

[mikesigman@eart]

I understand your comments, but I don't know how much perspective you have on what Mike has been doing here for the past few weeks.

I never heard of him until then, when I was participating in the "What is Ki?" thread on the Meditation Forum. He and Asura "challenged" me so many times..(snip) Not true. It's still on the board, as a matter of fact. You were being a pompous asshole that knew everything and you were belittling Rob, who was trying to tell you something important. Guys like you give martial arts a bad name.
Mike's on an interesting line but he starts with the unfounded certainty that no one else knows these things Never said or implied "no one else knows these things". I am saying, unequivocally, that YOU don't know these things and that all you can do is blather. If you know something, post it. Quit doing the character assassination crap. This is EXACTLY what I meant about the the "established" people who set themselves out as "teachers" but who really don't know these things and try to make up for it by personal attack. You're my prime example of "if you can't beat 'em, smear 'em".

Regards,

Mike Sigman

[kimiwane]

I said that Mike suggests that Ueshiba got his power in China---thus "other" explainations become relevent.

Actually, Mike did say that the idea that Ueshiba had learned in China had mis-led some people and that he realized the power had been in Japan all along.

Well...that still would not preclude it's having come from China which is both nearby and twice as old as Japan. It's likely that these things came from China long before 1,000 AD, though, and were not imported during the samurai era.

But that is a LONG way back and the Chinese and Japanese arts evolved in different ways. The concepts of one DO NOT equally overlay the concepts of the other. Hara, center, dan tien are all well established concepts,though, and these DO seem to be the same. Still, there are some major differences in the way the Japanese and Chinese arts use even the center.

And Mike's fundamental misconception of kokyu could be excused if he would just STOP DOING IT!

Cheers.

[kimiwane]

The problem is that establishing jin/kokyu paths is a skill that can be hampered by things like too much muscle, incorrectly sourcing forces, use of the shoulders (if you want a jin path to go from ground-to-hara-to-hand, using the shoulder to initiate part of your force will kill the ground vector force), etc. Having that back leg behind you to push off of makes you dependent on that forward-pointing "brace" so it will stop someone from developing the true and full path from the ground to the hands. Offhand, I'd suggest that you let someone push on your forearm and let your "brace" hold 100% of the push. Then gradually begin pulling that brace in (keep the upper body and lower-back relaxed and let his push go straight in toward your hara) until you can stand with your full weight over the back foot and the back leg is absorbing his push. That way you can start with the correct feel and then begin developing this path.

In other words, push hands will develop the "force" you mean.

[kimiwane]

"Kokyu" as used in the example I gave from a private mail, describing the Japanese sensei's literal and physical usage of "kokyu" was exactly jin. Nothing more, nothing less.

You would be entirely safe by saying "sounded exactly like jin", but you insist that it IS exactly the same. Jin is an ISSUED POWER. Kokyu is CONTAINED WITHIN THE SELF. Not "contained" really, because there is nothing to "be contained," nothing to "get out". Kokyu is the "condition" of the tori--not a power that he has.


Some Japanese prefer to say "ki power", "ki", and other things. It's an idiomatic usage... I don't quarrel with that... but I would suggest that the if I walked into the dojo's of a number of sensei's in Japan that can use these same skills and I say "kokyu", there won't be any misunderstanding at all.

Oh, I bet there would. How many such dojos have you walked into, BTW?
What you THINK you will find there tells a lot about who you really are.

[cxt]

Mike

Whoa dude YOUR calling "other" folks "pompous."

I was willing to bet that judgeing by your behavior, you did not even know that word meant.

Then again, "I" do not "understand" how the body should move in Chen Style Taiji better than ANY OTHER WESTERNER IN THE WORLD.

As YOU, YOURSELF CLAIM.

So maybe its just me.


Chris Thomas

[kimiwane]

So, in regard to ... my comment above about how I've already established in another thread that "kokyu" is a legitimate idiomatic way of describing this form of force-vector control...

Again, Mike, you did NOT "establish" any such thing. You CLAIMED it. "Establish" would be if you had a quote by Morihei Ueshiba, for instance. You're so big on the esoteric doka, but you don't understand basic ideas.

And "legitimate idiomatic way of describing...."???? You are making a BIG assumption about Japanese usage from an English-language description of a non-Japanese MA student's impression of a Japanese sensei's technique.

[/quote]Offhand, the only reason I can see is that someone is not familiar with this power and/or not familiar with the idiom.[/quote]

Well, you wouldn't see the "other" possibility at all, would you? Could it be that you're just "WRONG"???

That IS the problem.

[cxt]

Kimi

Hard to understand exactly what Mike was going for.

In context he pretty much DOES suggest that.

Otherwise there is no point to the rest of the paragraph.

And if training was in Japan all along, then it also negates the posit of the Chinese, under "penalty of death" keeping certain secrets from the Japanese/Okinawans.
Cause it really does not matter at all.

Course if that is the arguement "now" then it neatly fits with Mikes overall "message" of dark plots to keep certain training secret.
Plots hatched by masters going back to the 1900's and so deep and dark and effective that they managed to fool pretty much everyone BUT Mike and few select others of course.

Again, Occams Razor would suggest other, more plausable explanations.

But none of them would be nearly so good a story.

Myself, despite my fervent wish otherwise, I see no need to grasp for "secrets" that the "magic" of hard, disciplined training won't grant in time.



Chris Thomas

[kokumo]

So, in regard to my making "attitudes" a part of this thread, and my comment above about how I've already established in another thread that "kokyu" is a legitimate idiomatic way of describing this form of force-vector control... why would there be "emotional buttons" involved with this discussion? Offhand, the only reason I can see is that someone is not familiar with this power and/or not familiar with the idiom. "Kokyu" (the idiom for the force-vector skill) as a basis for "kokyu power" is fairly well known. What has been apparently misconstrued by many westerners is the idea that "kokyu" usually refers only to breath (and sometimes, idiomatically!!!!!, timing).

Regards,

Mike

Mike,

Your argument above is reasonable enough. The thing about emotional buttons is that reason has little or nothing to do with them.

The misconstrual of kokyu as solely referring to breath is a big problem, to be sure. My suggestion was intended to leave the door open for idiomatic usages like "timing," or "knack," or "quality of touch."

But I studied just enough socio-linguistics in a previous life to understand how attached people are to their particular idioms, and to see how many shooting wars have been fought over idioms in just the last century.

Archimedes never heard the words "jin" or "kokyu" but he did understand something fundamental about having a "ground path" when he said "give me a place to stand and I will move the earth."

FL

[kimiwane]

David disagreed with my definition, so I'm asking for him to say how kokyu power is used.

As I said, it is NOT a power, so it is NOT "used". It is a "condition" of the tori. That means, it is an alignment like the liu he six harmonies, with the mind, the body and the ki all working "together". That means no extra tension anywhere in the body. Exactly enough, no more. And the breath coordinates that.

How is kokyu "used" to move physical objects????

It is used to move "oneself".

Typically, in technique, its influence is to let tori put the full focus of his powers at the precise time and place where they will be the most useful.

That means, he will do the full technique with balance, coordination of body parts from the center, WITH his breath, not holding it or expelling it too soon, etc. so that tori arrives where uke will be weakest and is in position to exert his own effort at uke's weakest point.

One can have kokyu while doing nothing more than walking, sitting, standing, looking at a bluebird. Like all real matters of "ki", its main use is in normal human living.

[kimiwane]

So when you see some of the vituperative outbursts in a discussion which suggests that some long-term *professional* martial artist may be missing some basic element, the "attitudes" may play around this factor.

Well, that's natural. We all know of great chefs who have never attended any culinary school but could very naturally run a full-service four-star restaurant and serve hundreds of people nightly with elegant food.

And we all know armchair physicists who could easily answer problems that "professsional" people like Steven Hawking struggle with.

Hobbyists and armchair enthusiasts usually are the best.

Do you do surgery in your spare time also?

Or do you have your brother in law, the attorney, remove your dis-eased organs?

Do you recall him mentioning the word "lobotomy" to you at any point?

Think hard......

[cxt]

kokumo

Actually that one of the real problems here.

People are defining and re-defining terms so broadly that they can "mean" almost anything.

Thus it ADDS considerable "murk" to the discussion.

As I have I suggested prior, what we need is for those involved to explictly define exactly what they mean by the use of words like "ki" and "kokyu" etc.

As mentioned on the "kuzushi" thread--the term "kuzushi" can be accuratly defined and used to express purely physical actions---with NO need to include metaphysical aspects at all.

But there as here, people seem loath to even consider, let alone discuss, that "other" possiblities than metaphysical ones exsist.

The terms "ki" and "kokyu" cover A LOT of ground.

(heck, if they can mean "everything" then whats the point of having a word at all?)

And a "map" of how people are thinking of and using them would help to clear up a lot of confusion--help us cover more "ground" better.



Chris Thomas

[kimiwane]

...it really is about HOW you organize your body both when recieving power and when issuing power.

or just walking down the street, which is what you will be doing MUCH more of your life than you will be fighting. Kokyu is for when you pick up a box or open a cabinet and reach up for a cup.

FIRST is the upright stance. If you can't FEEL the body's natural impulse to lengthen the spine when you stand, you won't be able to develop dependable kokyu or do much else very well.

Training from a hanmi stance may be part of the problem. Thinking of moving regularly with the stability to absorb force may also be causing you to want to stay lower than your nervous system wants. You only lose by fighting the nature of your own nervous system.

[kimiwane]

my issue is how to apply that concept when executing a throw where you need to follow through with a step. How does one keep a ground path while moving? Is it a matter of shifting that ground path between the feet (i.e. whichever foot is on the ground establishes the path). So for example when walking your ground path is intantaneously shifting from foot to foot?


Dan. In a word, yes.

Best wishes.

[kimiwane]

David, look at your post. There is not one single substantive comment in there.

As I said,
You have admitted of a wide but spotty, on-and-off association with Japanese martial arts over many years, obviously with very different teachers of many different levels, each with his own limited understanding of whatever art you mention. Could it be that you never really attained what can be gotten out of 30 years of following a single great teacher, who was an acknowledged master of all the Japanese arts you have studied and could relate them all to one another in proper perspective?

That's a substantive question. It also sums up the truth about you. You're an armchair expert based on your own opinion of yourself.


Here's your chance.... I laid it out. You dissect it and tell me where the physical understanding is wrong. You've been raised and called.

Mike, you went bust on the kuzushi thread, when you NEVER addressed ONE of the many excellent examples of kuzushi I gave.

But I have answered your "example" in an earlier post on this thread. So I and everyone else here have done what you seem unable to do.

[kimiwane]

Er, I assume anyone who teaches, without offering caveats or reservations, is declaring himself an expert with "expertise", David. That's why I don't teach any martial arts, BTW. I'm not expert in any and I don't want to teach hash-do (even though I'm pretty good at it).

But you truly excell in bs-do.

[mikesigman@eart]

Your argument above is reasonable enough. The thing about emotional buttons is that reason has little or nothing to do with them.

The misconstrual of kokyu as solely referring to breath is a big problem, to be sure. My suggestion was intended to leave the door open for idiomatic usages like "timing," or "knack," or "quality of touch."

But I studied just enough socio-linguistics in a previous life to understand how attached people are to their particular idioms, and to see how many shooting wars have been fought over idioms in just the last century.

Archimedes never heard the words "jin" or "kokyu" but he did understand something fundamental about having a "ground path" when he said "give me a place to stand and I will move the earth." Hi Fred: Actually, Archimedes understood leverage with that statement. The ground path is different (it can also be a "weight path" for downward forces) and it is related to how the body can develop paths in different directions through the body at whim, given a little practice. In fact, with a little practice doing the "at whim" aspect, you can train it to automatically respond in a vector combination with an incoming force.... hence ai ki, in the purest sense.

The problem with terminology I recognize, but the least problematic term and one which is used to a reasonable extent by knowledgeable Japanese is going to be "Kokyu". I could say "ki", since jin is the physical manifestation of qi, but it raises more problems than it solves to do so. Notice that Tohei uses "Ki" to describe his demonstrations of "kokyu" paths. What that has done is to prolong a misunderstanding of the reachable substantiveness of these skills for many years. Frankly, the "left-behindness" (sorry... my German roots showing through) of American martial-arts practitioners because of the misconstruction of terms is incredible. Sometimes I feel like I'm in some sort of bizarre soap-opera with these discussions. :)

One thing I'd like to point out is that through all the chaff, this thread could have been a wonderfully productive discussion. Notice what has happened to it and the constant tangents that have led away from substantive exchange of information. If the information had been there, of course.

Here we are arguing terms, but if the subject was truly known, I'll bet that at best the discussion of semantics would have only been a transitory side-issue. The underlying question to the thread was really (and still is)... "how do we move forward?". What would you suggest, Fred?

Regards,

Mike

[kimiwane]

Sometimes I feel like one of those ultrasonic whistles that makes all the dogs in the neighborhood bark.

Dogs have a keen sense of smell, Mike.

They have a very keen sense of smell.

[cxt]

Mike

Buddy, dude, pal--the "TERMS" ARE THE DISCUSION.

Were "argueing" about them because they are crucial.

Unless we know exacxtly what YOU mean when YOU say "kokyu" then we can't have any discussion at all.

As an example you and I may be using very differernt meanings.

You seem to use terms/words in their broadest possible manner--to include pretty much every possible concept.

I tend to use words as exactly as I can.

"automaticaly respond in a vector combination with an incoming force"

What the heck does that mean???

Sounds very "scientific" and all---but its use of words to CLOUD meaning as opposed to clearing things up.

Otherwise you could have just said---"train to move to take quick advantage of some guy trying to push you down."

Or "if a guy tries to punch you in the head--do this--ok now practice that a lot"

Same general meaning--and a lot less gobble-d-gook than yours.

BTW, a "subsatntive exchange of information is EXACTLY what I have been begging you for.

Ready to post the "simple physics" that explains "ki" yet????????



Chris Thomas

[kimiwane]

Guys like you give martial arts a bad name.

Yeah. For armchair experts who just want to spew their amateur confusions and have them accepted as real martial arts. Guys like me just ruin your show, don't they?


Never said or implied "no one else knows these things". I am saying, unequivocally, that YOU don't know these things and that all you can do is blather.

No, I can say flatly that YOU are a bunko king who has drifted around and partially read some books and think you know something special. The first time I heard of you you were dissing and you dissed pretty much every established martial artist I mentioned. You have shown that you have no respect for anyone. This little thread is just your way of trying to shift the conversation from topics where you were clearly shown to be ignorant. Good effort, but the problem remains. You are ignorant.


If you know something, post it. Quit doing the character assassination crap. This is EXACTLY what I meant about the the "established" people who set themselves out as "teachers" but who really don't know these things and try to make up for it by personal attack.

Mike, your first words toward me were a personal attack. You have never spoken for your own credentials because they are such amateur credentials. You have never explained the physics you claim to have "laid out". You never addressed my examples of kuzushi but you have maintained demands for me to explain your improperly defined examples of kokyu, etc., from board to board.


You're my prime example of "if you can't beat 'em, smear 'em".

Well, Mike, your post had at least two explicit "challenges", so I hope perceptive readers will recognize that that is all you've done from thread to thread.

Bear this in mind: if I accept, I get to choose time, place and weapon. And I will choose bokken. Or, if you prefer, we could go steel. But I will also go you one better and we can use the rubber-covered-PVC "swords" sensei used to like to use. That way, it really won't kill you to learn the truth.

[kimiwane]

Then again, "I" do not "understand" how the body should move in Chen Style Taiji better than ANY OTHER WESTERNER IN THE WORLD.

As YOU, YOURSELF CLAIM.

Didn't he promise he was leaving e-budo after the LAST time you called him on that?

Didn't he try to say somewhere else that he only claimed to be "one of the few"?

But you found the original quote.

And of course you know he will never answer to any of it. It's like having a chance to argue with the Yachigusa guy. All the stories and "quotes" trail off into mist.....

Are you going to put some money on one of his seminars?

[mikesigman@eart]

Unless we know exacxtly what you mean when you say "kokyu" then we can't have any discussion at all.

Just to answer this part about "terms". I disagree. Rob John and I have no commality in our terms at all, but a quick cross reference on just a couple of issues sealed our ability to exchange information substantively... BECAUSE WE BOTH KNEW THE SUBJECT. Every person that has digressed into discussions about the terminology has shown at one time or another that they didn't have a real grasp of the basic information. Granted, there should be some relatively quick discussions about the semantics (as I agree with Fred Little), but prolonged discussion blaming the confusion on terms is simply an attempt to prolong the idea that someone is conversant with the principles. I don't mind that too much... we all do things like that in our lives... but at some point in time we have to be adult enough to quit stalling the discussions needlessly.

To answer Chris directly, if he understood how these things work he wouldn't have had to ask more than one or two questions at the beginning and he would long ago have been immersed in some other aspect, commentary, or substantive question. As it is, it's obvious to just about anyone that he's clueless and blustering, thereby hindering the rest of us from learning. And believe me, when the information exchanges get going, I have seldom not learned something interesting from someone which helps my knowledge and understanding.

FWIW

Mike

[kimiwane]

Rob John and I have no commality in our terms at all, but a quick cross reference on just a couple of issues sealed our ability to exchange information substantively... BECAUSE WE BOTH KNEW THE SUBJECT.

More BS, Mike. You and Rob did NOT ever agree on anything "substantive". You just "sided up" in an internet argument. You will soon find if you meet Rob that he has no more respect for you than you have for everyone else.


Every person that has digressed into discussions about the terminology has shown at one time or another that they didn't have a real grasp of the basic information.

Mike, this whole thread is YOUR creation and you gave it the name "ki, kokyu and Attitudes".

You MADE it a "discussion" of TERMS.

You're just showing how DENSE you are to even come up with this whining bit at this point.


at some point in time we have to be adult enough to quit stalling the discussions needlessly.

So you're finally going to "lay out the physics"?????

BS.


To answer Chris directly, if he understood how these things work he wouldn't have had to ask more than one or two questions at the beginning and he would long ago have been immersed in some other aspect, commentary, or substantive question.

How "these things work" is that you make bald statements of egocentric BS and then try to pretend you're coolly defending them with more vague BS. No one expects any "substantive" questions to be answered by you.


As it is, it's obvious to just about anyone that he's clueless and blustering, thereby hindering the rest of us from learning.

Mike, the only thing hindering you from learning is that thing on top of your shoulders that you have packed so full of BS you set the neighborhood dogs barking when you drive by in your truck.


And believe me, when the information exchanges get going, I have seldom not learned something interesting from someone which helps my knowledge and understanding.

The "information exchanges?" We used to call that "working out" or "keiko".

You could have benefited by a few-thousand more hours of that and a LOT less time on the internet.

Good luck.

[mikesigman@eart]

You have never spoken for your own credentials because they are such amateur credentials. Thanks for bringing this aspect up, David. It's a good point to the discussion.

As Fred Little obliquely (and correctly) notes, there is an emotional attachment to terms and concepts. Actually, Fred was too diplomatic with me on this point, but I appreciate it.

Let me shift out of Japanese martial arts for a minute and go to Taiji. I read all the lore, histories, etc., about how powerful Taiji was and I constantly looked for the power components. It turns out that Taiji is sort of open about the idea that if you don't use qi and jin, you're not even in the game. That's why a whole faction of "American Taiji" has developed.... most people don't know what things are so they fit the terminology around what they're doing and they actually sort of avoid expert Chinese. The attendance, as an example, of Chen Xiao Wang's seminars is markedly less than at some of the New Age westerners' seminars or the "wrassle-'em-to-the-ground" western "push hands champions". It's a truly interesting thing to watch, but essentially, if ALL movements in Taiji are not built around qi and jin, it's simply not Taiji and a real expert will just smile and pat you on the head if you don't understand.

So what happens is that you have a number of Taiji "teachers" in the West who are completely clueless about the importance of the basic movements around qi and jin. But those people discuss their "credentials" and "rank" and the size of their schools, and so on. My question is this: if they "know all the forms" and they have things they show for the "applications", they know all the lingo, they have wonderful-looking white-silk suits, etc..... what are their real credentials? Compare them to someone who hasn't been around Taiji very long, but knows how to move the body with qi, jin, and the six harmonies movement. That person with the body knowledge doesn't have any "credentials" to speak of compared to the talking points of the 20-year "teacher". But who is really more qualified? It's a strange debate.

The problem may be best resolved with an old apothegm about Taiji: "Technique without internal strength is no good; internal strength without technique is no good." I.e., neither of the two examples above is really credentialed in Taiji.

Now let's move back to one of the Japanese martial arts or koryu. If it turns out, for discussion's sake, that these ki and "kokyu" (I'll concede there's a semantics issue, but let's just go with the thrust of the idea) component's are core to the full movements and applications of the martial art, yet some "teacher" doesn't know these skills.... how good are his "credentials"? It's sort of like saying, "How good is the 'high school diploma' of the guy that got social promotions throughout his life?". A reasonably close analogy.

So back to my credentials for a second. I have some things on paper and in the closet (actually, there's even one blackbelt listed on the internet that I didn't know about until recently).... but I've already stated that my Judo, my Uechi Ryu and my Aikido that I knew were sort of null and void because I did external technique and didn't know about these things. In fact, it was really sort of sad when I had it made obvious to me by EJ Harrison's book that I had never even been close in Judo and yet I had thought it was the one art that didn't have these things.

So bragging about credentials..... I can't do it, David. You? Before you do it and before you drag your teacher's name further into the mud with your chest-thumping, tell us some substance about the subject before us... ki and kokyu. Unless you can show some substantive and demonstrable skills, your "credentials" are suspect. I.e., "credentials" is not the way to try and win these types of discussions.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

[mikesigman@eart]

Well, Mike, your post had at least two explicit "challenges", so I hope perceptive readers will recognize that that is all you've done from thread to thread. David, I think you must mean "implicit", not "explicit". I don't make explicit challenges from behind keyboards. You mean "implicit, as I see them", right?
Bear this in mind: if I accept, I get to choose time, place and weapon. And I will choose bokken. Or, if you prefer, we could go steel. But I will also go you one better and we can use the rubber-covered-PVC "swords" sensei used to like to use. That way, it really won't kill you to learn the truth.Thank you for having mercy on me, David. I hope you realize that I am an old, as you have tried to mention publicly, frail man and far beyond any capacity to challenge a martial-arts giant like you. Here's a picture from last week of me with my prosthetic that I use to get around on:
http://www.neijia.com/MikeProsthetic.jpg

I hope you would be merciful if we ever meet.

Mike

[kimiwane]

Let me shift out of Japanese martial arts for a minute and go to Taiji. I read all the lore, histories, etc., about how powerful Taiji was and I constantly looked for the power components. It turns out that Taiji is sort of open about the idea that if you don't use qi and jin, you're not even in the game. That's why a whole faction of "American Taiji" has developed.... most people don't know what things are so they fit the terminology around what they're doing and they actually sort of avoid expert Chinese. The attendance, as an example, of Chen Xiao Wang's seminars is markedly less than at some of the New Age westerners' seminars or the "wrassle-'em-to-the-ground" western "push hands champions". It's a truly interesting thing to watch, but essentially, if ALL movements in Taiji are not built around qi and jin, it's simply not Taiji and a real expert will just smile and pat you on the head if you don't understand.

That is all true. And it is very similar to aikido in America. Mochizuki sensei himself came to Birmingham in 1989 and didn't get as many attendees as the local guy could get with a mid-ranked mainstream instructor.

But the taiji guy is just glad to see people trying. And he only tries to correct them in small things to gradually turn them toward the way.


So what happens is that you have a number of Taiji "teachers" in the West who are completely clueless about the importance of the basic movements around qi and jin. But those people discuss their "credentials" and "rank" and the size of their schools, and so on.

I never met any taiji people like that. Of course, after my first teacher, who brought Jou Tsung Hwa to Birmingham, I only trained with Chinese teachers from China. My teacher from the late 80s on is from Wuhan.


My question is this: if they "know all the forms" and they have things they show for the "applications", they know all the lingo, they have wonderful-looking white-silk suits, etc..... what are their real credentials?

Compare them to someone who hasn't been around Taiji very long, but knows how to move the body with qi, jin, and the six harmonies movement. That person with the body knowledge doesn't have any "credentials" to speak of compared to the talking points of the 20-year "teacher". But who is really more qualified? It's a strange debate.[/quote]

You said it, brother. You said it.

Well, it is true that someone who has somehow developed liu he, qi and jin can usually move his body well, of what is he really speaking?

Should he say he knows taiji better than the man who has trained in it for decades? Shouldn't he just say he knows liu he, qi and jin? Why invoke the name of taiji if that's not your expertise?

The problem may be best resolved with an old apothegm about Taiji: "Technique without internal strength is no good; internal strength without technique is no good." I.e., neither of the two examples above is really credentialed in Taiji.[/quote]

Sounds like one of my last posts to Dan Harden.


Now let's move back to one of the Japanese martial arts or koryu. If it turns out, for discussion's sake, that these ki and "kokyu" (I'll concede there's a semantics issue, but let's just go with the thrust of the idea) component's are core to the full movements and applications of the martial art, yet some "teacher" doesn't know these skills.... how good are his "credentials"?

I guess I'd have to see his credentials to know, wouldn't I? What credentials does he claim? Does he have a certificate from someone? Does the teacher have a "name" or "can" he be named?


It's sort of like saying, "How good is the 'high school diploma' of the guy that got social promotions throughout his life?". A reasonably close analogy.

Assuming that he did get social promotions.

I think the dan system in judo actually does represent a pure human schematic for developing not only an all around self defense ability and sports experience, but also a path to a truly elite state of human being like Mifune. Most shodans in judo are 14 or 15 years old. They hit nidan by the end of high school, usually, and sandan maybe around the end of college, all through shiai backed up by kata. They are not overly schooled in the kata, but for those who develop an interest, the kata contain deep information. And most koryu are hard core kata-only (for the greater part) training.

But I'd say anyone with a third or fourth dan from Kodokan would be getting pretty formidable in most people's book.


So back to my credentials for a second. I have some things on paper and in the closet (actually, there's even one blackbelt listed on the internet that I didn't know about until recently).... but I've already stated that my Judo, my Uechi Ryu and my Aikido that I knew were sort of null and void because I did external technique and didn't know about these things.

Don't discount the null or the void.


In fact, it was really sort of sad when I had it made obvious to me by EJ Harrison's book that I had never even been close in Judo and yet I had thought it was the one art that didn't have these things.

No, it has them. Look at Mifune. If you can't see it there, you won't see it.


So bragging about credentials..... I can't do it, David. You?

No, I can't. I saw too many awesome people in my time to think I'm any kind of King in the martial arts world, but what I know about aikido came from people who knew him very well.


Before you do it and before you drag your teacher's name further into the mud with your chest-thumping, tell us some substance about the subject before us... ki and kokyu.

How's that? Did you just snap out of your mood of intelligence?

I've told you the only thing of substance there is to say about kokyu. It's integration of the mind, body, ki and breath, in action or in standing, in walking or fighting. It's main function is NOT to provide a source of hot air.


Unless you can show some substantive and demonstrable skills, your "credentials" are suspect.

YOU can't show substantive skills on this board, Mike.

The ONE thing you can do here is use LANGUAGE correctly (or post pictures). So I'll just accept your "credentials" if you will properly use the language appropriate to those "credentials".

I am one who has benefited well from lack of credentials. I work in epidemiology and biostatistics because the doctors there found a use for some of my strange propensities. People often introduce me as Dr. Orange because they just assume I'm a doctor. And I have to correct them.

But if I had a higher degree, they couldn't afford the salary they would have to pay me for what I do. So it works out fine for me.

As for martial arts, I don't have a big group, don't have a dojo anymore, don't charge for lessons, don't give ranks. And I do ukemi for the students.

What kind of credentials are those? Not as good as the people I go to with my questions. But I don't think they are worse than yours.

Well, I yam what I yam. And I yam telling you that ki is a component of kokyu, which is using the breath to integrate the mind, body and ki.

As for attitude? Get yourself some Feldenkrais Functional Integration lessons and lose it.

Best wishes.

[kimiwane]

David, I think you must mean "implicit", not "explicit". I don't make explicit challenges from behind keyboards. You mean "implicit, as I see them", right?

Maybe you're right.


Thank you for having mercy on me, David. I hope you realize that I am an old, as you have tried to mention publicly, frail man and far beyond any capacity to challenge a martial-arts giant like you.

Well I've told you I'm dead ringer for Harry Dean Stanton, but if you issue the challenge, I choose the weapons, ne? Not being one to challenge people implicitly or explicitly, I don't have that experience. But if you want to talk about "these skills", the sword is the only true test.


Here's a picture from last week of me with my prosthetic that I use to get around on:
http://www.neijia.com/MikeProsthetic.jpg

I hope you would be merciful if we ever meet.

You are lucky I am merciful with my wit after the line you just threw me.

You look pretty mighty. You look like an old Marine. Don't be such a gripe.

[thomas54]

The skills to do these things are, I would agree, *relatively* hard to find in the overall scheme of things, but given the size of Asian martial arts, the skills or aspects of them aren't all that rare. Although I first saw and felt some people with the ki/kokyu (same as qi/jin, in this usage) skills in Aikido, I wound up having to go to the Chinese martial arts to acquire what meagre skills I could...information is hard to find there, also. So coming back into the Japanese martial arts for a quick look-around during the last few years (as sort of a last check before starting a how-to book on these skills), I found that there are actually more skill available than I had originally thought. My late realization about these skills was because I had the unfortunate preconception that the "internal strength" skills were so closely guarded by the Chinese (it was a death penalty offense to show some "secrets of China" to foreigners, at times in Chinese history), that few if any Japanese ever got access to this sort of information.

The quote from Ellis was fairly mind-boggling when I read those things in Harrison's book. It means that the years of Judo I did were bereft of some core knowledge and I had been totally unaware of it. I had studied Uechi-Ryu on Okinawa at one time and piecing together what I had seen and what others reported, I have realized and accepted that once again, while I knew a lot about katas, application, kobudo, yada, yada, yada, I had missed something core to real karate (and a remebrance of my sensei showing me a kokyu trick one night in the dojo which I didn't understand at the time haunts me, too).

I did Aikido for a number of years and I thought there were a few bits and pieces borrowed from some access to Chinese knowledge, but during the last year of re-visiting Aikido (I had left Aikido and studied Chinese martial arts for a number of years) I've come to realize this knowledge was to be found sparingly, but to a greater degree of sophistication than I'd thought, in not only Aikido, but most of the so-called "koryu" and related arts.

From the literature and doka, it appears obvious that Ueshiba knew about these things and he knew how to drop the common and vague "hints that I know about this special information". Where Ueshiba got that information is an open discussion. The theory that Ueshiba picked up Chinese knowledge from China got some legs (and mis-led a number of us) from the very fact that Ueshiba went to China a couple of times.

However, Rob John has come onto the scene with his "Aunkai" stuff from Akuzawa. Purportedly, Akuzawa gathered his information from Daito-Ryu and a couple of other sources and Akuzawa is now teaching a system containing what he knows. So the "rare" knowledge is finding an outlet through Akuzawa and I believe that other sources are opening up as well, if the grapevine can be believed.

The point I'm making with these preliminary observations is that there is and there has been an availability of these skills not only recently in Japan, but apparently much further back than I would have guessed even a year ago. Ueshiba didn't need to go to China for these things. The traditional arts (and hence DR, Judo, etc.) have had access to them for some time. Reading one of two koryu-related books, I find the standard references to these skills.

The problem is that even though these skills have been around within the higher levels of the Japanese arts for a lot longer that would be apparent on the surface, there are still very few (comparatively) who know how to do these things or even know what they are, in most instances. Which gets to the part in my heading about "attitude". How do you tell some person who has been "doing martial art X" for 20 or 30 years or more that he may be missing a key element? All the normal defensive responses, not to mention the acquired pride,pomp, "status", etc., will come into play. You can see it on this forum. I've seen it on others.

If you simply "don't make waves" and mention these things, you're essentially slighting all the upcoming students and enthusiasts at the schools of all of these people. If you try to bring it up so that the noise gets some attention, there is no way to avoid the ego-centered reactions. If you don't bring it up and you happen to supposedly care for martial arts, you're not doing well by the very thing you profess to care for. And so on. It's a thorny issue. Sooner or later, though, as more information sources come online, people are going to have wider access to the information. All the teachers, books, etc., which today don't mention these skills and how to do them as part of the basics will be shrugged off in the future with "Oh, he didn't know", just as happens with some of the Asian books today, when knowledgeable martial artists of Asia discuss them. BTW, it's simply an accepted fact that "most people don't know" how to do these things.


FWIW

Mike Sigman

I think I can basicly agree with Mike about that. There are minor points about what I am still not convinced, but the presupposition to this disscussions is I think to recognize that both share the same body functions in principle and that it is related to "Qi" and "Jing" in Chinese martial arts. Ofcourse there is the problem of terminology, but these are rather minor points.

[thomas54]

I promised on another thread that I will write what I think about the differences between Yoshinkan and Aunkai, but since the thread is heading in an other directions, I am not sure where I should write about that. Is there still someone interested about that?

[Mark Murray]

I promised on another thread that I will write what I think about the differences between Yoshinkan and Aunkai, but since the thread is heading in an other directions, I am not sure where I should write about that. Is there still someone interested about that?

Yes, definitely. I would find that extremely interesting.

Thanks,

[mikesigman@eart]

I promised on another thread that I will write what I think about the differences between Yoshinkan and Aunkai, but since the thread is heading in an other directions, I am not sure where I should write about that. Is there still someone interested about that?I'd be interested in hearing your impressions on that, Tomoo. Of course, I assume everyone knows that Akuzawa's "Aunkai" is not a version of Aikido per se and it does not pretend to be so.

Regards,

Mike

[mikesigman@eart]

You look pretty mighty. You look like an old Marine. Don't be such a gripe.I get curious when people start tossing out oblique remarks about challenges and weapons. I'm known for suddenly showing up just to check it out. And I wanted to be sure you weren't building up some idea that your continued remarks about "age" were a smart thing to do. If you continue, despite all my past warnings, to go off on the personal track, you might get a surprise.

See if you can stay on topic and leave the personal remarks, hints of challenge, etc., out the thread.

Mike Sigman

[Ron Tisdale]

I would be very interested Tom. WHile the Aunkai is not aikido, not even pure daito ryu, it does have influence (apparently) from Sagawa's dojo, so there is a link (however distant). And GS always said that the methodology used at the yoshinkan was meant to develop the skills we are talking about. So someone with experience at both can perhaps draw some interesting conclusions.

Best,
Ron

[dbotari]

(from page 4) Well, these things are tough over the internet. OK, try this. Stand in a ai-migi-hanmi with a partner in front of you and his right hand is pushing against your belly.
[snip]
The ground will shift automatically from leg to leg as you move forward if you do that.

If you can do that, you may be able to understand that moving and keeping kokyu on uke as you go forward is the same thing. Hope it helps.

Mike

Thanks for that advice I'll work on it. The pieces are starting to fit together. :)

Thanks again,

[cxt]

Mike

I keep telling you---you know your your OWN worst enemy here, you refuse to listen to what people are saying to you--then you get all bent out of shape when the same people you refuse to listen to get upset with you.

You and I are not using the terms in the same fashion, what "you" mean is not what I mean.

I "understand" well enough that I know the definations of "kokyu" "kuzushi" even to a certain extent "ki" can all be defined in MANY ways.

-Purely physical

-With the implication that they involve certain metaphysical aspects

-Or in nearly entirely "spiritural" manner.

And from where I sit your using ALL THREE, when and how it suits you.

And that's jacked---if you throw everything INCLUDING the kitchen sink into the meaning of your terms---then the terms no longer serve useful purpose.

Now its great that you and your "buds" know what your talking about.
But in case you missed it--this is not the private "chat-room" for you and a few of your friends.
There are A LOT of people here and we all have a different understanding/use of those terms.

Like they say in the movies:

"Just cause people don't understand you don't mean your "deep"--it just makes you an a**hole."

NOT calling you one--just showing how it looks when you refuse to define complex terms that have multiple meanings.

I can just as easily advance the arguement THAT YOU don't know what your talking about based on the SAME reasoning.

In short--like I said before.

Your using words and terms to CLOUD the issue.

Any word yet on when your going to post the "simple physics" that explains "ki?????????????????


Chris Thomas

[MarkF]

I simply wish to have the "simple physics" that explain "ki" to be posted.


I am very sorry I let this go one. My fault for not baby-sitting a thread (not quite the word I had in mind but you can make a guess as to what I think this thread was)on a subject so overfilled or rather an argument basically between two adults who should have taken this to PM or email after the first page. I am giving you the credit of "first page" which is set at my default of twenty posts per page. After sitting here reading this, hoping someone would be able to fix it, I do not think it can be.

If this thread truly was to include kokyu and ki along with attitudes, well, the latter was discussed to death, you both lose, E-budo loses, Ron loses, and I am left to clean up the dreck.

Mark Murray also loses as he tried to give you the chance to get on with the discussion instead of the invectives with which this thread is littered. If you wanted to find out what people thought of 'ki' why did you simply do a search of E-budo. I assure you it has enough old threads in its archives to assure both parties what the general membership, at least those who post, think of that subject. Do not make promises you cannot or will not keep. As the song goes: "It's my party so I'll go." I'm afraid this thread was dead before the gun went off.

[kimiwane]

I promised on another thread that I will write what I think about the differences between Yoshinkan and Aunkai, but since the thread is heading in an other directions, I am not sure where I should write about that. Is there still someone interested about that?

Yes, please. Do discuss that if you would.

Thanks.

[MarkF]

I reopened this thread to give credit where it is due. Thank you Mark Murray for attempting to get this thread back to civil discourse. I now see why it was necessary.

To Ron Tisdale, thank you for what needed to be said. I apologize for closing this thread, but I will close any thread in any of my fora which has a thread titled with any of the three topics by either of the same people.

I suppose thanks should go to David Orange, Jr. as well for having the guts to get out while the getting was good (or perhaps, "...getting out while the getting was good").

Just one more thing. Everyone should go back and look at the rules to which you agreed when posting here. They are at the top of each page in each forum and subforum named "Announcement." It really is a simple thing. Show some respect and you should have a nice day.



Mark


Edit in: I did was writing this post when Thomas and Davids' replies were posted, but due to this thread being closed, if you would not mind, please start another thread to discuss the topic to which both of you are showing interest. It should have its own topic post, anyway. Sorry I did not have the opportunity to see your posts earlier.