PDA

View Full Version : Body Conditioning



Pages : [1] 2 3

Dan Harden
21st November 2007, 18:08
Aiki is…what?
As defined …by whom?
Defended by what?
Is it a proprietary method of some single art’s execution of principle- to- technique? Or is it actually a way to physically train the body that makes Aiki..happen?
Or is it, in the end for most…a word…with little meaning?


If you think it is a set of principles and/or some single-arts deep understanding, then good luck to you. You will be surrounded by hordes of like minded folks. It's all over the internet in many teachers styles. If you want to learn then get out and meet people.

The world is getting smaller year-by-year.
Presently there are students of ;
1.Daito ryu;
The Kodo kai; Kiyama and Goldberg,
The Roppokai; Okomoto and Quick,
The Mainline; Kondo
As well as students of;
2.Aikido;
Saotomae and Ikeda, and Chiba
3. As well as students of the Japanese Koryu
4. As well as Yanagi Aikibugei
5. As well as students of the CMA
Some have now trained in varying combinations of the above and have spent time and money to travel and meet people who “claim” to understand the deeper meaning and indoctrinations of various arts and their…Aiki. In so doing they have had their hands on combinations of the above..repeatedly.
They have formed their own opinions as far as who has what and what and what all this talk about "Aiki" means..at least for them.

While the internet remains a who’s who of many who don’t know much… you can help yourself. Again, get out and meet people. There is nothing more revealing than placing your hands on someone. In the end our understanding is in our hands.
Cheers
Dan

Dan Harden
23rd November 2007, 18:53
Since noone has mentioned him, I point out that the late Donn Draeger identified the concept of "aiki-" as proceeding from the Aizu clan through a noted 18th century Confucian scholar. I mention this only because I am of the belief that the use the term "aiki-" as a method is of quite recent interpretation, with the use of the same term, as "attitude" is only of slighting older vintage.


Hi Bruce

In many ways Don's writing reflected knowledge and available information at that time. It was never meant to be THEE source for all things Japanese. Were he alive he would be correcting his own earlier works here and there.



By comparison, the idea of "balance" or "unbalance" as applied to a given technique may be a more recent attempt to lend concrete meaning to an otherwise ethereal subject. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce
I can’t help but completely discount that take on things. It is only ethereal to those who don’t understand it or cannot do it themselves. The idea of Aiki is all over the place in Japan and in China (by act... not name) in many arts. It would do a disservice to anyone to just look for it in Daito ryu or in some arts techniques. As for modern ideas...actually the concept of Aiki as blending applied to a technique is the more modern concept. I think it's far better to research what "it" means... not what some art "says" it means.

The power of Aiki in the body is not dependant on an art, not expressed in a technique. It comes from retained balance of In/yo ho, a trained relaxed power in your own body, not in trying to “do things” to someone. Its power is in softness/softness that comes from power. The search for power was the heart of the martial arts. The idea of martial training was to gain strength and power-even this is gravely misunderstood by the modern practitioner. What type of power were they referring to? Surely not the inverted triangle "Arny" type of isolated weight lifting. The "power" they were referring to was internal power or internal strength. This type of skill is best trained initially in solo practice. Solo training is documented in so many Asian writings, in so many places that it should go without challenge. Over and over we read of men practicing Solo in the mountains and coming back with "enlightenment." Yukioshi Sagawa -himself one of the greatest modern exponents of Aiki- was a huge proponent of Solo training. We...(meaning many-not all) just don't know what the heck solo training really means. That westerners read about the older Martial artists training, and discuss it, and continue to research deeper meaning in the Japanese arts …yet skip this invaluable type of training… brings the ridiculous to the sublime.
It is unfortunate that many arts will not openly teach it and tell everyone to train for twenty years “getting it” from repetition of technique. It was and still can be gotten in a much shorter time frame, and without signing on to perpetuate an art. Once you have trained your body it exists in you and can be used in anything from Judo to jujutsu to MMA.
But in the end Aiki is real and not ethereal, and is soft...power delivery to control or knockout. It will express itself in a throw, choke, or lock, and just as viable in not being able to to be thrown or locked, or in a kick or short distance kidney or headshot. And it comes from a trained body, not from practicing some martial art.
Cheers
Dan

glad2bhere
24th November 2007, 00:51
I agree, Dan, and my heartfelt thanks for not invoking Japanese culture as the sole point of reference and infallible defining authority regarding this subject. Like you I have held that Chinese and Korean traditions have also made reference to this characteristic and sought its mastery in the execution of their own martial traditions. Personally, I don't think anyone gets quite so anal-compulsive about such things as the Japanese practitioners, but that is a subject best addressed all by itself. I remember only that in times past Japanese nationals would babble the subject to death with contradictory and sometimes mutually exclusive rhetoric, only to determine, in the end, that only the Japanese culture was truely able to appreciate "aiki" in all its nuances. Since then, I am happy to report that an increasing number of practitioners of various arts have begun to discuss "aiki" in biomechanical terms, and I consider the MA World well advanced for it.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

Dan Harden
1st December 2007, 13:00
Hi Bruce
The conversation is a nonstarter with most of the Japanese and the Chinese- including teachers. I think you will find DR folks telling you they donlt care. DR is DR and the Chines will tell you that Japense arts don't get it and dont have internals. Most people are too invested in their systems to research. The best thing to do is train your internals and work on you, and then just show up. When they can't do much to you at all, they may or may not wish to talk. The best conversation I had was with an older, master level internal arts teacher, who taught in Japan. And get this...he taught some of Sagawa's guys who were looking for what Sagawa had. Here I was with an amazingly skilled guy, hands on and talking about Daito ryu; Aiki age, sage and fure aiki. You caouldn't have that discussion with any hundred CMA or DR folks. And you still can't. The saddest- almost comical-ones, are those who are helpess to do anything to you, and are uninterested as to why. If it isn't directly related from their teacher or lineage it isn't for them. And they...are all over the place. I've seen men incapable of pulling off any technique and then shy away from even trying again. In the end it is more important to many people to be part of a group. Even when it means they are not being taught how to do something, and even when it means after ten years... they suck.

Here's another thought to offer those who may think Daito ryu alone owns the training method to creat aiki..think of this. Sagawa stated that only in his later years (80-90) did he finally start to teach "how."
Turns out it wasn't in the techniques after all..there's a surprise:laugh:.
In his own words it was his internal training. His solo internal training to change his body that he credited for his skill.

So, Ask yourself this. If DR does have a proprietary method
1. Why is it that the things he describes for his bodywork is directly related to....Chinese Internal arts.

While we're at it. Sagawa is interesting as most credit him with the absolute hghest level of skill. Examinng his words is telling in that he openly states he really never taught Aiki openly and that of his students only one trained his body (solo) properly.
So...if the secret is not in paried waza practice but in solo training...what the hell has every one else been doing for twenty years? And...thanks for telling everyone at the end of your life and after twenty years of their training in the wrong direction.
Take all that out for a spin with many DR or CMA practitioners and see how far you get.

Keep training. If you get it, you got it. For anyone blinded or prejudiced by style, there isn't a damn thing they can say...to your face. Your bodyskill will end the debate on the spot.
But on that day no one can stand for us. Not teachers, not style, not organization. Our understanding is in our own hands.
You either can do, or you cannot.

Nathan Scott
10th December 2007, 21:55
Excluding evident fakes or fraudolent masters, is there some sort of Aiki system other than the Aiki studied in Daito Ryu?

For a reference, I was reading Harrison's book about his Japanese experience during pre war period at the Kodokan. There is a chapter in which he met a master of a koryu system (it is not reported what school was) and the master gave a demonstration of some aiki.

There isn't any evidence to support that any "aiki" system existed that predates Takeda Sokaku's use of the term - and as he defined it. There are MANY arts and instructors that have used the term since then, and yes, there were likely a number of systems back in the day that had methods similar to what Daito-ryu calls "aiki". There are a number of arts that used the term aiki prior to Sokaku using it, but as others have pointed out, the definition is very basic, suggesting either an alternate definition of the term or a very shallow understanding of the principle. So "aiki" is either a very common principle defined and understood at different levels, or is a term used commonly to refer to different concepts. Which one of these answers is correct is a matter of personal opinion.

The book you are referring to is E.J. Harrison's 1955 book "The Fighting Spirit of Japan". The master you mention is a man by the name of Kunishige Nobuyuki of the Shinden Isshin-ryu. While there is an entry for Shinden Isshin-ryu in the Bugei Ryu-ha Daijiten, the listing simply has the name and "ju", indicating that it was primarily a jujutsu art (and apparently not very well known or preserved). It is unclear what time period the stories about Kunishige occured as they are recounted in Harrison's book, but the author does state he first met Kunishige during the time of the Russo-Japanese War, which was from 1904-1905, and that he returned from Japan some time before 1917. Kunishige's dojo was apparently very near Shimbashi Train Station (now Shiodome Station), which at that time was located in Minato, Tokyo. If Shinden Isshin-ryu was a developing art, then usage of the term aiki, or the principle of aiki, may have been included some time after the founding of the art. Being in Tokyo there would have been many opportunities for exposure to other arts. For example, one of Sokaku's students was someone named "Sato Kanmi" who began training in 1902. He received Kyoju Dairi and the Hiden Okugi, and according to the eimeiroku entry, will publish a book in 1906 that will include an entry on "aikijutsu".

Though it appears Sokaku started using the term aiki in the name of his art following approximately 1922, oral tradition states the term "aiki on'yo-ho" was the old method that was passed down through the generations, and there are several references in regards to this aiki method in stories about Minamoto Yoshimitsu and Yoshiie, early Sumo, and the earliest reference within the Kojiki.

All jujutsu/yawara/kumiuchi appears to have been derived or at least heavily influenced by early Sumo, so it would not be shocking to find that some of early methods or teachings exist within other koryu (such as Kashima shin-ryu). But what appears to be different now is the definition of the term and depth of understanding of it's potential.

BTW, from what I read in Harrison's book, it appeared that Kunishige was demonstrating "resistance" to attacks rather than countering methods using "aiki". Ueshiba apparently referred to some of his "resistance" methods as being aiki as well, so perhaps this is a defensive application of the principle.


No expert am I, but I think we must factor in Ueshiba Morihei. It was at the suggestion of Ueshiba's guru, Deguchi Onisaburo, that Takeda changed the name of his art to "aiki"-whatever.

Aiki was added to jujutsu either at Deguchi's suggestion, or at Yoshida Kotaro's suggestion. I've heard both. Yoshida began studying with Sokaku in 1915, so as far as Yoshida's family style Yanagi-ryu, it is clear that Sokaku was using the term prior to meeting Yoshida.

Regards,

Nathan Scott
10th December 2007, 23:22
The idea of Aiki is all over the place in Japan and in China (by act... not name) in many arts.

Well, if you define the "the idea of aiki" as being any martial artist who uses the term to attract more students, then I agree. I think there were some Japanese arts that had the same or similar methods at one time, but on the other hand, I think that aiki as used and defined in Daito-ryu would not exist within extant Japanese arts these days if not for Takeda Sokaku spreading the DR teachings so widely.

As far as aiki methods as defined by Daito-ryu being all over the place in China, I can't say yes or no with any authority. I'm sure there are some talented CMA's, but in these times CMA's with real ability in internal arts appears to be very rare, from what I've seen. And while CMA may have elements of what Daito-ryu defines as aiki, I've yet to hear or see anything that leads me to believe the exact same method is alive and well all over the place in China.

On the other hand, it is quite possible that Daito-ryu aiki, or at least elements of it, were adapted at some point from Chinese internal methods. Fact is, a great deal of Japanese and Okinawan culture and martial arts was borrowed and then adapted from China. The problem though is that Japanese are famous for adapting things they borrow, so while CMA may have some amazing techniques and principles, they may not equate to what Daito-ryu now terms as "aiki".

The problem is, from an art standpoint, mixing in R&D from CMA movements and principles to an operating system that is not complimentary to them. CMA and JMA move differently, and for the most part, generate power differently. Cross-cultural training can make an art better, or make an art worse, depending on the experience and understanding of the person doing it. Of course, of you don't care about the art but only inventing your own fighting method, then that is not a consideration.


It is unfortunate that many arts will not openly teach it and tell everyone to train for twenty years “getting it” from repetition of technique. It was and still can be gotten in a much shorter time frame, and without signing on to perpetuate an art.

This has been discussed here before. You call the historic Japanese resistance to spoon-feeding "unfortunate". I and other proponents of this method call it "allowing the student to develop critical learning skills" (aka: "you can give a man a fish and feed him for a day, or teach him how to fish and feed him for a lifetime"). The student develops slower in the beginning years, but advance exponentially in later years with little or no instruction. Even Sagawa, whom you quote in every post, taught that there was no substitute for repetitive practice.


<snipped together> Most people are too invested in their systems to research. The best thing to do is train your internals and work on you, and then just show up ... If it isn't directly related from their teacher or lineage it isn't for them. In the end it is more important to many people to be part of a group. Even when it means they are not being taught how to do something, and even when it means after ten years... they suck.

I disagree. SOME people may be too invested in their system to research, but many people simply have faith in their teacher and/or the instructional system of their given art. Daito-ryu, for example, has had exceptional martial artists teaching the art in every generation since the Meiji period. It is possible to learn the art, but it requires studying under an experienced and skilled instructor as well as the correct amount of dedication to training the art, both of which are achievable. Most people fail by either training under an unqualified instructor (or one who lacks the ability), or in not adhering to the teacher's instructions. Researching the methods of a given art is generally encouraged. However, researching the methods of other arts, especially those from other countries, is generally discouraged. At least in the earlier developmental years due to the likelihood of inappropriate cross-contamination.

I find it ironic that you are posting to a Japanese martial arts forum condemning those that follow the instructions of their teacher and way of their art. The teacher-student relationship is built upon this trust. If you don't trust your teacher to guide you correctly through the art, then you may have the wrong teacher. But there is nothing wrong with the traditional system of transmission. What is true these days is that most people cannot tolerate the idea of submitting to the authority of another person. This is a society that encourages seeking the "easy way" through life, making as much money as possible, and fostering an ever-growing ego. People who were raised brain washed into this type of thinking are definitely not going to last in traditional Japanese arts.

The importance of being a member of a group is probably the core teaching of koryu arts. When you are a member of a group you are expected to put forth a reasonable amount of time and energy to help sustain the group (ryu-ha). In return, you get "out of the art what you put into it". Not a bad deal, but it requires that you "give before you get" (another principle foreign to most of modern society). When you are a member of an art, you have access to generations of R&D of which you can build upon. This is much harder to from just seminar jumping or sampling the big shots of the day.

I can't think of any reason why it is necessary to "suck" for 10 years though. For example, Daito-ryu has a jujutsu curriculum that is taught from the beginning. Many people study jujutsu their whole lives and are able to adapt them to self-defense applications. Many who study the basics of aikido (which are based on DR jujutsu) are able to make them effective in modern self-defense as well. Like every art, it depends on the person. The art works fine.


Here's another thought to offer those who may think Daito ryu alone owns the training method to creat aiki..think of this. Sagawa stated that only in his later years (80-90) did he finally start to teach "how." Turns out it wasn't in the techniques after all..there's a surprise. In his own words it was his internal training. His solo internal training to change his body that he credited for his skill.

If what you are proposing is true, then why does the Sagawa Dojo still use the traditional jujutsu techniques as it's foundation? Body conditioning may have elevated Sagawa's over all skill or aiki to a higher level, but no where has he or his three successors disregarded the Daito-ryu curriculum as the foundation for their aiki. I suppose there must be a reason. It is also worth mentioning that Sagawa himself says he stole Sokaku's aiki at 17 years old from training in a resistance exercise, but that later on he was not even sure if what he ended up doing was really the same as Sokaku's aiki. Sagawa may have developed Daito-ryu aiki to the next level of potential, or, he may have used Daito-ryu aiki as his spring board for the extensive cross-training and experience in other arts he had to develop something else. Either way it appears Sagawa Sensei gained some impressive skills, but all his views and opinions on aiki may not be identical to the views and opinions of other skilled Daito-ryu exponents following Sokaku's transmission.

BTW, if CMA has all the elements of aiki - and then some - why didn't Sagawa just quit DR and immerse himself completely into CMA? He didn't seem to have any problem cross-training. Why not trade up? Or, why not take all that experience and make up his own MMA, like everyone else is doing?


So, Ask yourself this. If DR does have a proprietary method
1. Why is it that the things he describes for his bodywork is directly related to....Chinese Internal arts.

Being "related" to CMA, which is your opinion, does not negate the possibility that Daito-ryu's aiki is proprietary. What is proprietary is the totality of the information that defiines DR aiki, not necessarily the originality of it. Besides, to make such authoritative statements comparing CMA and DR aiki implies that you have full understanding of what DR aiki is. If that is in fact your claim, then there will surely be a number of follow questions to follow.


For anyone blinded or prejudiced by style, there isn't a damn thing they can say...to your face. Your bodyskill will end the debate on the spot.
But on that day no one can stand for us. Not teachers, not style, not organization. Our understanding is in our own hands.

Well, if you define "saying something" as throwing down every time you meet someone to prove his is stronger, has trained harder/longer, etc, then I guess you're right. I, for example, have a practical need for effective methods, but at the same time I gain much satisfaction and enjoyment from being a STUDENT of the arts. While it should be the goal of all martial arts to produce skilled martial artists, there is no reason why all martial arts need be nothing more than no-frills close quarters combatives.


You either can do, or you cannot.

There's no disagreeing with that. We will probably also agree that there are, and always will be, those that are well suited for koryu and those that are well suited for MMA. If there is room in this world for all the frauds, I'm sure there is room in the world for us as well.

Regards,

Dan Harden
11th December 2007, 03:27
Nathan,
I apologize for the length


Well, if you define the "the idea of aiki" as being any martial artist who uses the term to attract more students, then I agree. I think there were some Japanese arts that had the same or similar methods at one time, but on the other hand, I think that aiki as used and defined in Daito-ryu would not exist within extant Japanese arts these days if not for Takeda Sokaku spreading the DR teachings so widely. As far as aiki methods as defined by Daito-ryu being all over the place in China, I can't say yes or no with any authority. I'm sure there are some talented CMA's, but in these times CMA's with real ability in internal arts appears to be very rare, from what I've seen. And while CMA may have elements of what Daito-ryu defines as aiki, I've yet to hear or see anything that leads me to believe the exact same method is alive and well all over the place in China.
Agreed. With the exception that I believe the foundations for the correct body method were and are in arts throughout India and Asia. And that it is, in fact the foundation that is the key to what is missing in many of the Practitioners in these arts.
That Takeda was a hugely well known and capable…scratch that…immensely capable genius aided him in furthering his method. But it was, after all, a method which had its roots in other arts as well. As a side note, I believe you will find just as many poor students of the Chinese IMA as you will find poor students of Japanese arts, including DR. But I would not judge any art by poor, even mid-level students anyway.



... it is quite possible that Daito-ryu aiki, or at least elements of it, were adapted at some point from Chinese internal methods. Fact is, a great deal of Japanese and Okinawan culture and martial arts was borrowed and then adapted from China. The problem though is that Japanese are famous for adapting things they borrow, so while CMA may have some amazing techniques and principles, they may not equate to what Daito-ryu now terms as "aiki". The problem is, from an art standpoint, mixing in R&D from CMA movements and principles to an operating system that is not complimentary to them. CMA and JMA move differently, and for the most part, generate power differently.
They do not have to look the same in use to be the same in source. I think you are correct in defining principles -of use- as different… in execution. But I contend you are incorrect regarding, source of movement, and power generation. What a DR adept is using to cause aiki-age, Aiki-sage and other aspects of the art are all well in keeping with CMA internals. One can go from one to the other. I take it at face value that you cannot see this, and do not agree. OK.
To me its simply fact that Sagawa (in the little he does describe) describes as the basis for his body training the same basic tenants as the CMA. The breath power methods of in/yo ho are discussed in CMA as well. I suppose its a whole different thing to be training with a master level CMA teacher who trained in Japan for ten years, with him doing perfect Aiki-age, sage and fure-aiki and sharing notes on detailed methods of execution.


Cross-cultural training can make an art better, or make an art worse, depending on the experience and understanding of the person doing it. Of course, if you don't care about the art but only inventing your own fighting method, then that is not a consideration.
Well, I think cross cultural training as a goal will only serve to degrade an art form. If the intent is to do… an art…, then one must preserve it- in its fullness. Even within the model of Shu-Ha-Ri, the art should not be lost in the process. If it were being lost, then call it something else entirely and walk away. To me that’s the real danger.
1. Of folks claiming to teach an art when they are not qualified to do so.
Or, worse still
2. Being truly qualified and not really teaching much at all, only gaining students.



You call the historic Japanese resistance to spoon-feeding "unfortunate". I and other proponents of this method call it "allowing the student to develop critical learning skills" (aka: "you can give a man a fish and feed him for a day, or teach him how to fish and feed him for a lifetime").
Hmmm. Don’t be so quick there pal. I didn’t mean that at all. What I said was.. It is unfortunate that many arts will not openly teach it and tell everyone to train for twenty years “getting it” from repetition of technique. It was and still can be gotten in a much shorter time frame, and without signing on to perpetuate an art. Yes, I know we dissagree on that.


…snip…combined into one point….
If what you are proposing is true, then why does the Sagawa Dojo still use the traditional jujutsu techniques as it's foundation? Body conditioning may have elevated Sagawa's over all skill or aiki to a higher level, but no where has he or his three successors disregarded the Daito-ryu curriculum as the foundation for their aiki. I suppose there must be a reason. Even Sagawa, whom you quote in every post, taught that there was no substitute for repetitive practice.
Hmm.. repetition in what? Please at least examine what I am saying before refuting it bud.. I meant training in endless repetition of techniques is not the way. It never was. But it’s the bread and butter of most Japanese arts. It is…since we were discussing DR- NOT- the quickest way to gain skill.

Again Sagawa…..
You can't get good at something simply by repetition….
1. Many people would say back in the day that all you had to do is practice, and more practice! But after I became able to think for myself I found that this wasn't so.
2.The reason practitioners from some styles are weak and no good is because they do not train (Tanren) their bodies. Only amateurs think that techniques are enough and that training the body is unnecessary. They understand nothing.
3. The true execution of Aiki requires an enormous amount of solo training to condition the body (Tanren).
4….It is not easy to attain….. I didn’t teach this myself until a little while ago. I waited for my students to discover this for themselves.

I guess it’s a view, but my take is that he is telling you…my point was well made.




…snip I find it ironic that you are posting to a Japanese martial arts forum condemning those that follow the instructions of their teacher and way of their art. The teacher-student relationship is built upon this trust. If you don't trust your teacher to guide you correctly through the art, then you may have the wrong teacher. But there is nothing wrong with the traditional system of transmission.
Hmm.. Here’s a thought.
Sagawa admitted
1. I myself have a method that no one else knows about, that I created on my own, and have done this for a long while. I am able to toss around most of my inner door students so easily by me no matter how much they trained. So I taught them a little on how to train their bodies. I didn’t even teach that until a couple of years ago. To have a method of training that no one else knows about leads to success that differentiates you from others. If you teach everyone everything, you’ll simply become like everyone else. You’ll lose motivation to become better. Tanren was supposed to be something you did quietly in the background. It’s part of bujutsu after all. You never spoke of it to another person.
2..I didn’t teach this myself until a little while ago. I waited for my students to discover this for themselves.
I am sure everyone had a blast finding all that out after following their leader.



What is true these days is that most people cannot tolerate the idea of submitting to the authority of another person. This is a society that encourages seeking the "easy way" through life, making as much money as possible, and fostering an ever-growing ego. People who were raised brain washed into this type of thinking are definitely not going to last in traditional Japanese arts.

Nice speech. I agree. But I was talking about the fact that not all teachers…teach! You think I meant …what? I was discussing a narrow field of discussion ; Aiki within the arts. Not whole arts.
While we’re on the topic. I don’t recall saying the traditional method is unfortunate. In fact, I didn’t say that. I said it is unfortunate that many arts do not openly –I should have said honestly teach..one aspect of the arts. In my view a very foundational aspect.
Many Koryu have managed to be selective, secretive, proprietary and yet remain steadfastly… honest in their teaching methods. Others just simply lie, hold back real information and call it …a Koryu method.
We can discuss student/ teacher methods and trust of a teacher all day long. Some are worthy of trust, others …not so much.
I am enjoying my Koryu training and relationships, I hope you are as well. But if you think all Koryu teaching is straight forward, you are mistaken. In some arts you train and are taught honestly, other times you’re a fool for not stealing technique. It depends on where you are and who you are with. Some will even expect it.



It is also worth mentioning that Sagawa himself says he stole Sokaku's aiki at 17 years old (insert- wasn’t that my point?) from training in a resistance exercise, but that later on he was not even sure if what he ended up doing was really the same as Sokaku's aiki. Sagawa may have developed Daito-ryu aiki to the next level of potential, or, he may have used Daito-ryu aiki as his spring board for the extensive cross-training and experience in other arts he had to develop something else. Either way it appears Sagawa Sensei gained some impressive skills, but all his views and opinions on aiki may not be identical to the views and opinions of other skilled Daito-ryu exponents following Sokaku's transmission.
BTW, if CMA has all the elements of aiki - and then some - why didn't Sagawa just quit DR and immerse himself completely into CMA? He didn't seem to have any problem cross-training. Why not trade up? Or, why not take all that experience and make up his own MMA, like everyone else is doing?

Well, now you’re being a bit sarcastic. First you made a marginal point that maybe Sagawa was diverting from Sokaku’s method and others in DR with his extensive background to the point of maybe being his own MMA researcher., then you allude that I am saying the CMAare better, then DR…sigh.



Being "related" to CMA, which is your opinion, does not negate the possibility that Daito-ryu's aiki is proprietary. What is proprietary is the totality of the information that defines DR aiki, not necessarily the originality of it. Besides, to make such authoritative statements comparing CMA and DR aiki implies that you have full understanding of what DR aiki is. If that is in fact your claim, then there will surely be a number of follow questions to follow.
Nice. And if you are stating that they are proprietary in any way, you can qualify that just how? Lets be nice. We may disagree on just how proprietary it may be. But in kind-for you to make statements that DR and CMA are different in principle, use and power generation says exactly what? And since no one that I have met who was a teacher or I have read of ever…said they understood exactly what DR Aiki... is… where does that leave anyone to discuss anything? If you don’t think it should be discussed or are waiting for some imaginary recognized “expert” in both cultures to appear just to have a discussion, fine.
At the end of the day our understanding is in our own hands to demonstrate. I guess you want to leave the rest to forever be speculation for just about every.. single… student.. who walks the earth and endlessly repeats technique.


Well, if you define "saying something" as throwing down every time you meet someone to prove his is stronger, has trained harder/longer, etc, then I guess you're right. I, for example, have a practical need for effective methods, but at the same time I gain much satisfaction and enjoyment from being a STUDENT of the arts. While it should be the goal of all martial arts to produce skilled martial artists, there is no reason why all martial arts need be nothing more than no-frills close quarters combatives.
Whhaat?
No, I define it as doing …aiki. We were discussing aiki were we not? I meant doing aiki with them trying to stop you. Say Aiki age, then Peng jin, or kokyu-ho. Anyone who can do them can define what they are doing. Then perhaps stopping them from doing anything to you, with you just standing there looking at them. With your hands extended. But “throwing down.” That’s a whole different kind of fun.. FWIW Fighting, was never mentioned, only artistic expressions. At the end of the day at various levels you either can or you can’t, and for me that remains a whole different qualifier for just who, really knows what, about what.


We will probably also agree that there are, and always will be, those that are well suited for koryu and those that are well suited for MMA. If there is room in this world for all the frauds, I'm sure there is room in the world for us as well.
Regards,
Well I train with and know more than a few from all over the country and in Japan who are still active members of Koryu and who train weekly in MMA. Maybe there are more than you think who found themselves well suited for both.
I am sure you're in agreement with Seinfled in saying…”Not that there’s anything wrong with that!”
Cheers
Dan

Nathan Scott
12th December 2007, 19:15
Agreed. With the exception that I believe the foundations for the correct body method were and are in arts throughout India and Asia.

I'm not talking about things like using the strictly internal aspects like tanden, breathing, or "rooting". Chinese and Western arts/sports tend to generate power through hip twisting, whipping into a technique. Traditional Japanese power is mostly generated through straight line leverage (movement from hanmi). Neither is better or worse, from what I can see, but they are different. These power generation is built into the forms/kata, and are characteristic of the differences. My experience is that practicing forms/kata from mixed cultures confuses one's operating system. Even by studying the internal elements of CMA would be of limited use if you did not utilize a delivery system (physical form) to apply it. Those practicing JMA would have to separate the CMA internal principles being taught from the physical forms if they intend to apply it to the JMA traditional movement method.

The fact is, if there are skilled exponents of JMA doing aiki in this generation, then they know why it works. If you think about it, it's obvious. Thus, studying under such exponents should provide you the opportunity to be exposed to the correct principles, in the correct physical context. All you have to do is train seriously and conduct yourself in accordance with what is expected of students of a koryu art. Again,for some that is not difficult, but for others it is unbearable.

I agree that correct understanding of how to use the body most efficiently is largely missing in martial artists these days. But in most cases it is because students do not study an art long enough. If a student cannot perform the friggin external forms with reasonable skill, correctly applying fundamentals like ma-ai, kuzushi, kansetsu, etc., then they are not ready to learn internal methods yet - and in fact, have shown that they probably are not serious enough about their studies yet to practice them yet even if they were taught them.


As a side note, I believe you will find just as many poor students of the Chinese IMA as you will find poor students of Japanese arts, including DR. But I would not judge any art by poor, even mid-level students anyway.

I wouldn't either, but my point was that I don't believe the "idea of aiki" (as is used by DR) is as widespread as you posted. From what I've seen, deep, real ability in it's methods are still held within a handful of senior exponents of the art.


They do not have to look the same in use to be the same in source.

Conversely, just because other arts have roots, or elements of what DR calls aiki, does not mean it is the same.


To me its simply fact that Sagawa (in the little he does describe) describes as the basis for his body training the same basic tenants as the CMA. The breath power methods of in/yo ho are discussed in CMA as well.

Though I don't have much knowledge of ICMA, that is quite possible. However, Sagawa stated he discounted any form of breathing method, so I'm not sure how you worked that into Sagawa's method. I am,however, aware that specific breathing methods are core to ICMA...


I suppose its a whole different thing to be training with a master level CMA teacher who trained in Japan for ten years, with him doing perfect Aiki-age, sage and fure-aiki and sharing notes on detailed methods of execution.

I suppose so. A CMA expert who trained in Japan for 10 years is also an expert on DR aiki? I can't speak for others, but one art I study (under very qualified instructors) took about 8 years just to reach 1st degree black belt. Up to 1st degree black belt (or 2nd, or 3rd, ...) is typically focused on fundamentals, not high level inner-teachings. But perhaps his experience was different.


Being truly qualified and not really teaching much at all, only gaining students ... I was talking about the fact that not all teachers…teach!

From what I understand, aiki IS taught at the appropriate level of initiation, however, by then I suspect most have already revealed much of what they need to know through their own practice. From what I understand, most of what aiki is in DR is "taught" physically. In TJMA students are encouraged to "steal" techniques through acquired learning skills developed at earlier stages of training. In that regard, aiki is taught the same way the rest of the art is "taught". The subject of how traditional Japanese MA are taught is where I think we have different views. I've specialized for years now in JMA only, and have seen a repeating pattern emphasizing students developing learning skills through "tough love". It is not the teacher's job to explain how to do the art, or in many cases, even to "explain" corrections in movement. It is the student's job to use their brain, body, eyes and ears to steal the methods. Sure, many teachers of koryu will explain things anyway, but there is plenty of evidence to suggest that this was not the "traditional" way to guide the student. It's not that there is no verbal instruction, but usually verbal instruction is offered either when the student has been stumped for far too long or after they have already revealed the information themselves (as affirmation sort of). The student elevates *themselves* to the next level by being an active participant in the studies, not the other way around (although some arts do emphasize time-served these days).

There surely are some who don't care if their students obtain real ability, but I have a feeling this attitude is often confused with the teacher *using self-discipline* not to say anything in the best interest of student development, even though they would like to. This is also mentioned in the Sagawa book.

Speaking of the Sagawa book, the basic point he tries to make is not that it is bad to perform repetitive practice, but rather, it is bad to perform mindless repetitive practice. The basic thing he repeats over and over is that you must actively use your brain to reflect on the teachings and research the methods being repeated. It is this combination that is important. Repeating techniques is an important aspect to training the body to move correctly.

Sagawa stated he began to teach more explicitly towards the end of his life because he felt his students were not developing fast enough. The impression I got was that he later regretted doing so.


I am sure everyone had a blast finding all that out after following their leader.

There are a couple of sides to that. It is clear that Sagawa lectured about using the brain, and that he provided an impressive example of dedication to the art and to life time training in martial arts. Is it his fault most his students didn't follow (copy) his way? It's kind of like Ueshiba. How many of his students "did what he did" to reach his level (input the sounds of crickets).

When you've dedicate yourself to mastering an art like Sagawa Sensei did, what kind of expectations do you think you would have of your students? Probably pretty high - and simply showing up to class on a regular basis and saying "wow" during demonstrations of technique would be at the entry level of required dedication. Regardless, JMA can be "effective" at lower levels of initiation. They are just far more effective at higher levels. In most cases I doubt his students regretted their time training, or the impact Sagawa had on their life - even if they never learned the highest level teachings, aiki.


Nice speech.

Thanks. You don't think it was too philosophical do you? ;)


First you made a marginal point that maybe Sagawa was diverting from Sokaku’s method and others in DR with his extensive background to the point of maybe being his own MMA researcher., then you allude that I am saying the CMA are better, then DR…sigh.

You are correct about my first point, but incorrect about what I was alluding to. An art is only made "better" by the quality of the person doing it. Let me quote sections of what you posted to clarify my reactions with my interpretations in brackets:


Is it a proprietary method of some single art’s execution of principle- to- technique? Or is it actually a way to physically train the body that makes Aiki..happen? Or is it, in the end for most…a word…with little meaning? [read: aiki is an abstract term, and happens naturally through internal conditioning of the body] ... If you think [aiki] is a set of principles and/or some single-arts deep understanding, then good luck to you ... But in the end Aiki is real and not ethereal, and is soft...power delivery to control or knockout. It will express itself in a throw, choke, or lock, and just as viable in not being able to to be thrown or locked, or in a kick or short distance kidney or headshot. And it comes from a trained body, not from practicing some martial art.[read: I know what aiki is, and you won't get it from studying one art seriously] ... While the internet remains a who’s who of many who don’t know much, you can help yourself. Again, get out and meet people.[read: don't listen to others or follow "one way", but rather cross-train under exponents of various arts to learn "aiki"] ... The idea of Aiki is all over the place in Japan and in China (by act... not name) in many arts. It would do a disservice to anyone to just look for it in Daito ryu or in some arts techniques.[read: aiki is all over JMA and CMA, so don't limit yourself to putting in time in an art like Daito-ryu when you can learn the same thing faster elsewhere] ... It is unfortunate that many arts will not openly teach it [explain verbally] and tell everyone to train for twenty years “getting it” from repetition of technique. It was and still can be gotten in a much shorter time frame, and without signing on to perpetuate an art. Once you have trained your body it exists in you and can be used in anything from Judo to jujutsu to MMA.[read: you do not need to take the slow road studying by "signing on" to a TMA and "perpetuating" (keeping alive) an art like Daito-ryu. You can pick it up quicker by picking up bits and pieces elsewhere - many of whom, btw, are former students of DR of mixed levels of initiation]

I'm sure you'll disagree with how I read your posts, but I have a feeling I'm not the only one who took your posts this way, thus my response.


Nice. And if you are stating that they are proprietary in any way, you can qualify that just how? Lets be nice. We may disagree on just how proprietary it may be. But in kind-for you to make statements that DR and CMA are different in principle, use and power generation says exactly what?

You originally implied that DR aiki can be found in other arts, and in CMA in particular. Why should readers of this forum believe you? Based on mixed experiences with various MA exponents, or through a deep, formal initiation into an aiki art (such as DR)? Even though I know you've been involved in MA for a long time, the fact is anyone can post opinions to the internet. My rebuttal to you was based mostly on my research of the art, which has been substantial (much of which I've posted to this forum). However, if that and my formal initiation into similar such arts (like aikido for example) are not at all compelling, I'm fine with withdrawing my opinion that DR has a proprietary aiki method (based on lack of qualifications) IF you either QUALIFY your statement publicly, or, withdraw it. How's that?


And since no one that I have met who was a teacher or I have read of ever…said they understood exactly what DR Aiki... is… where does that leave anyone to discuss anything?

Yeah, I've heard the same things. But as I said, do you think those with real ability seriously do not understand how it works, or is it possible they don't want to explain it based on their current level of understanding (hmmmm)? But you're right. Either way it doesn't leave much to discuss, does it?


I guess you want to leave the rest to forever be speculation for just about every.. single… student.. who walks the earth and endlessly repeats technique.

Those who study the art seriously will not *have to* speculate. But they probably will not want to discuss it either. The answer is not difficult. It is just that the vast majority of people don't want to study the art, even if there is an opportunity locally to do so. Many believe it's much easier to look for the answers by simply baiting others who study! The problem is, those who talk rarely know.

Regards,

Dan Harden
14th December 2007, 02:51
You seem to be on a roll making a case for the traditional Japanese method of teaching. I’d be the last to stop you. I have been and am currently involved in TJMA as well. Since you are obviously talking to the wider reader, I think it is unwise to classify the JMA, even Koryu, as all of the same mindset in teaching. Its just not true. That said, I wish to stress again that I am talking about a topic within a topic. You, on the other hand tie everything in with the whole art.
I don’t know where you got your idea about Chinese arts using a “whipping into technique” and hip twisting with Japanese power being in a straight line. But, it does help to explain your understanding and viewpoints.
First and foremost the comparison isn’t correct, and the “delivery system” means little to nothing anyway, it’s merely an outer form, not the essence of real power and sensitivity. And the power generation isn’t “built into” a kata either. Were it so, there wouldn’t be so many terrible students out there who can be stopped rather easily. Solo Tanren changes your body to the point that your choice of expression is ancillary. Once your body is trained correctly Aiki is born through contact with you . Ultimately it is about training yourself, not kata with others. That’s an arts chosen form of expression and delivery. In and of itself its just another means to get the job done. One should be able to work within Chinese or Japanese or western arts with the same essence. I contend that Studying a delivery system as you put it is a completely different topic from body training. And the body training is the real gokui of both understanding and gaining power and sensitivity in all the Asian arts.
I quote Sagawa as he was one of few to ever admit openly just what was being held back from most in the art. As stated by Sagawa
1. Traditionally, One should not teach tanren to large foreigners as it would give them an unfair advantage.
2. That he kept the real secret (which he clearly stated was solo tanren) to himself and suggests that the accepted thought was most should as well to maintain an advantage over their students. “You kept that secret, and didn’t tell people.”
And he clearly wasn’t talking about technique.


I agree that correct understanding of how to use the body most efficiently is largely missing in martial artists these days. But in most cases it is because students do not study an art long enough. If a student cannot perform the friggin external forms with reasonable skill, correctly applying fundamentals like ma-ai, kuzushi, kansetsu, etc., then they are not ready to learn internal methods yet - and in fact, have shown that they probably are not serious enough about their studies yet to practice them yet even if they were taught them.
But you are now stating my point for me. It isn’t taught to but a few. But it clearly exists. The choice to keep it back is fine. But stating it doesn’t exist which has been done, or is unique and proprietary as a tanren will not stand up to scrutiny.


Speaking of the Sagawa book, the basic point he tries to make is not that it is bad to perform repetitive practice, but rather, it is bad to perform mindless repetitive practice. The basic thing he repeats over and over is that you must actively use your brain to reflect on the teachings and research the methods being repeated. It is this combination that is important. Repeating techniques is an important aspect to training the body to move correctly.
No....it is not. Most assuredly not. He stated categorically that the secret was… not...to be found in technique, repetitious or no.

Sagawa stated he began to teach more explicitly towards the end of his life because he felt his students were not developing fast enough.
Really? I find this hilarious. And what does “more explicitly” mean to you? He stated categorically that his secret was not in technique. Flat out stated it wasn’t. Then stated he didn’t teach it. Who was to bemoan his students lack of progress other than the guy who kept secrets and didn’t offer real instruction to them? He stated his secret was in Solo work that he previously only rarely showed…not in technique. Makes your Repeating techniques is an important aspect to training the body to move correctly. seem like the slow…well trodden road… that it is.


There are a couple of sides to that. It is clear that Sagawa lectured about using the brain, and that he provided an impressive example of dedication to the art and to life time training in martial arts. Is it his fault most his students didn't follow (copy) his way? It's kind of like Ueshiba. How many of his students "did what he did" to reach his level (input the sounds of crickets).
Seems obvious to me...they were suffering for lack of information from their teacher.
Loyalty, works best when it is both ways.
It's just as wise for students to keep their guard up, as it is for a teacher.

Dan Harden
14th December 2007, 15:19
Some of your responses are interesting but leave so many holes. DR leaves much to speculation. You say...not to its students. I have found that not to be true as well. Students and teachers within the art have doubts and speculations. Others have some very surprising stories to tell. The one thing we agree on is that no one in the art will talk about it publicly. Which is why Sagawa's comments at the end of his life were so revealing.

Has any one ever questioned why it is that the art was taught to thousands, yet managed and carried forward -including the evolving scrolls of transmission- only by well connected and set-up men, like Sagawa Yukioshi, Ueshiba Morihei, Kodo Taiso, Yoshida Kotaro and Hisa Takuma?
Where'd every one else go?
And why is it that each of their syllabuses is so different?
This strange disparity has been a topic of discussion behind the scenes to more than a few DR students researching- who went to different schools and realized it was a whole different art...based on common principles. Oddly each branch told these disparate students they should “Just train.” They never got an answer to their query.
The teaching method, and decisions as to just what, will be shown to whom, is one thing truly proprietary. So while one may argue there is only one Aiki-jujutsu- and its proprietary. The question then remains "Just what...it...is?"
Are there 5 or 6...it's's?
I contend the real proprietary method to aiki is in tanren. I also speculate that the art never had a fixed syllabus in the first place. It was ever evolving among these men in the modern age. The body method, taught to only a few, made the adept profoundly different and singular among his peers. This is what Sagawa referred to when he said “traditionally you never told anyone what you were doing so you had the advantage.” He also states he was ever evolving an individual expression of body skills. In the same manner as Takeda travelled different people responded differently to his body, and this could be why nothing got repeated quite the same way, and people learned suc different skills. He was devleoping the art as we went along. Which again explains the different approaches and technical syllabus between the schools. Each trying to steal and record what they felt. It is a plausible explanation as to why the art really isn’t anything technically cohesive from school to school.

Ron Tisdale
14th December 2007, 21:00
Gentlemen,

Intriguing discussion! I have nothing worth adding, except that I hope you will continue. I am all ears (I know Nathan at least will probably sigh and shake his head at that :D).

Best,
Ron

Cady Goldfield
15th December 2007, 01:37
Oh Ron, Ron, Ron!
You must know that the surest and fastest way to doom a thread and guarantee that no one will post anything intriguing on it again, ever, is to write in and say how interesting the discussion is!

Geez. :p

;)

Finny
15th December 2007, 07:15
So, Ask yourself this. If DR does have a proprietary method
1. Why is it that the things he describes for his bodywork is directly related to....Chinese Internal arts.



Easy to say, but very vague Dan.

related to which internal Chinese Arts?

The CIMA don't even agree among themselves as to what constitutes 'internal'

Are you saying DR's Aiki is related to Dai Shi Xinyi's dantien gong? Xingyiquan's zhan zhuang? Baguazhang's jibengong and circle walking?

R_Garrelts
15th December 2007, 19:03
Easy to say, but very vague Dan.

related to which internal Chinese Arts?

The CIMA don't even agree among themselves as to what constitutes 'internal'

Are you saying DR's Aiki is related to Dai Shi Xinyi's dantien gong? Xingyiquan's zhan zhuang? Baguazhang's jibengong and circle walking?

Or better yet... whose baguazhang jibengong and circle walking? Honestly, though, at the level of nitpicking commonly seen on internet forums, I think it might be necessary to specify not only which teacher but also which day of the week!

Does that mean that there can't be something that, say, Kodo Horikawa, for example, had in common with each of the more well-known practitioners of the Chinese "internal styles" (Feng Zhiqiang, Chen Xiaowang, Liang Kequan, etc.)? Of course not. But, considering the average amount of variation among teachers of even the same style, the commonalities that do exist (between even a specific teacher of daito-ryu and a representative sampling of the "internal styles") are likely to be of the most general sort--so general that the same or similar commonalities will likely be found if we were comparing Baryshnikov's movement to Daito-ryu or (heaven forbid) a Daito-ryu teacher to aikido.

Dan Harden
15th December 2007, 19:28
Easy to say, but very vague Dan.

related to which internal Chinese Arts?

The CIMA don't even agree among themselves as to what constitutes 'internal'

Are you saying DR's Aiki is related to Dai Shi Xinyi's dantien gong? Xingyiquan's zhan zhuang? Baguazhang's jibengong and circle walking?

Yes the goal with each of those is basic body training to do what? Prepare the body. It isn’t technical expression or outer form. Tai chi does not look like Xing-I but the results from training the body are the same
When you say “those in the CMA” can’t agree, I’d bet they are the same class as those who cannot see beyond their own arts everywhere. I have met staunch zealots who were well versed, utterly convinced of their arts uniqueness, and they are usually without skill. Fortunately there are students, and teachers who got the stuff who are starting to meet and compare notes. Some have come to realize they can talk and research and not do their art harm. For the most part though men will forever…forever!..think their art is unique, that some wizard from the past was unique in all the world to discover hitherto unknown ways to use the human mind and frame. There’s just no talking to these men.. .

While training in single arts and learning their ways in order to preserve them, men can get lost in them. The wiser road is to stay in the art and still be willing to preserve it but to also be a preservationist beyond it and see it, in its place in the world, while still loving it. There is a truth that binds these arts, while still leaving them unique in expression. And that truth, is the truth of the internal aspects of the arts gained through tanren not technique. I don’t really expect many to agree. Some will always bury their head in the sand and only want to see what their teacher wants them, or allows them to see. But thankfully more of those who can really do what they say they can do, are now talking and meeting and sharing. And this is starting to involve, students, teachers and even master level teachers as well. It’s no longer going to work to be a teacher at a seminar and tell people only those in your art can do this or that. Teachers are now starting to encounter attendees who have felt men outside of their art who can do what they are doing…sometimes better.

The truth of the matter is that a strengthened and retained central equilibrium, through tanren is the key to all the arts. Including Daito Ryu. No one really wants you to know that.. It is the same in the JMA as the CMA. They want you in, they will sift you, and they will decide who they will truly teach. Everyone else is doing kata and form and are along for the ride.

Again Sagawa
“The true execution of Aiki requires an enormous amount of solo training to condition the body (Tanren). It is not easy to attain… Your body has to truly be ready; otherwise no matter what you do you won’t be able to do “Aiki.”
…This martial art is only powerful because it is secret. It is because I know what others do not.
…Tanren was supposed to be something you did quietly in the background. You never spoke of it to another person.
I am able to toss around most of my inner door students so easily no matter how much they trained. So I taught them a little on how to train their bodies. I didn’t even teach that until a couple of years ago.
To have a method of training that no one else knows about leads to success that differentiates you from others. If you teach everyone everything, you’ll simply become like everyone else.
But when I became ninety, I finally decided that I should teach. Unless I teach you now <it will be lost>. All of you became much stronger after I started to teach the things… which Takeda Sensei told me I should never reveal.

In these Asian arts we need to study, and have a *measure* of faith, but even as the ones we look up to admonish and advise…think, and steal. Don’t waste time stealing technique, it isn’t it, and never was. Overall, listen to what they say about themselves, It is after all Bujutsu. It isn't too wise to be complacent and trusting...of them

Cheers
Dan

Samurai Jack
15th December 2007, 22:51
Yes the goal with each of those is basic body training to do what? Prepare the body. It isn’t technical expression or outer form. Tai chi does not look like Xing-I but the results from training the body are the same
When you say “those in the CMA” can’t agree, I’d bet they are the same class as those who cannot see beyond their own arts everywhere. I have met staunch zealots who were well versed, utterly convinced of their arts uniqueness, and they are usually without skill.

I just want to chime in regard to CIMA. I am doing it careful as my last experience here in this forum I was trying to gain favor, and fell flat on my face.

Having much experience in CIMA and CEMA and various teachers for many years, I think what Finny is saying should be looked at closer. CMA can't agree what internal, how true this is! And it is not as simple of a matter of the opinion of zealots. It is a very dynamic issue that includes Chinese history, culture, education, language, philosophy, location, amoung other things including what you point out, all have an influnence on what internal is determined to be, much less comparing something that itself can't be decided on, to anything else. And I agree, if you where to compare then what CIMA is the model? Is it Xingyiquan, or ...? I went down this road.

There are reams of books, articles, and countless forum debates on this issue and it really can't be reduced to what seems to be the obvious plane of thought or discussion. Basically, am saying your statement presents a great difficulty and complexity. :)

Samurai Jack
15th December 2007, 23:16
Dan, can you explain further with the details of what consitutes tandern you mention? What are the physical movement routines of body training in the art. This could help others recognized of the possible similarities, thus maybe pointing to an answer to the topic question.

Finny
15th December 2007, 23:37
Yes the goal with each of those is basic body training to do what? Prepare the body. It isn’t technical expression or outer form. Tai chi does not look like Xing-I but the results from training the body are the same
When you say “those in the CMA” can’t agree, I’d bet they are the same class as those who cannot see beyond their own arts everywhere.



Thanks for the reply Dan - I've learnt a lot from this thread.

I'm absolutely no expert, but I have no doubt there would be many (the majority of?) CIMA experts/masters out there who would disagree with you.

Of course, while Taiji and Xingyi may not look the same, there will still be many similarities in terms of quality of movement (whole body movement, coordination etc)

However - is that enough to call them the same (in terms of 'body development'/tanren or whatever you want to call it)?

It seems to me that there are so many different ways of developing these qualities that lead down different roads that it seems a bit strange to call them 'basically the same thing'

The type of body movement developed by Taiji chan si jin training is completely different from say Xinyiliuhequan's front weighted, straight road training, which in turn is completely different to Baiyuan Tongbei's extended, through the back, whippy strikes.

It just seems to me to be way too broad a generalisation, that's all.

Dan Harden
16th December 2007, 00:02
I just want to chime in regard to CIMA. I am doing it careful as my last experience here in this forum I was trying to gain favor, and fell flat on my face.

Having much experience in CIMA and CEMA and various teachers for many years, I think what Finny is saying should be looked at closer. CMA can't agree what internal, how true this is! And it is not as simple of a matter of the opinion of zealots. It is a very dynamic issue that includes Chinese history, culture, education, language, philosophy, location, amoung other things including what you point out, all have an influnence on what internal is determined to be, much less comparing something that itself can't be decided on, to anything else. And I agree, if you where to compare then what CIMA is the model? Is it Xingyiquan, or ...? I went down this road.

There are reams of books, articles, and countless forum debates on this issue and it really can't be reduced to what seems to be the obvious plane of thought or discussion. Basically, am saying your statement presents a great difficulty and complexity. :)

Jack
Your statement is another example of the understanding of students everywhere. I can introduce you to many...of you.. and you would all agree. All you have done is join the ranks and echo the voices of students everywhere. Forums are full of them.
On the other hand there are men who can seriously do, and they see what is needed in order...to...do. They can stand in both cultures arts.
You can continue to try to connect your body through years of forms or Japanese Kata and argue along with the masses.
Or pursue Tanren
Tanren is it.
Then the "expression" of it-becomes art specific
Will I tell you how? No.
Could I show you? Yes.
There are dozens of people training this way now. Perhaps every one of them would have, at one time, agreed with you too. I doubt a single one would agree with you now. In the end the arts were always about improving you, changing your body to make it strong. It is well recorded and written about in many cultures. But it isn't and never was about the type of strength men know. It is a different strength which leads to incredible sensitivity and capturing control, and powerful strikes.
Cheers
Dan

Dan Harden
16th December 2007, 00:25
Thanks for the reply Dan - I've learnt a lot from this thread.

I'm absolutely no expert, but I have no doubt there would be many (the majority of?) CIMA experts/masters out there who would disagree with you.

Of course, while Taiji and Xingyi may not look the same, there will still be many similarities in terms of quality of movement (whole body movement, coordination etc)

However - is that enough to call them the same (in terms of 'body development'/tanren or whatever you want to call it)?

It seems to me that there are so many different ways of developing these qualities that lead down different roads that it seems a bit strange to call them 'basically the same thing'

The type of body movement developed by Taiji chan si jin training is completely different from say Xinyiliuhequan's front weighted, straight road training, which in turn is completely different to Baiyuan Tongbei's extended, through the back, whippy strikes.

It just seems to me to be way too broad a generalisation, that's all.

Brendan
They are all about rising energy, sinking energy, weight transfer and dantien/center manipulated fascia work joined with breath power. The control mechansims through the central pivot are still part of tanren, but the use can get to easily "personalized" into an art form. It all works through the back(spine). The training of it takes years. What you see the hands doing to make peng jin, or say aiki age means nothing, that's an art form. Another form of the same rising energy. Capturing with it or bouncing off/throwing is a choice. Xingi-I as an art form is a beautiful example of continous Aiki age and aiki sage, and weight transfer. Not some wrist grab version, but of what is happening through the legs, back and center.
Don't get lost in "the look" of what you see.

Cheers
Dan

Samurai Jack
16th December 2007, 06:49
No offense Dan, but I sense from your post something is not well forged, there is a lot of fog. What I am guessing is your saying the body must be trained to act on internal process as I was taught is called fah jing. What you said to Finny describes nothing more than CMA more to what is called internal arts philosophy. Maybe the author of the book you are citing is throwing a curve ball. Tanren sound as if it is nothing more then CIMA philosophy? The difference you speak of may be nothing more then a tweaked CIMA philosophy given to those students who know nothing of CIMA philosophy that does strengthen the body of a student. It sounds as if the author was playing with the students, or allows the reader to think so. Any type of structuring, alignment of the posture and the body to produce fah jing will easily improve those unknowing students performance.

We can say as a more relevant cultural example such as, golf, baseball, tennis, etc. If you don’t coach a players swing, stance and body nor correct their body alignment and posture etc. the novice player not will improve. If you leave it up to the player to figure all that out, the player struggles senselessly with little improvement. Then provide vague rhetoric and word games in lieu of answers to questions of the player, and the player never improves. Maybe one player out of a hundred or more will be a natural and not need coaching.

If you subscribe to this method of not coaching, well… it insures you as the expert. Insures your skill will not be surpassed. The philosophy behind it is if everyone knows everything then everyone is an expert. Add to that playing cat and mouse with what I described above and call it the inner secrets of the game (as I think the author of the book you cite does) as a coach no one will surpass you, and you insure yourself as a legend.

Basically what I am getting at is you (no offense) subscribe to the author’s ploy on how to improve etc. I understand the author’s voice that you can’t mindlessly perform motion, i.e. go through the motions when practicing and improving your golf game. When working on your golf swing you have to think about ways to improve upon it, i.e. trying different stances, grips, shoulder rotation, swing height, balance, weight distribution, visualization, breathing, conditioning etc. to improve your game, along with good solid coaching to correct you and give you tips. I think the author of the book doesn’t want to let that cat out of the bag.

Now is swinging of a base bat different then other swing instrument sport? Yes, and no. Yes, there are overlapping principles, such as stances, balance, and swinging motion commonalities. No, you don’t swing a baseball bat like a golf club or a tennis racket. Yes, knowing how to hit a base ball can lead to a less steep learning curve when learning to play golf, tennis, cricket, stickball, etc. Frankly, imo what is being discussed is not that big of a deal. It is like that great tag line that Bruce Lee said in his movie about a finger and a moon. If you look at the pointing finger you miss all the heavenly glory. In the 60s and 70s we use to see a lot of moons (streaking too ) and finger pointing, and watch Bruce Lee movies and Kung Fu the tv series with all that abstract and confusing Chinese philosophy. Which they never had on the Ponderosa. Hopsing always made sense. :laugh:

Dan Harden
16th December 2007, 10:45
Jack
You haven't a clue as to what I am talking about.
I've nothing substative to reply to in your post, except that the fog you are seeing... as referenced in your opener to me... is not of my making.
No offense...back at ya.
Dan

Samurai Jack
16th December 2007, 17:12
Jack
You haven't a clue as to what I am talking about.
I've nothing substative to reply to in your post, except that the fog you are seeing... as referenced in your opener to me... is not of my making.
No offense...back at ya.
Dan

I am sorry you feel this why. Then please explain.

I am not sure why you fail to understand that I know exactly what your talking about. Which I prefer to discuss in a different structure. Maybe you fail to understand a structure that makes it more relavant to our culture and other readers.

Basically, I don't think it is all that complicated. I think the author is messing with the reader, he is not telling where the treasure is buried, otherwise everyone will have it. Remember the author is a traditionalist, legendary fame is his goal. All the info in the book is for that and not related to a dicussion like this. When I speak of the author I don't mean his student who wrote the book, rather his instructor.

I just think you unfortunately are latching on to pyrite purposely published by a clever Gold Miner who don't want to reveal where his gold mine is. The book it self is self-promotion with no nuggets of gold. And using it to discuss what is and what isn't (in highbrow Japanessque parlance an ambiguously defined concept put forthin this thread) is the result of a Miner suffering from gold fever. It is my understanding if you did find gold you wouldn't be discussing this at all. You would be showing us the gold. :)

Mark Murray
16th December 2007, 17:20
Oh Ron, Ron, Ron!
You must know that the surest and fastest way to doom a thread and guarantee that no one will post anything intriguing on it again, ever, is to write in and say how interesting the discussion is!

Geez. :p

;)

Hi Cady!

Looks like we've narrowly averted that doom this time. Some others jumped onto the discussion and we're sort of continuing. Well, continuing down the same road as before.

Still, it has certainly been an interesting thread. Hopefully it will prove the exception and continue. :)

Hope you're doing well!
Mark

edg176
16th December 2007, 18:27
It is my understanding if you did find gold you wouldn't be discussing this at all. You would be showing us the gold. :)

LOL. Geez Jack, it's almost like you don't realize that plenty of people have gone to work out with Dan and his students and come back with glowing reports.

And Dan isn't the only one showing things now...

In this era of the internet and global travel, there's no excuse for ignorance.

And what do you mean by ''fah jing?" And how does it relate to postural stability?

Cady Goldfield
16th December 2007, 19:08
Hi Cady!

Looks like we've narrowly averted that doom this time. Some others jumped onto the discussion and we're sort of continuing. Well, continuing down the same road as before.

Still, it has certainly been an interesting thread. Hopefully it will prove the exception and continue. :)

Hope you're doing well!
Mark

Hi Mark. Long time, no see!
Just came in after an hour and a half of snow shoveling in a @#$& "winter wonderland." I hear you guys in West Virginia get your share of snow, too.
Yeah, the "discussion" will continue down the same road, ad nauseum, except for those who are conscientious enough to get out there and train in the stuff Dan is talking about, so they'll understand the topic and not just opine without hands-on experience to inform their opinions.

Hope to see you (and Ron -- "Mr. Too-Darned-Swamped-At-Work") again soon. But not right now... the roads are a mess after a two-day Nor'easter!

Dan Harden
16th December 2007, 19:11
Well Jack, considering me a miner- digging, further clarifies your ignorance of what is going on. The book bears testament to what I, and others already know. We're not looking-for gold we have it and we are working it.
Aiki is the great treasure. But men have it Jack. Some, in spades. Just as Sagawa stole it at an early age, others have gotten it too. As I said earlier the days are gone where a teacher can show up and do a seminar and claim everything is proprietary and unique. These days, just now..chances are he will be standing, in a room, with men who have felt others do what he can do..sometimes better.
Daito ryu can stand among the great internal schools of the world. And it is head and shoulders above most Japanese arts...but that, only in the hands of certain, connected men (pun intended guys). What some of us are trying to do is to get the Asians to fnally open up and teach. Something which they increasingly admit they have not been doing with us. In many ways allot of people have been had. Hence the quotes from the book.
In any art, claiming YOUR method is secret and will not be shown to YOUR people until you decide is perfectly fine. Just don't be surprised if they go elsewhere to get it without telling you. Come to think of it, that already has been done by teachers and Shihan in the art already.;)
And currently there are a number of students of the highest ranking Daito ryu Shihans in the world now training on their own under various men to get it. See, just as their teachers advised...they are THINKING. What they are thinking is "I am going where someone will actually teach me." And they are staying with the art. Just as some well known Shihan did in the past as well.
The lesson here is a Japanese one. Obey..show up, then shut-up and go steal it elsewhere.
Chances are...your teacher did as well..and never told you that either.


The only real difference between you and many readers here, Jack is that ..you don't know, that you don't know what we're talking about. There are dozens of men in the Aiki arts who now do and are training.
Cheers
Dan

Dan Harden
16th December 2007, 19:24
Hi Cady
Took me and Jake three hours to shovel out and plow .....And Mark was going to come train this weekend...HAH!!!
me

Cady Goldfield
16th December 2007, 19:29
Well, you have 9 acres, and I have a 60'X115' little urban nook! :)
Good thing Mark stayed home, or I'll bet you'd have made him shovel. You know, like those Shihan who tell their students that "shovel snow" will instill some Very Special martial knowledge! :laugh:

Mark Murray
16th December 2007, 21:37
Hi Mark. Long time, no see!
Just came in after an hour and a half of snow shoveling in a @#$& "winter wonderland." I hear you guys in West Virginia get your share of snow, too.
Yeah, the "discussion" will continue down the same road, ad nauseum, except for those who are conscientious enough to get out there and train in the stuff Dan is talking about, so they'll understand the topic and not just opine without hands-on experience to inform their opinions.

Hope to see you (and Ron -- "Mr. Too-Darned-Swamped-At-Work") again soon. But not right now... the roads are a mess after a two-day Nor'easter!

Well, some parts got ice and snow, but mostly, down where I live ... we got nothing. :( Some snow would have been nice. Instead, we got lots of rain and cancellations from flooding. In December. *sigh* Even today, it's just now starting to cover the grass.

Back to the discussion, every now and then some good tidbit of info comes through. :) But, yeah, I'll have to try to drag Ron away from his work and get us up there.

Mark

Mark Murray
16th December 2007, 21:44
Hi Cady
Took me and Jake three hours to shovel out and plow .....And Mark was going to come train this weekend...HAH!!!
me

Three hours? You sure you're not getting old? ;) LOL!

I would have made it before the snow, too! I could have helped get in the way while you shoveled. Next time, for sure. :)

Samurai Jack
17th December 2007, 00:35
LOL. Geez Jack, it's almost like you don't realize that plenty of people have gone to work out with Dan and his students and come back with glowing reports.

And Dan isn't the only one showing things now...

In this era of the internet and global travel, there's no excuse for ignorance.

And what do you mean by ''fah jing?" And how does it relate to postural stability?

I am embarrassed. I didn't realize who I was talking too. I didn't realize he had studied in Japan under the master, and was his top disciple. Those who studied with Dan then must know what so many of us simpletons don't. The millions of us who are clueless to what Dan speaks to, who mindless move in rote as drones never learning, never progressing for our sin. Those of us deprived of the secrets, deprived of Dan's enlightenment on the method to condition our body as delineated in that rare coveted book that speaks so clearly to Dan and that of which Dan speaks of. I guess, I mis-spoke, I have egg all over my face.

But, I have one humble question that perplexes me, if the philosophy of improvement is to study alone, on ones own, and such little progress under direction is made, and it should be greatly coveted not to be shared for fear of reducing it to the common, as cited in a book that was published and marketed to the public, then why go to Dan? Is he any greater? Wiser? Proficient? Yes, I am truely at a loss and don't understand.

Fah Jing
I could be like Dan and be insolent and highbrow and say you’re not worthy to discuss Fah Jing with me. But, I am not a person who wishes to build credibility with though intellectual discussion, and then when challenge to delineate a method becomes insolent- regardless of those impressed. Honestly, if you study CIMA you know how hard it is pin something like this down, or even prove its existance. And in addition, that everyone has their own definition and application of it. Thus, making it almost impossible to establish a standard, muchless use it carelessly. If I try to explain my understanding then I fear I will add to more confusion then what is already out there by use of comparison or otherwise used in broad respects to fill an empty arguement. I use great caution with it. Therefore, I leave it up to the individual to make their own assessments, and judgments. All I was doing is making a simple reference to point that out.

If you don't already know, there is a Chinese saying that if you know something valuable it is your responsibility to share it. It is my understanding that Japanese don't feel the same- all of course said interms of martial arts. :)

Dan Harden
17th December 2007, 01:17
Jack, try to express your frustration in a more constructive manner. We...meaning several of us here...disagree with you and don't think you know what you are talking about. I said it. But without using sarcasm. Disagree and try to move the conversation forward or leave it for a while if it frustrates you. You don't realize that you were being challenged, by Tim-who does know what he is talking about-that Fajing is a different topic than retained balance and structure.
So while you clearly don't know what we are talking about-which is fine, Jack. you, made it equally clear after being sarcastic, that you didn't have a clear understandiing even of what you were trying to talk about either.

Listen, this is not an easy, nor welcome conversation on many complex levels. Its not easy to bring it up, nor to say. It has and is being well recieved by some who have trained with Daito ryu teachers, Aikido teachers, and CMA teachers, and it has been also rejected by teachers and schools. But students and teachers who have started to embrace it are seeing results. This is a topic within a topic, and its old stuff, not new ideas, Jack. There are many training this way now, and discovering a truth that is changing their abilties so profoundly that you cannot possiibly alter their opinions or touch them with your words. There's nothing like teaching a man to fish, and giving them real power that changes them. They're not dumb, they did it, they sweated and strived and they have seen it work. Your words about trusting in continual traditional training...which they... almost to a man- have been part of for many years..mean nothing to them. They've heard it all before.
The difference is now...they see results.

Samurai Jack
17th December 2007, 03:18
Dan,

It is easy to dismiss. It is harder to prudent and precise. Yet even harder to be true. I still find it difficult after all these years to find the language to express all that I have learned, all that I am capable of, to listen, to understand. It bewilders me those who work within a small scope and who use tactics to thwart inquiry instead of providing answers.

I am not sure if you can, in complete, tell us step-by-step without the vagueness and special parlance as smoke and mirrors what this body conditioning consists of. This is the second request I have made. I speak of the body conditioning and the Japanese term you cite, which was not known to you until the publication and then the translation of the book. Basically, I am saying, I am not satisfied with your discussion of this topic, nor your credibility as authorized to do so -as said in a matter of fact. You revelation yields no gold, no renaissance, that has not been discover in CMA or JMA. FWIW, it more about the delivery system where the root of the discussion exists. The author of the book states he created his own verison. A bold statement as he had only one life-time, if I am not mistaken . Your zeal seems to serve only seemingly immortal arguments to prove your worthiness, your credibility. I say this because in the circles you reference those that matter, your not mentioned or recognized regardless of those who provide testimonials to you. Again stated in a matter of fact.

At this impasse I will no longer suffer you the challenges I made, but I wish you comply though I feel it risks exposure. Before I provide credibility to an unknown, regardless of the claim, substantial evidence must be made to the individual’s credibility-when discussing martial arts. I think as I said before pyrite or fools’ gold lay deep in the pages you profess. I believe you are likened to a Miner with gold rush fever. I don’t make that statement with shallow knowledge you post alot, you have left behind a huge foot print here and other places. My statement is also not based on what you currently say in this post, (your claims is old hat) but how you say it. What you have said in the past has drawn serious critiques from reputable individuals. It is a good rule of thumb un martial arts, you must evaluate not only a person’s responses, arguments and knowledge, but also his motives, and those who support him or not as well.

In closing-

I remember a man in Japanese martial arts by the name of Dillman. What Dillman did wasn't remarkable if you knew the body. It was his showmanship that sold the show.

I will suffer you again one last time, have you studied with the master, where you a disipline of his? If not his whom? I say that again as a matter of fact, my ignorance is great in this area, what ualifies your discussion to the frustrated, unworthy and ignorant?

Samurai Jack
17th December 2007, 03:40
Dan, if you wish not to reply to the inquiries I have made, I will not persue the matter. I don't wish insults to replace answers or discussions.

Correction: I will suffer...ualifies it should read qualifies

kenkyusha
17th December 2007, 04:01
FWIW, Mr. Harden has only ever been open about those w/whom he's trained, and doesn't so much call people out as offer them the chance to feel what he's discusses on fora such as this... perhaps a step back and deep breath are called for here?

Be well,
Jigme

Dan Harden
17th December 2007, 04:33
Hi Jigme
Guys like this always show up when you present challenging ideas to what they've previously known. It's just too "out there" for most martial artists to fathom. The "idea" has to come from a source they can wrap their heads around. No outsider can know. They simply...can't...it's a secret. They can't believe its even possible. Ya can't blame em. It's all they know. So far everyone I've met didn't have much to show. For me, since I've been more open, its been interesting, if they show up and train, they shut-up. The truth of it speaks for itself. And then it's on to the next one. The result is in the training, and we sweat together. I've lost track, but many have come back...and folks are realizing there is a better, smarter way to train.
Even the replies are private. Folks are getting smart and talking amongst themselves to check things out. They don't want their teachers to know.
Happy holidays, bud
Dan

Jack
I don't seek your offering of "credibility" or acceptance of what I am saying in anyway.
Thanks anyway. And Happy holidays as well.
Dan

Finny
17th December 2007, 04:42
Yeah - I know who Dan trained DR with, and I don't even read that many of his posts or anything.

And if the "Japanese term you cite, which was not known to you until the publication and then the translation of the book" is tanren, I've heard the term before, and I'm not even a fluent Japanese speaker. It just means body conditioning IIRC.

Dan Harden
17th December 2007, 04:52
Finny
It's a new concept to many in the Japanese arts. They had no clue, or ignored it. Worse is that for many in the arts that DO know, their teacher-as cited in the book-refused to tell most of their own inner students! Sad state of affairs on the Japanese end. But then again since I have gotten about with CMA folks...Even the #1 students of some very famous guys...stink up the place. They know everything, chapter and verse, and are lineage holders but have no real physical skills. You can stop them and bounce them with ease. After training and talking with them over a few beers, I wonder once again if they haven't been shown, or they don't put in the work either. I've only met a few so far with real power. They feel the same way I do. How do you get folks to do the real work instead of rote forms or kata?
Dan

Dan Harden
17th December 2007, 05:10
Not that it matters- but I have risked quite a bit, to gain nothing, from people I had never met before. Only to try and help by getting the word out. So far, without exception men are grasping the truth of this and helping change their art forever. Many, if not most of these people, cannot, due to affiliation publicly express ackowledgment.
Dig around people, check out what I am saying and where you can find it. It's out there. You will be pleased that you did.
Cheers
Dan

Kendoguy9
17th December 2007, 05:30
Hello Dan et al,

Wow this thread is really off topic now isn't it?

Back to the original question. Daito-ryu (and a few of it's off shoots maybe) is the only school or ryu that I know of that uses the name aikijujutsu. That's not to say similar methods do not exist in other ryu but Daito-ryu is the only one that uses the name aikijujutsu.

Dan, I thought you weren't a student of Daito-ryu?!? How is it you can comment so much on what is missing from Daito-ryu training when you admit yourself you don't do the art? Have you joined the Sagawa-ha Daito-ryu? While tons of people on the net speak so highly about Sagawa sensei I have only heard of how great he is from his own mouth and the mouths of his students. Since students will always sing the praise of their teacher (whether it's true or not) I am forced to discount their opinions. It's also hard to swallow all of his self aggrandizement, even if it is true. Hell, he might be an even better hype-man then Flavor-Flav (Yeah Boy!)!

On to solo training, tanren etc. Wow Dan you are really opening up a can of worms here aren't you? On one level when you say the secret to good budo is solo training I'd say "duh!?!" On the other hand the expression as you call it (the ryu) is just as important.

I think many koryu/arts contain the tanren you speak about, developing the proper frame, coordination, kokyu, etc. The problem is that most students don't extract those elements from the kata, and they don't practice the kata enough to gain the benifits as fast as maybe their teachers did. While you suggest that the Japanese teachers are keeping their tanren methods a secret I think most don't know which elements in the kata are the tanren and which are the heiho, thus you get the old "keep doing the kata," because that is how they got it. I also don't think, to them, it really matters which are tanren and which are heiho. It is part of the ryu and that is the training method that has been successful for X hundred years. I think it is a more Western idea to create this duality between the two.

The other aspect that tanren neglects is the heiho. Learning the strategy and mind set of the ryu is huge and just as important. It is here you learn timing, target, distance etc. Without these aspects all the tanren in the world is useless and you just make yourself some guy who is hard to push over. I have no answer to this but I wonder if dividing the body methods from the strategy is doing yourself a dis-service?

Ellis Amdur wrote somewhere (Aikidojournal maybe) about native/rural/farm people who show extra-ordinary strength. This isn't a type of strength that you get at Gold's Gym or from throwing dumb bells around. This is the strength that budoka find so important. I think what makes the native/rural people's "exercise" (read as "back breaking work") is how the muscles and body are used. In the gym we grow "stronger" by wearing out the muscles by moving weights and letting them heal. The farmers strength comes from finding ways of moving that weight without wearing the muscles out. This is found in using the frame of the body to support the weight instead of the muscles, and reducing excess movement. I think this is why Ueshiba felt farming was so closely related to budo. This is also why rural samurai (goshi) who worked the field in the day and did kendo at night could come to Edo and beat on their city folk opponents and corn fed farm boys make good football players and wrestlers.

So maybe us city folk can replicate the farmer movements and create an exercise program to mimick it, but it will still never be as good as doing it in a field or in the right context.

Dan I think you are starting to make tanren a little too universal and you are losing any impact in your statments. People from all cultures have figured out methods to "get it." There are some boxers who we often refer to as "heavy handed" and they seem almost mysterious. While people try to replicate their outside form they never get what their training model has.

A few weeks ago we were talking with our Jikishinkage-ryu teacher about learning methods and the speed people start "getting it" (not tanren per se, but understand the ryu). He told us in Japan some people get it very quickly, and other very slowly, but the assupmtion is they'll both get there at some point.

I think a lot of people have figured out shortcuts to creating these body methods to help increase thier aiki power. They have extracted the tanren and they have been able to advance more quickly. More power to them. "If this snail wants to climb to the top of Fuji surely he will get there!" ~ Tesshu.

It's late so I'll comment more another day. Look forward to your feed back.

Best regards,

Woody
17th December 2007, 12:36
It's a new concept to many in the Japanese arts. They had no clue, or ignored it.
http://www.wonder-okinawa.jp/023/eng/012/index.html

Dan Harden
17th December 2007, 13:13
Hi Chris
I think everyone agrees on the name, particularly in context of Japanese jujutsu. No, I don’t do it anymore. As for Sagawa I think its fine to use his own words to discuss his views but ad hominem attacks post mortem?? Yikes!! I’ll let your comments sit there. Three people I know went to see him and test him. One witnessed others test him as well. What they came back with, and their subsequent statements and choices supports everything said about him; that he was an amazingly skilled man, and that he was doing Daito ryu Aiki, not some whiz-bang invention of his own.

Tanren/heiho
Well I agree with your points, or should I say you agree with what I have been saying. While a big advocate of tanren, where did I ever say to stop doing an art and just do tanren? As I said repeatedly I think we are talking about a topic within a topic. Tanren as opposed to the whole art. Did you miss that?
As for leaving an art or just doing tanren-In public and private I have said exactly the opposite. Stay in the art of choice and learn and train tanren. The big difference between us may be the level of importance you may place on tanren VS me. Also we may have gotten completely different results from our own training methods. It is my view that Tanren is so profound that it is the key to all the arts, it is the engine that drives them. The heiho while important, is of lesser importance overall. Were folks in a pinch Tanren will give you better chances than spending equal time learning techniques and strategy. Thousands of crappy martial artists pretty much have made that case. It is the reason so many stories point to men going off to the mountains and coming back as these monster artists. But wait...these guys and these stories happened in cultures that were agrarian cultures already. They were supposedly all versed in smart labor.
Farm boys
The farm boy stuff Ellis was writing about has been discussed in depth by me and many others in several forums. It’s no ones new idea. More important than recognizing it is to know just what it is and what it means. I was raised by a farm boy who became a contractor and knew ways to use the body that generate greater strength in general labor without flexation and where and how to assign load. That they are key to martial arts is true, but not all is to be found in labor. It won’t cut it. Hence the martial retreats and enlightenment I discussed earlier.
Martial tanren is different, but not goals for it from one art to the next. It is the key to producing all the attributes of Aiki people are looking for. But mores the point the method, is in Daito ryu. My overall point is to get it from your teacher or get it somewhere else…but use it…in the art.

I also agree with your ideas of who gets it. I have discussed “heavy hands” before. But can you say you have heavy hands? Can you discuss how you got there? Or how to get others there? It is well defined in Daito ryu. Anyone doing Daito ryu should have heavy hands. The old "one strike can kill stuff" While a bit over the top as a comment still expresses a point. While your Jikishinkage teacher’s comments were true- they are also presumptive, not all snails make it. Mores the point is that if there are ways to help the snails that are known why not teach them.
Why be a snail?.
Happy holidays
Dan

Dan Harden
17th December 2007, 13:19
http://www.wonder-okinawa.jp/023/eng/012/index.html
Ricky
The martial tanren needed has largley been ignored. And other arts where it is absolutley essential- it is not taught too much later. In Karate, Ushiro is a good example. The many Western guys flexing through sanchin...is not. All based on...by their own admission...which cultures teaching? China.
Dan

E. Johnstone
17th December 2007, 15:23
Not that it matters- but I have risked quite a bit, to gain nothing, from people I had never met before. Only to try and help by getting the word out. So far, without exception men are grasping the truth of this and helping change their art forever. Many, if not most of these people, cannot, due to affiliation publicly express ackowledgment.


Hey there Dan!

Actually, it does matter...at least to those of us who've been given the chance to come and visit you. Your willingness to share with those who have come to see you has, for many, made irreversible changes in their view of training, I am sure. I am certainly one of them.

See you soon & Have a happy Christmas Season!

EAJ

Ron Tisdale
17th December 2007, 18:49
Oh boy...
Hey all, worked Saturday and Sunday...even from my parents' house! Yuk...sick of working.

Anywho...Dan, just ignore the JackMan...like so many others. Same old....

Best,
Ron

lucky1899
17th December 2007, 19:10
All,

Too much talk and not enough action (although this is what has been in so many of the posts in this thread), I'm calling for execution of the word.

Dan,

With all due respect, host a seminar, let those who want to feel, come and have a dose. Then we can come back and comment on whether it's the real thing.

I guarantee I will be there.

Regards,

Andrew De Luna
Daito Ryu

Ron Tisdale
17th December 2007, 19:32
Hi Andrew,

Dan doesn't do seminars. :D Those of us that were interested already went to see him. He's a great guy, and I highly recommend the time and effort to check out what he does.

Best,
Ron

Mark Murray
17th December 2007, 19:44
All,

Too much talk and not enough action (although this is what has been in so many of the posts in this thread), I'm calling for execution of the word.

Dan,

With all due respect, host a seminar, let those who want to feel, come and have a dose. Then we can come back and comment on whether it's the real thing.

I guarantee I will be there.

Regards,

Andrew De Luna
Daito Ryu

Andrew,
Why would you be there? In all seriousness. Dan has made offers to come and feel this to a great many people. Why haven't you taken him up on this already? I'm curious as to why it would take a seminar format rather than a smaller, in-person, format to prompt you to go? Again, it's all serious curiosity. I posted a similar question on AikiWeb and received cricket's song for replies. And not only going to Dan, but Sigman, Rob John, and Akuzawa. Akuzawa had two seminars recently. Did you attend? If not, why not?

Really, I cannot fathom this mindset. Maybe I never will. All four of the above are open and willing to show (last time I checked. Things change though). It's been just over a year since I met Dan. Not even a year since I met Sigman and Rob John. In that time I have seen countless people demand seminars and meetings and also people asking for seminars and meetings. And only a handful have ever gone. But, in the past year alone, all those that attended Akuzawa's seminar or met Dan or Sigman have all (to a person) expressed the great things learned, shown, and how willing and open Akuzawa, Rob, Sigman and Dan have been.

Erg, now I'm way off topic. Sorry to the readers of the thread. I'll quit here.

Mark

E. Johnstone
17th December 2007, 19:45
Hi Andrew,

Dan doesn't do seminars. :D Those of us that were interested already went to see him. He's a great guy, and I highly recommend the time and effort to check out what he does.

Best,
Ron

Hello! Just want to second Ron's post...and to add that there is plenty of action to back up Dan's posts. Make a trip up to check him out.

lucky1899
17th December 2007, 21:23
I'm in Houston, TX and if I haven't been to a seminar (Dan's or anyone elses), it's not due to lack of desire. I just got back from two weeks in Japan where I visited three dojos; I have gone to Aikido, Hapkido and Judo seminars here in Houston. I've been to seminars in Virginia, Louisiana, Pennsylvania and Austin in the past 18 months. In addition, I train at least three days a week. I've never had the opportunity to go to one of Dan's seminars (or dojo) because I didn't know about it nor had I ever heard about Dan's knowledge of the arts. I have visited Aikiweb but do not normally subscribe or read posts there.

Again, it is with all due respect I make this request. And you're right, it doesn't have to be a seminar. I can just drop by Dan's dojo so someone (or Dan) please give me the address and his contact information and I will arrange with Dan to come by.

Respectfully,

Andrew De Luna
Daito Ryu

Dan Harden
17th December 2007, 22:26
Hey guys....Merry Christmas to all. Hope everyones making progress!

Hi Andrew
Just write me a P.M. here. Training up here can be fun, you may meet people who have or do currently train with top (recognized) shihans in DR, Aikido, and other arts including Koryu, Judo, BJJ,...all kinds of stuff. It's a chance to maybe feel something unusual by way of power and sensitivity and then get actually shown how to develop it. What you feel may be familiar, maybe not. We will see I guess. Some who train with me, can go from Aiki-age/sag to fure aiki...to submission grappling, to 6 oz gloves.
I understand that time is important to people so I suggest talking to some of the guys who have written in here, they can introduce you to others, just so you can make sure I...am not a waste...of yours.
FWIW I charge nothing, as I'm just trying to help, but I don't have much time to waste on those who don't train either.
Happy holidays
Dan

Jim Sorrentino
18th December 2007, 04:27
Greetings All,


The martial tanren needed has largley been ignored. And other arts where it is absolutley essential- it is not taught too much later. In Karate, Ushiro is a good example. The many Western guys flexing through sanchin...is not. All based on...by their own admission...which cultures teaching? China.Dan

Will anyone offer a definition that we may use to determine whether a movement is or isn't tanren? In the quote above, Dan seems to imply that Ushiro-sensei's sanchin kata is tanren, but sanchin as practiced by "Western guys" is not. What is the difference in the manner of practice? By the way, does it appear to others that Dan is also suggesting in this quote that kata can be tanren if practiced properly? (Dan, is this what you meant to say?)

Is there something that makes a solo practice (such as funakogi undo, shiko, or subri) tanren? Is there a way to engage in a partnered practice (such as aikijujutsu or aikido) that will make the practice tanren?

Sincerely,

Jim Sorrentino

Joshua Lerner
18th December 2007, 07:34
Greetings All,



Will anyone offer a definition that we may use to determine whether a movement is or isn't tanren? In the quote above, Dan seems to imply that Ushiro-sensei's sanchin kata is tanren, but sanchin as practiced by "Western guys" is not. What is the difference in the manner of practice? By the way, does it appear to others that Dan is also suggesting in this quote that kata can be tanren if practiced properly? (Dan, is this what you meant to say?)

Is there something that makes a solo practice (such as funakogi undo, shiko, or subri) tanren? Is there a way to engage in a partnered practice (such as aikijujutsu or aikido) that will make the practice tanren?

Sincerely,

Jim Sorrentino

Hi Jim,

I realize you are trying to engage Dan, but I thought I would throw this in the mix anyway.

I would suggest that the question of whether or not something is tanren isn't a particularly useful question to ask. What is more useful, or at least more interesting to me, is whether or not something is effective tanren. Doing 1000 bad, mindless suburi a day could still be considered tanren. If you don't have any real idea of what you are trying to accomplish by doing them, they are just useless, and hopefully not harmful, tanren. If you are assuming that just by doing them, you will gain skills that will transfer over into actual swordwork or empty hand work, or even chopping wood, then you are engaging in really ineffective and probably counterproductive tanren.

So instead of offering a definition that we may use to determine whether a movement is or isn't tanren, I'll offer a definition that we may use to determine whether a movement is or isn't effective tanren. And that would be - it is effective if it produces the results that you are trying to achieve by doing it. Which, of course, is obvious. But then you have to know what it is that you are actually trying to achieve, which is not always so obvious.

Josh

Dan Harden
18th December 2007, 13:49
Good point Josh
My main point in posting wasn't to tell anyone what to do or how to do it. Not interested on an internet forum. And there are some people I hope never learn how to do any of it the right way.
First and foremost I was hoping to bring forward something which I know to be true, but which is publicly and routinely denied or publicly diminished in value. And secondly to use someone from within the art to support the claim. That is, that the heart of Aiki…is solo training, not the art’s kata. Further, that the heart of aiki tanren is to create a strengthened zero balance or central equilibrium and that this is what the Asians referred to as training to be strong. Then, to point out that Sagawa was stating-that this, the heart of Daito ryu, the power behind the art, is specifically, held back from students, and that he was told he shouldn't reveal it.
I fully expected it to be denied, even to see Sagawa discredited and his words marginalized.

Tanren
It is my opinion that no one is really ever going to “discover” how to do this on their own. It’s unnatural and very counter intuitive. Of course later-on one can add and innovate, because the basics helped the adept to identify and intuit the correct things, but the goals have to be shown, first. And In/yo ho not only is not going to be “stumbled onto” anytime soon, it is exceedingly difficult to do even when you know what to do.

Trying to build the body through Kata?
I’d just point to, hundreds of posts on Aikiweb, support from others teaching the same things about solo tanren, hundreds getting out to feel it and their support of what they discovered -solo tanren, and finally Sagawa, not only saying the exact same thing, but strengthening it by stating it was a looong held secret. And that kata- won’t cut it, and never did. That solo tanren is thee source, and Takeda told him never to reveal it.
Add to that his statement that he would never teach foreigners as it would give us an advantage. Further that he made the point that there is an old, long accepted belief in bujutsu that you held this stuff back.
Anyone saying “I’ll just trust my teacher” or “I prefer to learn this stuff through the traditional manner.” Or thinking “We can learn it through kata.” Is fine.,To each is own. I say go for it. Nothing would please certain folks more than to see more white guys doing that very thing. Personally, I’ve seen more and more guys, some teachers, others master level teachers of these arts, standing there flat on their feet, helpless to do much of anything against those who train…tanren.
Kata training? I’ll see ya in twenty years.
Happy holidays
Dan

Budd
18th December 2007, 14:43
Yup, I have to echo my own encouragement to others to just go feel what people are doing. I've met nothing but nice and open folks - provided you hold up your end and keep doing the work to train it. And like anything worthwhile, it's not necessarily going to be spoon fed to you on your terms.

Dan Harden
18th December 2007, 14:50
Hi Jim,

snip... I'll offer a definition that we may use to determine whether a movement is or isn't effective tanren. And that would be - it is effective if it produces the results that you are trying to achieve by doing it. .... But then you have to know what it is that you are actually trying to achieve, which is not always so obvious.
Josh

Silly me for not stressing that more. I wonder how many know what it is they are actually trying to do in any of these arts in the first place. Maybe they know what they want it to look like, and what they are trying to mimick, whether it be aikijujutsu, aikido, taiji or Xing-I-but do they really know what makes things actually work? How many are trying to find it/feeeeel it through rote repitition? So, how can they find what...it...is that they are trying to accomplish in their tanren. Much less thee most effective means to get ...it.
Very...good point, Josh
Happy holidays
Dan

Aiki requires an enormous amount of solo training. Only amateurs think that techniques are enough. They understand nothing. Sagawa Yukiyoshi

Jim Sorrentino
18th December 2007, 15:59
Hi Josh,


I realize you are trying to engage Dan, but I thought I would throw this in the mix anyway.
With all due respect, you are mistaken. I was trying to move the discussion forward by drawing out a definition of an apparently essential term. The source of the definition is not as interesting to me as the definition itself.

I would suggest that the question of whether or not something is tanren isn't a particularly useful question to ask. What is more useful, or at least more interesting to me, is whether or not something is effective tanren. Doing 1000 bad, mindless suburi a day could still be considered tanren. If you don't have any real idea of what you are trying to accomplish by doing them, they are just useless, and hopefully not harmful, tanren. If you are assuming that just by doing them, you will gain skills that will transfer over into actual swordwork or empty hand work, or even chopping wood, then you are engaging in really ineffective and probably counterproductive tanren.
Without a definition of tanren itself, this doesn't advance the discussion. Why could "1,000 bad, mindless suburi a day" still be considered tanren? Isn't that like Dan's example of "Western guys flexing through sanchin" (which he seemed to suggest as an example of something that is not tanren)? A definition would help.

Sincerely,

Jim

Woody
18th December 2007, 16:34
Tanren
It is my opinion that no one is really ever going to “discover” how to do this on their own. It’s unnatural and very counter intuitive. Of course later-on one can add and innovate, because the basics helped the adept to identify and intuit the correct things, but the goals have to be shown, first. And In/yo ho not only is not going to be “stumbled onto” anytime soon, it is exceedingly difficult to do even when you know what to do.
Dan,
I am really interested in meeting the individual that taught you tanren. Would you be kind enough to reveal that information? Also, do you know of somebody here on the west coast (preferably southern California :D)that could teach tanren as you know it?
Thank You,

Joshua Lerner
18th December 2007, 18:08
Hi Josh,


With all due respect, you are mistaken. I was trying to move the discussion forward by drawing out a definition of an apparently essential term. The source of the definition is not as interesting to me as the definition itself.

Without a definition of tanren itself, this doesn't advance the discussion. Why could "1,000 bad, mindless suburi a day" still be considered tanren? Isn't that like Dan's example of "Western guys flexing through sanchin" (which he seemed to suggest as an example of something that is not tanren)? A definition would help.

Sincerely,

Jim

Hi Jim,

I was assuming that most people understand tanren to mean anything that is done to forge yourself, to strengthen yourself. But I usually don't use the word, so I haven't thought much about it. How do you define it?

Josh

Dan Harden
18th December 2007, 22:28
Dan,
I am really interested in meeting the individual that taught you tanren. Would you be kind enough to reveal that information? Also, do you know of somebody here on the west coast (preferably southern California :D)that could teach tanren as you know it?
Thank You,

Ricky
I don't know of anyone who teaches this stuff openly. Haven't you been reading? You are going to have to join a traditional ryu, forge relationships, prove yourself through travel and hard work, and if they'll have you, maybe, just maybe you will be taught. Every man has his own path.
There are some woderful people in South Cal. P.M. here if you would like some suggestions.
Cheers
Dan

Samurai Jack
19th December 2007, 03:21
If you remember my first couple of posts you will notice that Dan, Mr. Harden, met quickly my unpretentious post with absolute pretentiousness, rudeness, and distain as a response to me. If you re-read the posts you may recognize this tactic as it is a common defensive maneuver (threatened to exposure) that earmarks those in poor quality or understand (deficiency of acclaimed authority, mastery) which they speak on authority. The response is negative and seemingly taken personally as an affront to his authority of the matter. This defensive posture was further reinforced with following exchanges by Mr. Hardening.

It is easy to perform martial arts tricks and assign these tricks with a vague label or reference them from a master practitioner, a popular form of imitation and plagiarizing. This act is not unlike those of poor quality CMists of old who preformed such tricks and attributed such abilities to that of chi, or the supernatural superstitious power they proclaimed to command to an audience. When in fact these ambiguous stage parlor tricks which are, and still, simple acts of physics hardly applicable in combat. This confuses physics with superstition and supernatural. The famous Jing Wu assoc./school mission was to eliminate such traditional superstitious conceptions of CMA and establish soundly without trickery of the past that confused and degraded CMAists, based CMA on modern science. The moral of this story in my imo is a valuable lesson, an instrument in gauging the resulting effects of the discussion content proclaimed by Mr. Hardening, (which if defined by Mr. Harden in accordance to that of the master he references as requested -I believe he is unable to define and instead maintains ambiguity and vagueness)referencing a concept originally put forth by a well known JMAs authority is probably nothing more then qi gong( to align with Harden's perception of CIMA) in its original purpose created to fill a need to improvement the body's condition- We in the West call it exercise. A concept originally put forth by a well known master and authority.

My contention is with how the concepts are being proclaimed or disseminated (if you like), on authority by someone who isn’t recognized with mastery of ability, a person who seems to assembles a collection of principles isolated from various arts of several areas causing confusion, and possible misleading information. Something in CMA, as I was taught, is not highly regarded. Mr. Harden’s MA background as he indicated in this thread is a disconnected set of principles and concepts; that is principles and concepts detached or out of context from various MA systems, and in this case the master himself. Here again such principles and concepts isolated from the systems and those qualified, and who mastered them provides and is subject to personal interpretation by those who have not reached mastery. And when proclaimed in voice and in action they are not complete in form or function. Thus, leading to misunderstanding of what others are or are not doing, and adding further confusion to the subject. Very much like a know-it-all freshman in college in any field of study who lacks the complete training in that field and as enough information to be dangerous in his proclamations from his Professor or the material taken from a Professor he has never met or attended that Professor’s class. In addition, to my analogy of a miner with gold rush fever taken by fool's gold. This may be the very reason for the vague and ambiguious replys to some prudent and common questions.

I am frankly disappointed that Mr. Harden (I have no doubt he has some assemblance of skill like so many thousands of others in MA, that level is not mastery am sure) chooses such a path to respond defensively to those prudent and common questions. Questions that arose out of his authority and referencing on ideas that he proclaims and discusses in his authority. Sometimes, sadly, I guess it is required to read between the lines and let sleeping dogs lie, when it is water underneath the bridge; to re-mix metaphors :)

IMO, I am sure he is capable of many MA feats and holds knowledge other don't have or seek. Therefore, I will conceed his skill and knowledge much greater then mine, thus there is no reason to accend any further or engage in further discussion with Mr. Harden. Basically, the fact is he simply isn't the leading authority on the subject (despite that he discusses it with authority as he has demonstrated in this thread). Unfortunately, we all can't be at the top. [Chorus] When being....

kenkyusha
19th December 2007, 04:34
Rather than refute point by point, just a couple of simple things-
1) Have you trained w/him?
2) We are all a bunch of names w/out connection to you, but is it possible that those of us who can attest (in my case, feeling things a like 11 + years ago, he has no doubt refined since) to him having something might not all be chucklemuffins? Some of us may have at least seen a block (if not actually been around it once or twice) and maybe, just maybe, know the difference 'twixt someone who's faking it w/some 'ki trick' nonsense and actual body skills for taijutsu.
3) Appeals to authority are fine in the abstract, but what are we discussing here? If a skill-set is transmissible, then doesn't that provide some basis for authority coming from being able to replicate, then integrate and finally apply naturally the crucial elements?

Bruised ego aside (and I really got no dog in this fight, but Dan's been very kind to me), can we get back on topic now?

Be well,
Jigme

Joshua Lerner
19th December 2007, 07:59
Happy holidays
Dan



Hi Dan,

Sorry, I forgot to say . . . Happy Holidays back at 'ya.

Josh

Samurai Jack
19th December 2007, 13:07
Rather than refute point by point, just a couple of simple things-
1) Have you trained w/him?
2) We are all a bunch of names w/out connection to you, but is it possible that those of us who can attest (in my case, feeling things a like 11 + years ago, he has no doubt refined since) to him having something might not all be chucklemuffins? Some of us may have at least seen a block (if not actually been around it once or twice) and maybe, just maybe, know the difference 'twixt someone who's faking it w/some 'ki trick' nonsense and actual body skills for taijutsu.
3) Appeals to authority are fine in the abstract, but what are we discussing here? If a skill-set is transmissible, then doesn't that provide some basis for authority coming from being able to replicate, then integrate and finally apply naturally the crucial elements?

Bruised ego aside (and I really got no dog in this fight, but Dan's been very kind to me), can we get back on topic now?

Be well,
Jigme

I am sorry if I hurt peoples feeling who train with him. I delinated my concerns I think pretty clearly. Such concerns do have something to do with the topic.

Dan interjection in this thread was self-promotion and authority based. When asked to provide concrete details, to expand on a concept he presented in vague and ambiguous terms, those who asked where met with rudness and silence. I don't see where the bruised ego or training with him has anything to do with the topic. The matter here is the avoidance and if he is speaking under authority of the organization that he cited, and if he isn't then that is an issue, or any organization that holds the rights to aikijujutsu, or is he simply speaking on his own authory. It is my understanding he is not a member or is authorized by any legitimate aikijujutsu organization. This is where the problem is for me are we getting correct authentic information or is it his own summations based on his transient background.

Dan Harden
19th December 2007, 14:08
Jack
Unfortunately for you the crowd you are talking to, while we do not all agree on this tough topic, is more educated than you are. "Hurting their feelings?" You don't know enough or are informed enough to have enough weight to hurt or even give them pause. They, on the other hand are trying to help...you! You opened with the admission that when you first posted here on E-budo you fell flat on your face..get smart...change. Here I'll help. Budo people almost never learn anything on the surface. That much is obvious to most Asians, and they expect it, unfortunately it's not to some westerners. You will learn more by rooting around and checking things out privately.

As for your idea of self promotion?
If I am self promoting I would like to see where my "gain" is. From my view it has come at a substantial loss to me. The only ones gaining anything are those who are out training with me and others they have found who know what they need to do. They know everyword I am saying is true...and if you start reading for once, you'd they are telling you they have discovered something. Talk about that!

As for my authority? It's in what I know and can do. I speak with confidance for good reason. As for those who are just now talking with you? What you don't realize is that many of the people who train with me did not come to me as new students to learn budo. Some are teachers who have their own schools, some even came to challenge the very ideas you are now reading and to "test" me. They are people who have trained and do train with some of the highest ranking Daito ryu authorities in existence today as well Aikido and Koryu master level teachers. They are more than able to judge truth appropriately. So, I have met significant resistence, and now years later the support of some surprisingly well informed folks. Some of whom cannot publicly speak to the issue. I... am on my own. My authority, Jack...is in my hands.
Here's an old Bujutsu saying for ya.
"Do not look to authority for truth. look to truth for authority."
now...play that up against Sagawas admissions of NOT teaching. Of by choice holding back what he deemed to be the secret of the art...tanren, and that Takeda told him to do so. I am telling you... I have stood in rooms with master level teachers telling everyone there to do one thing and having him show me what was really going on. Sagawa, finally admitted what has been happening to us for years now.
In the end it's what you can do...that is how much you truly know. The rest is faith, and hope in your teachers that they are teaching. Sometimes that is wise, other times, not so much. If you are currently in Budo. The underlying truth of it is being laid out in front of you. If you are not currently training this way, there are people passing you by..and gaining the one true power that binds us all.
Dan

Dan Harden
19th December 2007, 14:24
Hi Dan,

Sorry, I forgot to say . . . Happy Holidays back at 'ya.

Josh

I'll be seein ya soon enough anyway. I miss you guys soo much.:)
Dan

lucky1899
19th December 2007, 14:32
Dan,

I sent you a PM requesting information. Please reply at your convenience. Thank you.

Regards,

A. De Luna

Dan Harden
19th December 2007, 14:40
Back to being on-topic, just where did Takeda learn his "aiki" skills? Knowing that might help to answer the question of is there other aiki besides Daito ryu aiki?
As a matter of historical curiosity maybe. Ellis is publishing some interesting ideas. IMO none of it means diddly to those on the ground training. Hell, it doesn't mean anything to those in the art now who really can't do squat with it. Most are going to continue to try to "do" things to people through "feeeling" it from more kata for the thousadnth time.
How is the knowledge of Takeda's teacher going to matter...When many folks in Budo...with a teacher... still can't do much of anything against real resistence? Just who is teaching what...to whom?
Without the true teaching, the essence of Daito ryu being shown to them- which is a profoundly connected body, with a strengthened central equilibrium, gained through solo tanren- students are not going to make Aiki happen in the first place. It will be parts and pieces slowly gained-if at all. For many it will forever remain in their waza and in their hand shapes and body positioning and their shoulders will be too involved, and everyone will be focused on Maai and timing, and waza and every other thing that is incidental to real control.
Learning the outer...to capture the inner...is the slow boat to China.
Ask your teacher for the truth, If they won't teach you, smile at them...to their face... like they have to you...and go get it from someone else. Stay in the art though and help others. We need to start getting smart and think for ourselves and help each other. Hell, I know of Japanese shihan and Menkyo's who went elsewhere for help and their students were so brainwashed they didn't go with them in oder to learn. They thought "Our teacher is the only one smart enough to glean what is essential from that for me to know in our art."
Happy holidays
Dan
Aiki requires an enormous amount of solo training. Only amateurs think that techniques are enough. They understand nothing. Sagawa Yukiyoshi

Dan Harden
19th December 2007, 15:25
To those writing me privately. Get a clue.
Sending short requests like.."send me the city and street address of your dojo and I'll make arrangments to come according to my schedule...
or, ...Can tell me who your teacher are so I can go there...
Why should I come and train there?...what do you teach...how much do you charge?
Or even ...Can you tell me where to go, in ____________this area, cause I want to learn
This is not the way to do things. I give more care in my replies then most do in their requests. Where were you raised? Introduce yourself, be expansive and questioning, state why you are looking for something, what you think or hope to gain.
Listen up, even if one doesn't really care about being polite in the first place, and both feels and is expressing dripping disdain and dismissal...be a budo guy...pretend, and lie... on the surface, in order to gain what you want.
I hear it's perfectly acceptable, even considered wise and waay cool in some circles.;)
In either case if for some strange reason you actually want a reply, and honestly are thinking of facing me on a mat. Ya might want to question both why I would respond in the first place, and the nature of any possible meeting. Not all are driven by profit, not all will freely share with just anyone.

Dan

Mark Murray
19th December 2007, 15:51
As a matter of historical curiosity maybe. Ellis is publishing some interesting ideas. IMO none of it means diddly to those on the ground training.


I was thinking in regards to all the people who have questioned whether this "aiki" is related to "internal skills" or related to that other "aiki" or related to CIMA, etc.

If you think about it, if Takeda learned through someone who had some Chinese martial background skills, it certainly deflates some people's argument that DR aiki is different/unique. Of course, the flip side is also true, if Takeda learned from someone who had mostly Japanese training in some other art, then those people would use that as proof that DR aiki and CIMA internals are different.

So, yeah, historically it can be an important piece of information.



Hell, it doesn't mean anything to those in the art now who really can't do squat with it. Most are going to continue to try to "do" things to people through "feeeling" it from more kata for the thousadnth time.
How is the knowledge of Takeda's teacher going to matter...When many folks in Budo...with a teacher... still can't do much of anything against real resistence? Just who is teaching what...to whom?

Happy holidays
Dan
Aiki requires an enormous amount of solo training. Only amateurs think that techniques are enough. They understand nothing. Sagawa Yukiyoshi

You know I don't disagree. After feeling the skills, it's hard to not accept that things are related, that technique driven work isn't the path to aiki, and solo training is very important.

Eh, maybe we can discuss more in detail over dinner one day. :)

Mark

Jim Sorrentino
19th December 2007, 17:05
Hi Josh,
I was assuming that most people understand tanren to mean anything that is done to forge yourself, to strengthen yourself. But I usually don't use the word, so I haven't thought much about it. How do you define it?
I apologize for my delayed reply.

I'm in the same boat as you: I don't usually use the word. In my martial arts training (Uechi-ryu karatedo and aikido), my teachers have made only glancing references to it. I regard it as a process of forging and strengthening the body and spirit for martial purposes, through the mindful repetition of specific movements and stances. It may involve an apparatus (such as a suburito or a weight), a fixed physical reference (such as a wall or a plumb line), or even another person working with "cooperative resistance" (as in Uechi-ryu's kotekitae [arm-rubbing and pounding, leg pounding] or aikido's kokyu tanden ho).

And as you said in an earlier post, it's crucial to have an idea of what you want the exercise to produce. Since that is not often obvious, especially to most of us when we begin our study, we look to our teachers for clues. What can they do? How do they move?

Jim

lucky1899
19th December 2007, 18:54
Dan,

To assume that you have something to teach me or show me is...well, what it is. I'm not challenging you on the mat because I have nothing to prove to you or even prove to myself.

I was raised in Texas and I learned how to read English in school. You previously wrote [paraphrasing] that teachers should openly share knowledge, that the forging of relationships and devoting years is a waste of time because you have the secret to make all the skills for aiki exist.

Why waste my time introducing myself???? I'm not looking to establish authority, I'm looking to establish truth. Truth has no name or history, it JUST IS. Who I am doesn't matter. I'm not stating anything on these boards about my skills or knowledge...YOU ARE. Or more appropriately, simply paraphrasing Sagawa's book over and over as if you wrote it. If you don't want to be questioned, then lurk, as I have for YEARS on many boards.

I'm not looking to gain anything. I do it because it is my way. I meet and train with everyone. It would cost me a lot more money than it will you to pay you a visit. I'm looking to experience the arts, maybe something I haven't experienced before (although doubtful certainly possible).

If you don't want to show me then don't respond. I was a good fighter long before I registered on e-budo.

You should refrain from speaking on Daito Ryu or about Daito Ryu practitioners as if you have TRUTH about aiki and others don't. I've asked you politely, openly, to show me and now you've written than I'm rude because I didn't introduce myself. I don't want to be your friend; I just want to train. I want to know if you really can reproduce the AIKI I have felt from Kondo, Okamoto, Goldberg, Kato, Hasegawa, and many others.

Good luck in your training.

Regards,

A. De Luna
Daito Ryu

Ron Tisdale
19th December 2007, 20:58
Dude, you just dropped yourself from the list. :shot:

Why is it that MANNERS are so hard to understand??? :redhot:

Dan doesn't have a public dojo...if you are fortunate enough to spend sometime with him it's because he's basically invited you into his home.

I don't invite no one into my home without an introduction. And I'm pretty sure it works that way in Texas. :laugh:

And if you are rude...forget it. You ain't gettin in. :cry:

Best,
Ron

Jim Sorrentino
19th December 2007, 21:56
Hi Ron,
Dude, you just dropped yourself from the list.Maybe you should leave that to the moderator. ;) I really don't want this thread to drift, but I met Andrew at my dojo when we hosted a seminar with Roy Goldberg-sensei. Not that Andrew needs me to do so, but I will vouch for his manners. Andrew was consistently courteous and gracious, on and off the mat, in his interactions with me and the other seminar participants.

In this instance, Dan asked Andrew to contact him by private message to discuss a future meeting. Andrew did. Apparently, Dan was not happy with Andrew's PM (and perhaps the PMs from others), and chose to air his displeasure with a private message publicly. Andrew took offense at being "scolded" publicly for his PM --- as many of us would, I suspect.

Private messages were meant to be private. If I'm wrong about this, please contact me privately.:)

Jim

Woody
19th December 2007, 22:25
Hi Ron,Maybe you should leave that to the moderator. ;) I really don't want this thread to drift, but I met Andrew at my dojo when we hosted a seminar with Roy Goldberg-sensei. Not that Andrew needs me to do so, but I will vouch for his manners. Andrew was consistently courteous and gracious, on and off the mat, in his interactions with me and the other seminar participants.

In this instance, Dan asked Andrew to contact him by private message to discuss a future meeting. Andrew did. Apparently, Dan was not happy with Andrew's PM (and perhaps the PMs from others), and chose to air his displeasure with a private message publicly. Andrew took offense at being "scolded" publicly for his PM --- as many of us would, I suspect.

Private messages were meant to be private. If I'm wrong about this, please contact me privately.:)

Jim
That would be a pretty accurate summation from my perspective as well. I contacted Dan via PM as he invited me to do. He did not respond to me privately but he seemed to address my request publicly. That's no problem. He is his own man. He don't wanna help me...ok. No problem. But it does seem somewhat hypocrytical to bemoan the "asians" for not being open to teaching the secrets and then to behave in a similar manner.

Dan Harden
19th December 2007, 22:41
Andrew
I didn't name names or be specific to anyone-you just did. And near as I can tell you didn't need to say anything, and could have written back in private and no one would have known who I was referring to. You certainly didn't write the others. I think the tone of your request is clearly echo'd in your post, so thanks for that.
As for me assuming I have something to show you Er...didn't I say the opposite.
Post #64

...Just write me a P.M. here. Training up here can be fun, you may meet people who have or do currently train with top (recognized) shihans in DR, Aikido, and other arts .....(What you feel may be familiar, maybe not.) We will see I guess. ......snip
I understand that time is important to people so I suggest talking to some of the guys who have written in here, they can introduce you to others, just so you can make sure I...am not a waste...of yours. FWIW I charge nothing, as I'm just trying to help,)

And fighting? Er...what? It isn't a question of fighting, but openess and fun, VS being difficult, and dissagreeable. For which there is no need but it's been done before. Debating and disagreeing over ideas and methods is just that. No where should we loose ourselves in the debate. Are you taking the ideas you obvious disagree with personally or something?
"Speaking about aiki as if I have a truth others don't?" I thought you said you can read English?;) The case I made is the opposite of that. That this truth is in the art, is known, is taught, just not openly taught. Thanks for the expanded post clarifying your feelings though. No more need to be nice.
What did you say "I don't want to be your friend, I want to train." Thanks...got it.
Happy holidays
Dan

Dan Harden
19th December 2007, 22:50
Ricky
I get a lot of private p.m;s and emails all the time. It helps to understand what the person is looking for and needs when they are more than one sentence long.
I have about 15 emails to be unanswered in 4 different forums. things like "I heard about you and want to train internals, where are you?" With no NAME but there screen name!
It bugs me sometimes, shoot me.:cool:
Cheers
Dan

Woody
19th December 2007, 23:03
Ricky
I get a lot of private p.m;s and emails all the time. It helps to understand what the person is looking for and needs when they are more than one sentence long.
I have about 15 emails to be unanswered in 4 different forums. things like "I heard about you and want to train internals, where are you?" With no NAME but there screen name!
It bugs me sometimes, shoot me.:cool:
Cheers
Dan
Dan,
Sorry for bugging you.
:)

Dan Harden
19th December 2007, 23:09
I was thinking in regards to all the people who have questioned whether this "aiki" is related to "internal skills" or related to that other "aiki" or related to CIMA, etc.

If you think about it, if Takeda learned through someone who had some Chinese martial background skills, it certainly deflates some people's argument that DR aiki is different/unique. Of course, the flip side is also true, if Takeda learned from someone who had mostly Japanese training in some other art, then those people would use that as proof that DR aiki and CIMA internals are different.
So, yeah, historically it can be an important piece of information.
Well I don't think that will ever be addressed on the internet or in person. The greats debated, and made chastizing comments about each other. There may be too much invested in any given method for folks to want to try to figure out a common binding underlying path to aiki. DR schools argue among themselves about who really has got what in the same way the CMA do, and have for a while now. Odd that there are some seriously skilled DR Shihan who have gone to Sagawa and have commented on his skills and how he...changed them.. Hell I have seen them change their approach to aiki after training with him. So its odd to then read him getting downplayed or his words marginalized by lessor lights. I know one prominant, very accomplished and skilled Shihan who was absolutely stunned by Sagawa's skill. Stands to reason that Sagawa's open sharing of just what he was doing or thought to be critical training to create it should prove interesting.

As for how they are the same? I guess you would have to know, to know. And then see that blown up and debated just like the greats debated. One thing is for sure, everyone needs a measuring rod something which they can use to measure their skills and improvements. You yourself know you are training in a way you never did, and never heard of, but can read some of Sagawas words and recognize things right off the bat as truths to your training. Get out and meet certain CMA teachers who know their stuff and you are going to be pleasantly surprised to stand there and without prompting here them start to outline training methods and ideals that you are now learning as well. It's the reason two of Sagawa's men were non-plussed meeting the Taiji master and seeing him do DR waza with little prompting...oh Aiki age..hmmm peng jin. Like dis way...blam!!! there they were up on theor toes captured! They were unaware there was a way to train it...outside their own art, and pissed they were not shown by Sagawa.


You know I don't disagree. After feeling the skills, it's hard to not accept that things are related, that technique driven work isn't the path to aiki, and solo training is very important.

Eh, maybe we can discuss more in detail over dinner one day. :)

Mark

Yeah well, I think there are a few DR people who would disagree with you on that. Those who have been in the art for years and taken a lot of Ukemi for high ranked DR teachers know exactly what it feels like to have it applied to them. They know the solo training works and it is strengthening, and increasing their ability to do their arts Aiki.
Yeah we can talk about it when you come up.

Dan Harden
19th December 2007, 23:14
Dan,
Sorry for bugging you.
:)

Well you never bug me Ricky. I just would like to hear more about just what the heck you were looking for. I mean... come on man, I'd love to give you a more informed answer. Hell, I'd give ya my phone number if I could drag more than a line out of ya. :eek:
Cheers
Dan

TomW
19th December 2007, 23:23
I don't invite no one into my home without an introduction. And I'm pretty sure it works that way in Texas. :laugh:


Not to promote the thread drift, but I'm with Ron.

It works that way here in Oregon. I train in a private dojo in my teachers home and no one gets in without an introduction. It's his HOME, let alone the huge liability risk to him and his family.

May be I'm just old fashoned in this day and age of texting and e-everything, but a "dude, where's your dojo?" type PM wouldn't get much of a response from me either.

Woody
20th December 2007, 00:14
Well you never bug me Ricky. I just would like to hear more about just what the heck you were looking for. I mean... come on man, I'd love to give you a more informed answer. Hell, I'd give ya my phone number if I could drag more than a line out of ya. :eek:
Cheers
Dan
It is kinda hard to get more tham a couple lines outa me.:D
What I'm looking for? Specifically I am looking for some tenren methods to sensitize, develop and stregnthen my internal skills. I do shiko (sumo stomps) in the morning and try to work in "proper" breathing methods while doing so. I would like to know if I were doing them productively. I am currently working on the tanren methods as outlined in "Let Every Breath...Secrets of the Russian Breath Masters." I have experimented with your "wall work" routine as much as I can given your brief description. There is only so far you can go without quality guidance and instruction. What I want/need is feedback from people who understand these principles on a higher level than I do. I know and love basic aikido waza. I had a good teacher. I believe there is a deeper level of the art than I currently understand and therefore am reaching out, looking for those who might be willing to help along the way. You never know what kind of gemstones one may find in one's own backyard. I'm more than likely going to have to travel a bit to find what I am looking for. Bottom line is; If I'm going to take the time to do 100 shiko a day, I'd just as soon I'm doing them the right way.

Dan Harden
20th December 2007, 00:24
Thats more words than I have ever seen you piece together anywhere....
Let me see if I can put something together for ya. I'll P.M. you later.
Cheers
Dan

Walker
20th December 2007, 00:39
An old one and a good one from Toby who is being more than charitable in this article:
http://www.aikidojournal.com/?id=234

Samurai Jack
20th December 2007, 02:43
An old one and a good one from Toby who is being more than charitable in this article:
http://www.aikidojournal.com/?id=234

My dos centavos

Mr. Harden requested people to email him, and then acted arrogantly and rudely. He didn't provide his requirements for communication via PM, he is not Japanese, nor is a well known Japanese Koryu instructor such as Mr. Threadgill. Nor does Mr. Harden have the same reputation or the mount of reputable support .i.e. other reputable organizations as Mr. Threadgill. I would bet Mr. Harden is not recognized by the leading aikijujutsu organizations. I don't know even what system Mr. Harden is of. And the qualifications between these men aren't the same, or even comparable. Therefore, I may not agree with Mr. Threadgill's methods, but he has a qualified and well-known reputation. Mr. Harden's action are self-important, self-serving and arrogant, not to mention rude and misleading. Once again, we see a familiar defensive tactic by Mr. Harden, for what reason is only known to Mr. Harden. It is unfortunate that those who wish to physically understand Mr. Harden's skill and arguement as he professes, he puts them through an eccentric, and anti-social gauntlet of his own design choosing who he wishes and doesn't wish to demonstrate too. I think it is unfortunated that people should have to suffer Mr. Harden's questionable ways. He is no aiki master.

I wish Mr. Harding good luck, and best wishes.

Samurai Jack
20th December 2007, 04:16
I feel that since Mr. Harden is not an aiki master at any level, much less of the author which he is so besotted, infatuated relying heavily as a crutch on this author's publicly published philosophy and experiences to explain his abilities and arguments, yet Mr. Harden for all his skill doesn't rely on his own; perplexing. His skill (what ever that might be or what ever he calls it) I would bet is not be recognized as aikijujutsu by any reputable aikijujutsu organization. Therefore, how can he argue or proclaim he knows there are different or are not different aikijujutsus, or his ability to interpret and have greater insight the words of the author of the book than anyone else? He says he does, it is based on his own skill and experiences that he notes. He didn't train with the author of the book. I know for a fact he would never be accepted as a student. His research is weak and lacks professional protocol at best, indicated by his visit to Japan as he claims. Basically, he uses testimonials, his own. At this point in the argument no one truly qualified, a recognized and reputable expert/master in aikijujutsu has spoken to this topic Mr. Harden picks and chooses his Koryu culture and isn’t consistent with it, or understands it. Mr. Harden, I fear has muddled the waters of this topic with his own anomalies and perceptions. He may have abilities that impress, but that doesn't mean it is aikijujutsu as recognized officially.

Looking at the facts, Mr. Harden didn’t answer the tough (well soft-ball) questions. He didn’t train with the author he cites as if first hand experience. Our exchanges and including those Mr. Harden has had with others. I also weighed in as well those in support of Mr. Harden. Also, a very important one, there has not been top reputable aikijujutsu instructors supporting Mr. Harden's discussion, I have read. I have determined that I can't support Mr. Harden's effort or argument that he is any type of an authority on the subject discussed. He may flip a few eggs in an egg pan at home, but that doesn't make his an Iron Chef.

Big deal?...right…what is the noise all about anyway. This is the problem, the subject fall victim to the same issues that relate to chi and CIMA. There is no standardization. Some people don’t want standardization so they can peddle their wares, their personal version to jump on the band wagon. As a result, a person such as the thread starter who asks the question doesn’t know who to believe or gets the proper information. I for one am a victim of that. I believed the wrong guy with the wrong information, and felt cheated. I in fact, promoted the wrong information and my credibility was effected. Lesson learned.

Btw, a forum is only as credible as those who post in authority.

elder999
20th December 2007, 04:58
Btw, a forum is only as credible as those who post in authority.


Irony, much?:laugh:

Samurai Jack
20th December 2007, 13:06
I don't claim in any way to be an authority, or speak as an authority or to have special skill or abilities in terms of martial arts that I am not qualified, authorized, etc. to. I don't play games with posters; if you ask me a question I don't become unrationally defensive, or by inviting them to PM and then become rude etc. to them. :D


BOT:
I am wondering if anyone will post here who has the expertise needed to address the topic. It would be nice to get the real information. I am supposing that would need to be given by a real expert. The other problem I see when researching is in the Japanese language and that we are dealing with a concept of a past era that isn't well documented. An era that also was not scientific minded. Maybe we shouldn't go into the past for answers and start with what is current as a demarcation. We then can start with a standard. :)

Mark Jakabcsin
20th December 2007, 13:27
Mr. Samurai,

Your post at 9:43pm is completely built around attacking Dan then at 11:16 pm you post a second post all based on attacking Dan. Nothing constructive in either of them. What happened during that hour and half? Did you work yourself into a second foaming lather? Did you feel that more venom was the answer and would garner the desired results?

We get the picture, you do not like Dan and you do not agree with his posts. Enough said, move along, get over it, leave it alone, GO SOMEWHERE ELSE, ignore him, ignore his posts, do whatever you want, other than the continual I hate Dan posts. If you wish to make a counter point then do so but please READ and TRY to understand what has already been posted. It is obvious from your earlier posts that you struggle with this, no matter how many times you claim to the contrary. Frankly this thread was moving along nicely until you poked your head out of your hole. Note this does not mean everyone agreed, thank God for diversity, but it was still an interesting and constructive thread.

As you said in your first post, when you orginally came here you feel flat on your face, I can assure you, you are doing the same again. Stamping your feet and pointing your finger at the posters will not gain anymore favor than the gross sucking noises you tried before. IDEA: Trying being productive and constructive, even when you disagree and when you can not be one or both of those then stay silent.

Final note of caution: A good number of folks on this forum have met and have personal relationships. I doubt anyone has met everyone but most of us are only once removed from each other. This has helped communications and understanding between the forum members. If you truly wish to be a part of the forum get out and meet some folks, train with them, drink a beer with them and please slow down on making any posts on the forum. When you get the urge to post, stand up, back away from the keyboard and resist that urge with every cell of your body. Trust me that will earn you more respect than anything you have done to date.

Merry Christmas everyone,

Mark J.

PS. My appologies for this post to the forum at large. While this post would normally be better as a PM, my experience with Mr. Samurai Jack via PM has shown me that such interaction is worse than useless.

Dan Harden
20th December 2007, 14:24
Please delete the previous post- this is the edited version.


Hi Mark
Jack and others like him are "allowed" for a reason. But come on, these guys are fun when you get them in your hands. I've not met one who could do much anything past belly aching. It's why they get apoplectic hearing from others who state flatly that they can do and..understand. It is difficult to fathom that statement as it can only come from rank and recognition in their minds. Its impossible any other way. Its just... not ...possible. Budo is always going to have these guys. Even their arguments lack cohesion. They miss the obvious. the many people who have already seen and felt the masters who have seen and felt us or some masters who have felt us as well. No one can have skill, particularly high levle skills and not be known or well indoctrinated. The two cannot exist as one, in their minds. Even though the entire history of all martial arts in all cultures are chock full of stories of that very thing. Many in the arts are incapable of seeing, or even making smart assumptions past surface stuff and they make up the body of the student populations in these arts.
Anyway your points are well made. Those "in the know" know, and many of us all know each other or "are once removed" from experience through trusted friends. Aslo that there are many people out there doing the things we are discusing here, from other sources than me. Good comment. I think it also goes unoticed that most of those reading here have trained with and felt many, many, times, some of the highest ranked DR, Aikido, and Koryu folks in the world. Some who train this stuff are STILL active students of the Kodokai, Roppokai, Mainline, and other Koryu, under the master level teachers. While some of us have been less than impressed at some, very impressed by others, no one is going to say it. Or come out of the closet. They are being, Japanese budo men; smiling, and getting the stuff where they can. On the net many times we are talking past each other or using some as foils to speak to the larger crowd who are thinking and calling around like good budo guys would.
In Budo...one thing remains-what can ...you... do

Some interesting points for people within the arts.

What is kuzushi is at the source and what causes it.
Within the model of DR what allows it to be maintained while another action takes place in an instant.
Past the “hand shape” ideas- just what energy …is…rising? What energy is actually sinking…how?
What is Fure aiki? How does it work?
What turns to take someone up and out? What remains?
Just what is it that aiki does to “capture” in the DR sense?
What would or could you do to stop Aiki from capturing you?
What could Sagawa have meant by having to change the body? What on earth could changing the body have to do with Aiki.
What did he mean by having to prepare the body?
What does it truly mean to move from the center? What is moving what?
Were everyone not able to use techniques, or timing or shapes of any kind , what and how with your own knowledge could you create aiki with some sort of force coming at you?
Why would say…. power strikes from no distance…be the same as aiki age. What are heavy hands?
Just what do you truly know that you can define past some…feeling?
Why is it that kokyu ho, Aiki age and peng jin are all the same?.
Can you rocket someone up off the ground with your aiki age? If not, why not?
Just what stops throw attempts by planting the attackers feet? How and what is it that manipulates his weight and intent?
All of these answers are within DR. And they are all attained, everyone of them, from solo training, then paired practice.
There are some-not many at all-including those reading in Japan, who can answer everyone of these. But they are not allowed. Others have various levels of "not having a clue past a certain feeeling" when they do it.

Mark Jakabcsin
20th December 2007, 15:04
Hi Dan,
That is a hell of a list of questions that, imo, would make interesting topics for discussion on the forum. Although we know from experience these type topics are difficult to discuss via words and therefore are shunned by many. To bad as I enjoy the difficult technical discussions the most. The challenge of finding the right words to describe the what's and why's always help me solidify my understanding. Plus I occassionally find a pearl as I listen to another person struggle to put their understanding into words. The pearls are not so much instant understanding as they are new ways of viewing concepts and/or new concepts to explore in my own training. As you know real understanding only comes with the sweat of trial and error. Oh well, that is my Christmas wish.

Take care,

MJ

Nathan Scott
21st December 2007, 05:41
This thread has turned into a friggin mess. I have tomorrow off from work, so I'll try to manage this thread in some way that makes sense.

Dan - if you insist on publicly advising everyone on how to perform Daito-ryu techniques, I think readers are going to want to know what qualifies you to speak on the subject (ie: training experience and depth of initiation in DR). I'm not picking on you specifically, but this is the reason why most people don't try to explain how the techniques are supposed to be performed. If you just want to discuss your own methods, then have at it. I'll set up a thread for ya, or maybe John can put together a MMA/CMA forum.

In the meantime, keep it civil (all who are posting), or I will S-can this thread.

Regards,

Samurai Jack
21st December 2007, 06:25
Mr. Samurai,

Frankly this thread was moving along nicely until you poked your head out of your hole.

I hope that post is deleted in the clean up, if the thread isn't canned. The above quoted unprovoked personal attack in the post could have been PM. BTW, to set the record straight, if you go back in the thread you will see where Dan attacked me when I asked him a question concerning the topic, just as he attacked others who he invited to PM him, especially the on poster who had experince in aikijujutsu, who was awfully nice to him!?! I don't know why that came about either. I apologize for any extra work the moderator has to do as a result of my posting in the clean up. I do admit I was careless, reckless and thoughtless in that regard. If I can make a request, if any of my posts are to be deleted, what could be retained is essentially what your [Nathan] post #107 is saying. Thank you.

Dan Harden
21st December 2007, 07:43
Nathan
What I was discussing was the commonality of body training and what it does to bind all the arts together. The question was whether it was just the name or the method that was proprieary. You could say the nature of Aiki (or connection) and its use in jujutsu(or grappling) was the point of the thread.. Body training as the means and source to create connection is not exactly a revolutionary new idea or model in neither in Japan or China. It is very old, recorded and rarely spoken of. It is relevant to DR, CMA, Karate, all of them. It's what it "looks" like after that-that is proprietary. Further that the since the concept of Aiki is not Japanese- it came from China- and since most of the internal CMA incorporate jujutsu you have aiki-jujutsu...from China. It of course stands to reason that they have methods to train it as well..which surprise of surprises... is in solo work. I know solo work is taught, and so do you. Only recently have some teachers begun to finally speak of it publicly. And Sagawa being willing to speak up or ..fess up in such detail will help students of all the Asain arts...and most pointedly one as secretive as DR as well. That he finally stated what others have stated about the Asian arts- that the truth isn't in the arts waza, it's in the body-is telling. And none of that... has anything to do with me. Nothing at all. Nor does it reveal or discuss the arts waza.
Overall, if protectionism prevails, and the truth is even further denied, if even Sagawa can now be alluded to as not doing "real" DR Aiki, and being off the path of Takeda...then its pretty much a waste of time to talk at all. People are pretty much dug-in and following in lock-step.

The thread- is- a mess. You can S...can all my posts or the whole thing as far as I'm concerned. If your personal take is that only those in DR can understand and do DR aiki, and everyone else is doing something different, then the only thing for you to do is to dump all of my comments off the forum as being...unrelated. I'm all for it. Please spare us all a MMA thread. Most of the guys training this way now behind the scenes are students of DR and Aikido. Just hit delete.
Merry Christmas
Dan

Jeff Cook
21st December 2007, 11:04
Guys, I just want to say this has been a fabulous discussion. Dan, I understand what you have been saying for eight pages, and I agree WHOLEHEARTEDLY.

Jeff Cook

Dan Harden
21st December 2007, 15:26
_________________________________
Welcome!

This "aikijujutsu" section of e-budo is an academic-style discussion and archive forum, focusing on arts and traditions that incorporate aiki principles and methods specifically.

SUBJECT CRITERIA

In order to encourage discussion, styles and traditions that are gendai {post-Meiji} and/or not recognized formally as koryu will be accepted as topics for discussion (otherwise we wouldn't have much to talk about, to be honest!). This includes arts using the names "aikibudo", "aikijutsu", "aikibujutsu", etc.

Nathan Scot
___________________________________________________


Hi Jeff
Well actually I have spent almost eight pages explaining nothing in detail, and doing not much else but quoting from a book on Daito ryu by Sagawa...which points to some interesting truths in other arts, and further helps explain the stories of martial art masters going off to the mountains to train alone and coming back with very unusual skills. Sagawa is another voice supporting a theory as to how and why that can be true. Sagawao was well recognized as being a giant in DR. Though some now suggest he was more of an MMA guy and not a DR man after all.

Review the quotes from Sagawa. He is extremely candid about what he was doing and why he lied about what he was teaching and what got held back. He openly stated it was the way it was done, and he was told to hold it back by Takeda. His words give everyone a window into both the driving force behind this magnificant art...and its selective teaching method.
1. The power in the art is not in its waza
2. The power is in training the body to change it and prepare it.
3. Teachers don't teach it but too only a select few.
4. He was told never to reveal it.

In the strangest, wierdest twist I have seen you have the most senior living exponent of the art explaining and making some sense of why only a few ended up with real power in the art of Daito ryu. It ties in perfectly with the idea of Takeda only giving it-by choice- to some well placed men/; Sagawa, Horikawa Taiso, Ueshiba, and Hisa. Where some arts gokui are nothing more than some strategies and others are a host of more waza. Perhaps Sagawa reveals that Daito Ryu's Gokui may be one of the most profound of all. His words are there to read. Are they to be denied? I think it's pretty clear that they might. His words and maybe even his own skills will now be marginalized as well for revealing it.
There are those...in the art...who know what Sagawa was saying is true, but that isn't going to help a public case or discussion. In fact his words will be denied by everyone; Those in the art who just simply haven't been taught, and truly don't know, so they of course say this cannot be true... those in the art who know and don't want it known, will marginalize and interpret Sagawa's words to mean nothing.
So in a sense I am citiing a man who was a legend in Daito ryu who, after stating what the source of aiki is.....after 80 years training it, apparently doesn't know aiki or what the established method of teaching it was either.

What remains for everyone;
What can you do?
What can you explain?
Why is it now and always was ...explainable?

Merry Christmas
Dan

Dan Harden
21st December 2007, 16:31
Hi Dan,
That is a hell of a list of questions that, imo, would make interesting topics for discussion on the forum. Although we know from experience these type topics are difficult to discuss via words and therefore are shunned by many. To bad as I enjoy the difficult technical discussions the most. The challenge of finding the right words to describe the what's and why's always help me solidify my understanding. Plus I occassionally find a pearl as I listen to another person struggle to put their understanding into words. The pearls are not so much instant understanding as they are new ways of viewing concepts and/or new concepts to explore in my own training. As you know real understanding only comes with the sweat of trial and error. Oh well, that is my Christmas wish.

Take care,

MJ
Well they are rhetorical really. They are questions for people to ask themselves. And if they don't have the answers, to find out why they don't have the answers. More than anything I think more of us need to think about our training,whatever that may be, what we are doing, and what we are actually being shown. In the end just get out there and feel. Remember, not long ago you were questioning all this as well.
There is a movement that I don't think can be stopped now. There are too many students of very high level teachers sneeking around to test out this theory.
First they realized..slam..."Thats what my teacher feels like"...sometimes, "That's better than my teacher."
Then when they were given tools to do it and then, shown how it can then be stopped....many were pissed off. Why? Think. How on earth could they go to see and train with different men, (one maybe is explainable, but several?).. none of whom are in their chosen art, and feel the gokui of their art? These are mostly-not all-people with many years in these arts. What they felt isn't logical, isn't true, or it is all is true.
And it is explainable.
So far, from a few sources, (includiing myself) I have tallied up various people that have gone to train and or feel this way of training the body. The arts include Daito ryu Mainline, Daito ryu Kodokai, Daito ryu Roppokai, Aikido Yoshinkan, Aikikai, Birenkai, Jiyushinkai, Saotmoe's line, various Koryu, BJJ, and MMA.
Their ranks include
1st Dan to 6th Dans
Shihan
Menkyo holders X 3
And all agree that this training is both profound and is key to their improving the way they do their arts.
I didn't say it-they did.
And it fits like a missing puzzle piece into any academic discussion of the Asain arts, including the aiki arts. First that it isn't being taught, second that it is real and profoundly changes the body and skill level of those practicing.Third it has a specifi rationale for whay it worls and what it is doing to the body of the adept and those who come in contact with it.
No one more eloquantly captured the idea than in Sagawa's comment
Aiki requires an enormous amount of solo training. Only amateurs think that techniques are enough..... They understand nothing. Sagawa Yukiyoshi
Call it gendai tanren (tm) that has nothing at all to do with Daito ryu aiki, aikido, or anything else established.
Even Sagawa apparently doesn't know what aiki really is...how could anyone else. So this isn't___________ it's ____________. train this way and it will greatly improve your ___________.

Happy Holidays
Dan

jdostie
21st December 2007, 21:03
_________________________________
Welcome!

This "aikijujutsu" section of e-budo is an academic-style discussion and archive forum, focusing on arts and traditions that incorporate aiki principles and methods specifically.

_SUBJECT CRITERIA

In order to encourage discussion, styles and traditions that are gendai {post-Meiji} and/or not recognized formally as koryu will be accepted as topics for discussion (otherwise we wouldn't have much to talk about, to be honest!). This includes arts using the names "aikibudo", "aikijutsu", "aikibujutsu", etc.

Nathan Scot
___________________________________________________


Hi Jeff
Well actually I have spent almost eight pages explaining nothing in detail, and doing not much else but quoting from a book on Daito ryu by Sagawa...which points to some interesting truths in other arts, and further helps explain the stories of martial art masters going off to the mountains to train alone and coming back with very unusual skills. Sagawa is another voice supporting a theory as to how and why that can be true. Sagawao was well recognized as being a giant in DR. Though some now suggest he was more of an MMA guy and not a DR man after all.

Review the quotes from Sagawa. He is extremely candid about what he was doing and why he lied about what he was teaching and what got held back. He openly stated it was the way it was done, and he was told to hold it back by Takeda. His words give everyone a window into both the driving force behind this magnificant art...and its selective teaching method.
1. The power in the art is not in its waza
2. The power is in training the body to change it and prepare it.
3. Teachers don't teach it but too only a select few.
4. He was told never to reveal it.

In the strangest, wierdest twist I have seen you have the most senior living exponent of the art explaining and making some sense of why only a few ended up with real power in the art of Daito ryu. It ties in perfectly with the idea of Takeda only giving it-by choice- to some well placed men/; Sagawa, Horikawa Taiso, Ueshiba, and Hisa. Where some arts gokui are nothing more than some strategies and others are a host of more waza. Perhaps Sagawa reveals that Daito Ryu's Gokui may be one of the most profound of all. His words are there to read. Are they to be denied? I think it's pretty clear that they might. His words and maybe even his own skills will now be marginalized as well for revealing it.
There are those...in the art...who know what Sagawa was saying is true, but that isn't going to help a public case or discussion. In fact his words will be denied by everyone; Those in the art who just simply haven't been taught, and truly don't know, so they of course say this cannot be true... those in the art who know and don't want it known, will marginalize and interpret Sagawa's words to mean nothing.
So in a sense I am citiing a man who was a legend in Daito ryu who, after stating what the source of aiki is.....after 80 years training it, apparently doesn't know aiki or what the established method of teaching it was either.

What remains for everyone;
What can you do?
What can you explain?
Why is it now and always was ...explainable?

Merry Christmas
Dan

I've been thinking about what Mr. Harden has been saying over the last several pages, and trying to remember something similar. I am not sure that this is the exact quote, but it's the correct context that I was thinking about. The following appears on Daito-Ryu.org, from an interview between Kondo Sensei and Stanley Pranin.


_"Naturally, the day before these my teacher would go over with me in detail about what he wanted me to teach on his behalf, and he always told me that I must not teach the true techniques that I had learned from him. Even in regard to the very first technique taught in Daito-ryu, ippondori, I was strictly prohibited from teaching the real version I had learned directly from Tokimune sensei, and was told to teach only the version of ippondori he always taught in his own Daitokan dojo." (http://www.daito-ryu.org/history4_eng.html)

I wonder how this compares with what we are hearing from Mr. Harden. As Mr. Harden says above that the "power is not in the waza" it may not be the same thing at all, but I thought I'd throw it out there . . .

Nathan Scott
21st December 2007, 21:20
Dan,


What I was discussing was the commonality of body training and what it does to bind all the arts together.

There has been a little of that, but pretty much every post you have in this thread makes reference to aiki (a Japanese word) and to DR or DR methods, which you are not willing to qualify. For the sake of clarification, my use of the term "proprietary" (exclusively owned) in regards to any art was to say (and I did say) that the *combination* of an arts principles are what becomes proprietary, not that "nobody else can do aiki except for those in DR" or that nobody else has some or all of the same principles.

The question posed in this thread related to aikijujutsu, which is a term originally coined by Daito-ryu. So are other arts doing AJJ? Who knows? You have to have a complete understanding of what DR's use of the term is, or for that matter, any other art that has started using the term since DR. Who on this forum is qualified to make the comparison? Exactly. So the answer is "I don't know, but there are surely arts out there that contain similar principles and/or methods".


... Body training as the means and source to create connection is not exactly a revolutionary new idea or model in neither in Japan or China.

Exactly, so what's the big deal?

The idea of "tanren" ( 鍛練 forging, training) and "tanden" ( 丹田 the center point of the body just below the navel) are quite common. You keep saying that nobody knows about these methods because our teachers want to keep them secret. Yes and no. In Japanese arts you are expected to stick around for a while and think a little bit. If you don't, then I guess there are a lot of secrets you won't get out from the training.

Tanren, training that is sometimes incorporated under the name of "Junan Taiso" ( 柔軟体操 ), is all over Japanese budo and something I made reference to in my unfinished 1999 essay on "Shugyo" HERE (http://www.tsuki-kage.com/shugyo.html). In swordsmanship, Nakamura Taizaburo used to use a shaped 4x4 piece of wood for sword conditioning. In 2004 I demonstrated one of his exercises with this type of equipment, called a "tanren-bo" (forging wood), for an MPEG on my website HERE (http://www.tsuki-kage.com/mpegs/suburi4.mpg). Sure it improves your grip, but if you try to muscle the tanren-bo, you'll lose. I've also been using a set of three different weights of "tetsu-to" (iron rod swords) for many years in swinging exercises. There are antique tetsu-to examples that appear to be made of high carbon iron. Using these tetsu-to for striking would likely cause them to shatter, so that leads us to believe they were used only for solo conditioning exercises. I've also heard of "tetsu-yari", which is an iron spear featuring a taper from one end to the other. This provides good balance for swinging/spinning exercises. I was instructed by my sword teacher, Obata Toshishiro Sensei, NOT to use the shoulders for such swinging exercises, but that the swing must start from the lower abdomen (tanden). I was also taught to kiai during these swings (see previously linked MPEG). Jikishinkage-ryu if famous for their "furi-bo", a long and heavy wooden sword used for swinging practice. Jigen-ryu uses impact practice. Maniwa nen-ryu uses resistance practice.

The point is, not only is solo tanden practice extant in Japanese budo, but students who have formally studied under a qualified teacher for more than a few classes will eventually learn them. I speak of my own experiences to illustrate this point, as EVERY art I now study and have studied I've begun as a beginner white belt - regardless of ranks and licenses in other arts - and worked my way up through the ranks and levels of initiations. Personally, I've found it to pay off big time, as I can now build on the generations of R&D that so many others have already done, and tested in real conflicts. Why start over again and re-invent the wheel?

There are numerous references to Japanese arts teaching students to perform "1,000 cuts a day", or to perform impact-practice on yoko-gi and/or tate-gi (horizontal and vertical impact targets). Ueshiba can be seen in photos performing impact practice on a horizontal target on different occasions with his son Kisshomaru, Saito Morihiro, and a foreign student whose name I can't remember. Some aikido-ka strike car tires in an attempt to replicate this traditional target. I've used hay-bails in my own dojo for similar types of training (messy, but very effective).

All these exercise are designed primarily to condition your tanden, and I'd be surprised to find that the majority of senior exponents of their given art that participate in this type of training would be ignorant of this.

As far as empty-hand body conditioning, it is my understanding that new students to a koryu often learn jujutsu (body arts) first in order to begin conditioning the body correctly, so that by the time they learned weapons they would be well on the correct road to using their body correctly (tanden ryoku).

Breathing from the tanden? This is one of the first things I ever learned about martial arts when I was a kid. The martial arts most likely adapted this method of breathing from the various sects of Buddhism which teach breathing through the tanden during meditation. Japanese arts usually have kiai. I've heard some of my peers in other arts mock the use of kiai as being a useless attempt at scaring them, but is it possible there is more to it? I've observed that a given kata may contain quite a bit of "call and answer" type kiai, while the intended application of the techniques may not contain *any* (audible) kiai (ie: real fighting). So why practice kiai in kata only if you may not really use it? Yeah, to make sure you don't hold your breath, and to assist with synching your timing with your opponent. But proper kiai involves proper breathing from the tanden, and proper use of the tanden to produce the correct sounds. From what I've seen, kiai is the main tool used to teach tanden breathing and conditioning of the tanden, which is achieved during the practice of kata. The teacher, and even the student, can hear if the student is using their tanden correctly. So much for repetition of kata being worthless.

Famous swordsmen Yamaoka Tesshu taught his students that "The secrets of our school are all contained in the kata". Kata is and has been the primary instructional tool of Japanese budo, and there is no reason that anyone can't experience self-realizations through mindful and guided repetition of kata. Is it faster to have someone explain the principle to you? Sure. But you still have to develop basics and settle on a single operating/delivery system. Being able to perform unbendable arm type stuff in the dojo will only get you so far.


It is very old, recorded and rarely spoken of.

It is rarely spoken of in Japanese arts because of the emphasis on self-realization through study of kata and other training methods. If you study with a teacher long enough, they will answer most questions and guide you in the correct direction once they've seen you put forth your own effort first. But that takes studying an art long enough to ascend through levels of initiation. Dabbling will only get you so far.


Further that the since the concept of Aiki is not Japanese- it came from China- and since most of the internal CMA incorporate jujutsu you have aiki-jujutsu...from China.

Your opinion, which is based on what? Meeting unnamed exponents of other arts, who have unspoken levels of initiation in their own art(s)? Based on your own experience, which is always implied but never stated? This is the internet. None of us can feel your technique here, and most of us will not be flying out there so that we can better evaluate the value of your posts. On the internet, this kind of posting just comes off like self-hype.


Overall, if protectionism prevails, and the truth is even further denied, if even Sagawa can now be alluded to as not doing "real" DR Aiki, and being off the path of Takeda...then its pretty much a waste of time to talk at all. People are pretty much dug-in and following in lock-step.

It's not a waste of time if you talk about your own experiences without name dropping arts and terminology your not qualified to drop. It sounds like many people are interested in your methods. Why not use English to describe them since all this cultural stuff and historical stuff is irrelevant?


If your personal take is that only those in DR can understand and do DR aiki, and everyone else is doing something different...

That's not my opinion, but it doesn't sound like repeating myself is going to do any good. I'm saying stick to what you know and don't come here and berate those of us that choose to study under a teacher.

If any of the above information was useful for any of the readers, great. It's stuff I learned from studying under good teachers, and through my own efforts as a student. However, it is useless to explain techniques in a written format, so find someone to guide you through such training. If my posting the above had prevented a student from discovering these things for themselves, I apologize. Get off the internet and practice instead!

Regards,

Ron Tisdale
21st December 2007, 22:02
Hi Jim,

I'm responding to this post because I consider you a bud, and someone who's better at this stuff than I am.

This is not a moderator issue, in my opinion. I think I've run into Andrew myself at a Daito ryu seminar or two (not sure, but quite possible). I totally believe that he behaved just fine. My point is that that behavior should be the same when PMing someone whose home he wants to visit for training. That's it.

On Private PMs...Dan didn't post the PM, he just discussed it, and how he felt about the general tone of the ones he's been getting. He's not the first to do so...there are several well respected post on this board that do the same thing. I feel he did nothing wrong in that.

Last I have to say on the topic. I'm saying it publicly, because I personally see no reason not to.

Best and Happy Holidays to All,
Ron

Hi Ron,Maybe you should leave that to the moderator. ;) I really don't want this thread to drift, but I met Andrew at my dojo when we hosted a seminar with Roy Goldberg-sensei. Not that Andrew needs me to do so, but I will vouch for his manners. Andrew was consistently courteous and gracious, on and off the mat, in his interactions with me and the other seminar participants.

In this instance, Dan asked Andrew to contact him by private message to discuss a future meeting. Andrew did. Apparently, Dan was not happy with Andrew's PM (and perhaps the PMs from others), and chose to air his displeasure with a private message publicly. Andrew took offense at being "scolded" publicly for his PM --- as many of us would, I suspect.

Private messages were meant to be private. If I'm wrong about this, please contact me privately.:)

Jim

Nathan Scott
21st December 2007, 22:37
Hi all,

Because of major thread drift, I created this thread by splitting the majority of posts from the previous thread (renamed):

Is Daito-ryu the only style of Aikijujutsu? (http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=38411)

The title of this thread seemed to be the most appropriate one based on the content of this thread.

Samurai Jack, behave yourself or I'll send you to your own thread again...

Regards,

Dan Harden
22nd December 2007, 01:37
Dan,
There has been a little of that, but pretty much every post you have in this thread makes reference to aiki (a Japanese word) and to DR or DR methods, which you are not willing to qualify. For the sake of clarification, my use of the term "proprietary" (exclusively owned) in regards to any art was to say (and I did say) that the *combination* of an arts principles are what becomes proprietary, not that "nobody else can do aiki except for those in DR" or that nobody else has some or all of the same principles.
The question posed in this thread related to aikijujutsu, which is a term originally coined by Daito-ryu. So are other arts doing AJJ? Who knows? You have to have a complete understanding of what DR's use of the term is, or for that matter, any other art that has started using the term since DR. Who on this forum is qualified to make the comparison? Exactly. So the answer is "I don't know, but there are surely arts out there that contain similar principles and/or methods".

So instead of always putting me on the spot for pointing things out...Address Sagawa saying it.....since it was my main point. He is your argument for hearing from authority.
It makes it seems surreal to be reading folks only wanting to be reading from authorities. With the only "authority" stating "it isn't in the kata stupid" and then seeing those arguing against him and what he said ...while asking for more authority to go train under...even when he said he never openly taught it. If it wasn't so sad it'd be funny.


The idea of "tanren" ( 鍛練 forging, training) and "tanden" ( 丹田 the center point of the body just below the navel) are quite common. You keep saying that nobody knows about these methods because our teachers want to keep them secret. Yes and no. In Japanese arts you are expected to stick around for a while and think a little bit. If you don't, then I guess there are a lot of secrets you won't get out from the training....snip..tanren examples...The point is, not only is solo tanden practice extant in Japanese budo, but students who have formally studied under a qualified teacher for more than a few classes will eventually learn them. I speak of my own experiences to illustrate this point.
I am saying that the real methods are rarely, if ever taught and most guys I have talked with who are seniors in many of these arts haven't a clue, and they were delighted to get to see and feel some things. Point is, its not taught to everyone.

Once again you don't address Sagawa and his authority who is contradicting you at every turn in what he chose not to teach.




...as EVERY art I now study and have studied I've begun as a beginner white belt - regardless of ranks and licenses in other arts - and worked my way up through the ranks and levels of initiations. Personally, I've found it to pay off big time, as I can now build on the generations of R&D that so many others have already done, and tested in real conflicts. Why start over again and re-invent the wheel?
This is a good point except that it is based on assumptions, One, that you will be taught and two that you will be taught something worthwhile. The Japanese are just as lost as many westerners and they are doing muscle building outer forms. Suburi as done by a certain extremely high ranking teacher I know was ridiculous...even stupid. I really don't care that he's a big gun. His solo stuff sucked. There was nothing to say. I showed him, He changed it, he is happy that he did.



...There are numerous references to Japanese arts teaching students to perform "1,000 cuts a day", or to perform impact-practice on yoko-gi and/or tate-gi (horizontal and vertical impact targets). Ueshiba can be seen in photos performing impact practice on a horizontal target on different occasions with his son Kisshomaru, Saito Morihiro, and a foreign student whose name I can't remember. Some aikido-ka strike car tires in an attempt to replicate this traditional target. I've used hay-bails in my own dojo for similar types of training (messy, but very effective). All these exercise are designed primarily to condition your tanden, and I'd be surprised to find that the majority of senior exponents of their given art that participate in this type of training would be ignorant of this.
Nonsense. Much of it is trash even among the Japanese. Can you cite exactly what it is you are training? What trains then tanden? What joins what? What parts do what? You don't need to hit anything to gain power with a sword.


...As far as empty-hand body conditioning, it is my understanding that new students to a koryu often learn jujutsu (body arts) first in order to begin conditioning the body correctly, so that by the time they learned weapons they would be well on the correct road to using their body correctly (tanden ryoku).
Well... spoken like a 20th century modern budo student. The exact opposite is true in some other Koryu. Further there is no need to "condition the body" through jujutsu. It can be done in other ways and the Japanese and Chinese know it. And Daito ryu's solo training is some of the finest in the world.
Again, you really never address Sagawa as he points out the genious of Daito ryu as an internal art. He points to the power of solo training, nor did you address the many stories in Japanese history of men who trained solo and gained power.
Instead you are a kata guy



...Breathing from the tanden? This is one of the first things I ever learned about martial arts when I was a kid. The martial arts most likely adapted this method of breathing from the various sects of Buddhism which teach breathing through the tanden during meditation. Japanese arts usually have kiai. I've heard some of my peers in other arts mock the use of kiai as being a useless attempt at scaring them, but is it possible there is more to it? I've observed that a given kata may contain quite a bit of "call and answer" type kiai, while the intended application of the techniques may not contain *any* (audible) kiai (ie: real fighting). So why practice kiai in kata only if you may not really use it? Yeah, to make sure you don't hold your breath, and to assist with synching your timing with your opponent. But proper kiai involves proper breathing from the tanden, and proper use of the tanden to produce the correct sounds. From what I've seen, kiai is the main tool used to teach tanden breathing and conditioning of the tanden, which is achieved during the practice of kata. The teacher, and even the student, can hear if the student is using their tanden correctly. So much for repetition of kata being worthless.
This is simply a cursury understanding of one type of breathing, in martial usage. Breathing 101. It is so superficial as to be not worth discussing. There are far, far, more potent way to connect the body in breathing...and...they are in Daito ryu. The reality of breath-power is fascia work and has little to nothing to do with what you wrote.


...Famous swordsmen Yamaoka Tesshu taught his students that "The secrets of our school are all contained in the kata". .
That's fine... famous Daito ryu master Sagawa said the opposite,(arguing from authority) that Kata and technique isn't it and anyone who thinks it is... is an idiot!! and knows less then nothing. So where does any of that leave us?


...Kata is and has been the primary instructional tool of Japanese budo, and there is no reason that anyone can't experience self-realizations through mindful and guided repetition of kata. Is it faster to have someone explain the principle to you? Sure. But you still have to develop basics and settle on a single operating/delivery system. Being able to perform unbendable arm type stuff in the dojo will only get you so far..It is rarely spoken of in Japanese arts because of the emphasis on self-realization through study of kata and other training methods.
But again you don't adress Sagawa's comments do you. He was told not to reveal the real work...solo training to change the body, and he didn't. The methods are there, and certain schools know exactly what to do and teach and they do to whom they wish.




... If you study with a teacher long enough, they will answer most questions and guide you in the correct direction once they've seen you put forth your own effort first. But that takes studying an art long enough to ascend through levels of initiation. Dabbling will only get you so far..
That is on many levels sometimes true to simply not true at all,what a gamble. Sagawa did not teach it but to only a few and that not till the end of his life. I have seen secretive but honest Koryu, I have seen mislead students as well.


... Your opinion, which is based on what? Meeting unnamed exponents of other arts, who have unspoken levels of initiation in their own art(s)? Based on your own experience, which is always implied but never stated? This is the internet. None of us can feel your technique here, and most of us will not be flying out there so that we can better evaluate the value of your posts. On the internet, this kind of posting just comes off like self-hype...It's not a waste of time if you talk about your own experiences without name dropping arts and terminology your not qualified to drop. It sounds like many people are interested in your methods. Why not use English to describe them since all this cultural stuff and historical stuff is irrelevant?
I'll take your continuing digs without launching my own. Theres a hell of a lot of stuff I can say good and bad, but I won't. I have my own experiences and from what I can glean here I am glad for what I know and can do. But I am curious as to why you keep coming after me for ideas I quote from Sagawa? You continually opine for authority and ignore, and at one point down played the one who is the centerpoint of the argument. He was quite plain


...I'm saying stick to what you know and don't come here and berate those of us that choose to study under a teacher.
Nathan It seems to me that you and a very few others feel that way. I am not berating those who train that way as I still do myself. That said a whole bunch of folks are out there testing and making more arangements to train this way. After they felt it, they no longer believe your type of argument or what you are saying, in fact, if you ask they will tell you kindly and with resect that you are simply....wrong. But here's the key, All are staying in Daito ryu and Aikido, and I have encouraged a few more to join DR.

I understand you are an advocate of the traditional Koryu method, so am I. But we have been had by some, in some... of these arts. While some are willing to eat it wirh a spoon and say "Yummy!" others are not so inclined.
Cheers
Dan
Aiki requires an enormous amount of solo training. Only amateurs think that techniques are enough. They understand nothing. Sagawa Yukiyoshi

Nathan Scott
22nd December 2007, 04:50
Once again you don't address Sagawa and his authority who is contradicting you at every turn in what he chose not to teach.

I've got no problem addressing your quotes from Sagawa Sensei, and I will do so now. No problem. You on the other hand have opted to not respond to a number of points I have made, which include a quote from Sagawa Sensei saying he tried breathing methods and gave them up (see below). By the way, one thing you will find after reading the entire book is that many points are repeated over and over again. This is due in part to quotes and what not being compiled from different time periods. Hence, some quotes also contradict themselves a bit. That is why you have to read the whole book.

Frankly, quoting Sagawa Sensei in every post is getting old. I was trying to find arguments without adding to the Sagawa festival. It does sound like he was a very skilled teacher, and his point of view carries a great deal of weight in DR and martial arts in general. That being said, it is not the only point of view, and some of the things you've said sounds as though you've either taken his words out of context or somewhat misunderstood the text.

Before I begin with the Sagawa stuff, let me qualify it by saying that I have read the entire "Tomei na Chikara" book in great detail, as well as Kimura's other book "Discovering Aiki" to a lesser degree, and other books and articles in Japanese and English. Enjoy the free translation.

Reading through the book, it is clear that Sagawa was changing and developing his art throughout his entire life. Also, the book was written by Kimura Tatsuo Sensei, one of three successors of the Sagawa Dojo. It is possible that his interpretations of the teachings may not be identical to that of his two seniors (just something else to take into consideration).

Here are some more quotes from Sagawa Sensei as translated from the Kimura book Dan is referencing:


“Generally, a person who has a multitude of dan ranks in various studies, such as a something-dan in karate and something-dan in judo, etc. is not a truly great martial artist. Such a person only desires to learn certain things, and is not focused on any one system completely. Aiki is related to all types of martial arts.”

I interpret this as Sagawa frowning on dabbling, not so much cross-training (as he cross-trained himself extensively). It is interesting though that he places importance on focusing on one system completely. "Only desiring to learn certain things" is what many are doing instead of studying from the beginning under a teacher.

Referring to the period immediately following WWII:


"However, since I would move around a lot, spending one week in a place like Hakodate, and then the next week somewhere else, it was impossible for the students to really learn properly during that time. The training time was also limited, and I was therefore unable to include body-conditioning exercises in order to establish the necessary foundational physique. There was only time to teach techniques, so all things considered, it is easy to understand why the students had trouble learning ... I taught my students how to condition their bodies to some extent, because I found that, even if they trained diligently, I could still throw them freely by applying aiki. If it wasn’t for this, it would not be necessary for me to teach them how to condition themselves ... Even the biggest secrets that Takeda Sensei demanded I not teach, here at the Sagawa dojo, I am now teaching. That is why all my students have become strong."

It sounds to me like Sagawa Sensei did in fact teach the body-conditioning exercises when possible. He may not have been able to fit it in during the earlier days, but teaching out of his dojo daily to regular students would have been easy enough. Is it that he didn't teach them, or that the students didn't pay attention? So much for his poor students not being exposed to the gold after all those years.


"Finally, when Sagawa was about sixty-eight years old, he discovered a new type of aiki, which was developed from the aiki of Takeda Sokaku ... However, because [Sokaku] traveled continuously, there was virtually no time for him to think deeply about such things or to do the physical research necessary to make such a discovery ... This method is now completely different from that which Takeda Sensei was using ... My aiki spawned from Daito-ryu aiki, but has now become something completely different."

Thinking deeply and conducting physical research of Sokaku's method of aiki sounds less like body-conditioning and more like technique. But I'm just guessing based on what's written in a book. You also criticized me for saying that what Sagawa was doing may be different from what other students of Sokaku were doing (meaning not all of what Sagawa's teachings may apply to other branches). I hope the above quote clarify my reason for saying this. It is not a value judgment, just a recognition that it may be something different.


"On the other hand, all the types of things Sagawa Sensei says are reasonable, and based on concrete concepts. Things such as “how to think” and “how to see”, which develops very naturally if guided by Sagawa Sensei, but lacking such guidance, would appear very difficult to discover by oneself."

The author seems to think it is not that hard to learn from Sagawa as long as you follow his teachings. On the other hand, trying to discover such concepts without the guidance of a qualified instructor is very difficult.


"In this chapter I state clearly that in the deeper teachings of Daito-ryu, aiki exists as a concrete technique. It appears likely that aiki was discovered by Takeda Sokaku Sensei, and that Sagawa Sensei realized this principal when he was seventeen years old, further developing it largely through practical application over a long period of time."

According to the author's understanding of Sagawa's methods, aiki is a principal that was further developed by Sagawa largely through practical application over a long period of time.


"Sagawa discovered the essence of aiki when he was seventeen years old. Following that, he began experimenting with various types of training intended to increase his aiki abilities, which is evidence that even from the beginning his perspective on training was different from that of the mainstream ... and studied various methods of training the body before finally establishing his own methods, one after the other ... These methods of training are specifically designed to enhance aiki abilities."

He developed self-training methods in order to *increase* his aiki abilities. He did not consider them "aiki", or even something that *causes* aiki to happen.


"In my case, if I move my body even a little bit, using any kind of motion, the enemy’s bodies will collapse. I can make the opponent collapse regardless of the attack. This “body-aiki” cannot be achieved within twenty or thirty years by even the most talented budo-ka. For those who do not have an adequate level of talent, it will be impossible for them to achieve this type of technique even if they were to practice seriously for many years ... If one understands the theory of aiki, and then trains seriously for a few decades, they can develop real ability ... Aiki should in fact be developed over a long period of time ... One cannot obtain real ability in aiki without training every day, for more than several decades, thereby causing the body to memorize the sensation on a daily basis."

According to Sagawa, there are no time shortcuts to developing his *technique*, and in fact advises against trying to develop it too quickly. The above goes against what you have been advising readers to do in this forum. You stated previously "The power of Aiki in the body is not dependant on an art, not expressed in a technique". You also wrote "It is unfortunate that many arts will not openly teach it and tell everyone to train for twenty years “getting it” from repetition of technique. It was and still can be gotten in a much shorter time frame, and without signing on to perpetuate an art."


"Aiki should not be explained through words, but should be discovered through continuously researching in your mind the feeling experienced when being thrown, and through this process, begin to develop your own theories."

That's funny, Sagawa doesn't think that explaining aiki to others is a good thing.


"To be honest, it is impossible to perform true techniques without having first trained the body ... I believe one should practice sword techniques only after one has properly conditioned their body."

I'm not sure why talking about Edo period training is speaking like a 20th century budo student, but in regards to conditioning the body first (in my example through learning jujutsu first) it looks like Sagawa also saw the value in such a structure.


"I’ve tried everything before, but in regards to breathing, I finally came to the resolution that special breathing methods are of no use. Of course, there are good points to the idea of stopping the breath, or breathing in various ways. But in the end, it is something that is induced artificially, and as a result, will cause movements to become slow or awkward at certain points and the techniques to feel unnatural. Things such as breathing are things one should develop naturally through training in martial arts."

Another oops you haven't addressed yet...


"Don't get hooked on kata, and don’t try to create new kata. Kata might appear well-formed when viewed by others, but artificially created kata are in fact nothing more than dead forms. To train jujutsu as a set of pre-arranged kata is the worst mistake, as such training becomes useless for real fighting. Practicing variations is paramount, so our way is like this."

Sagawa does not say kata is worthless, he says don't get overly hooked on it, because being able to move freely based on a given situation is important. He makes a good point. Sagawa himself admits he learned aiki at 17 years old from a kata he researched and repeated endlessly, which he learned from Sokaku.


[Dan:] Nonsense. Much of it is trash even among the Japanese. Can you cite exactly what it is you are training? What trains then tanden? What joins what? What parts do what? You don't need to hit anything to gain power with a sword.

Sure. Using weighted instruments, resistance training, and impact training condition the tanden, which allows you to maximize and conduct the power generated through the kahanshin (lower body) to the johanshin (upper body). Especially if you kiai correctly. The tanden is the connection between the two. New students use localized muscles in the beginning until they get tired, and eventually their body finds an easier way, a big part of which is connecting to the tanden and using their whole body. You don't need to hit something to gain power with a sword, but hitting something correctly will develop your tanden strength, which will in turn allow you to cut more efficiently using your whole body and with more power.


Again, you really never address Sagawa as he points out the genious of Daito ryu as an internal art. He points to the power of solo training, nor did you address the many stories in Japanese history of men who trained solo and gained power. Instead you are a kata guy.

I've said in other threads that I believe DR is an internal art - or at least that it has significant internal elements. I've also described solo training to develop power that I do, and referenced the tools and methods as being used by martial artists of the past. Yeah I am a kata guy, but as I wrote in my last post, I am clearly a self-training guy also. How is it possible that you could have missed that? I even posted links to an MPEG and essay from my website. Most arts also have self-training aspects as well. Big deal. In my opinion focusing on only the self-training is as ignorant as focusing only on the kata.


This is simply a cursury understanding of one type of breathing, in martial usage. Breathing 101. It is so superficial as to be not worth discussing. There are far, far, more potent way to connect the body in breathing...and...they are in Daito ryu.

Boy, I didn't think I closed the door to specific breathing methods. I simply referenced tanden breathing as being fundamental to Japanese arts. Tanden and breathing. I thought those were two subjects we were discussing. I am aware that there are specific breathing techniques that exist within various schools, thanks. BTW, I see above you can't avoid comparing your breathing methods to Daito-ryu. I know THAT opinion didn't come from Sagawa's book...

**

Believe it or not I'm not really interested in arguing over something we clearly don't agree on. My point was that you should resist comparing your R&D to that of arts you are not qualified to speak about. Even if you quote Sagawa, he clearly states above that what he is doing is different than what Sokaku and other branches of DR were doing.

Kimura's book is a great book. Inspirational and insightful. I recommend reading it. But there are many ways to the top of the hill.

Regards,

Dan Harden
23rd December 2007, 14:38
Nathan
We are not going to come to agreement. We can’t.
A couple of things.
I keep discussing Sagawa,
You keep discussing me.
I stated that solo training is the engine that drives high level Aiki. You stated no one outside the art is qualified to discuss it, so I keep talking about someone who is... Sagawa

Various quotes that you gathered and your responses to them do no match up either. Case in point:

"Sagawa discovered the essence of aiki when he was seventeen years old. Following that, he began experimenting with various types of training intended to increase his aiki abilities, which is evidence that even from the beginning his perspective on training was different from that of the mainstream ... and studied various methods of training the body before finally establishing his own methods, one after the other ... These methods of training are specifically designed to enhance aiki abilities."
To which you try to make the point….
Nathan: ”He developed self-training methods in order to *increase* his aiki abilities. He did not consider them "aiki", or even something that *causes* aiki to happen.”
Yet right underneath that you make my point for me, its almost like quoting me.
Sagawa:

"In my case, if I move my body even a little bit, using any kind of motion, the enemy’s bodies will collapse. I can make the opponent collapse regardless of the attack. This “body-aiki” cannot be achieved within twenty or thirty years by even the most talented budo-ka. For those who do not have an adequate level of talent, it will be impossible for them to achieve this type of technique even if they were to practice seriously for many years ... If one understands the theory of aiki, and then trains seriously for a few decades, they can develop real ability ... Aiki should in fact be developed over a long period of time ... One cannot obtain real ability in aiki without training every day, for more than several decades, thereby causing the body to memorize the sensation on a daily basis."
While trying to argue against my idea that there are specific way to train to shorten the learning curve… you inadvertently point out that there is a solo training method inherent in the art and that it-the body aiki- is the …it…in the first place.
Sagawa:

The reason practitioners from some styles are weak and no good is because they do not train (Tanren) their bodies. Only amateurs think that techniques are enough and that training the body is unnecessary. They understand nothing. In reality unless you train the body you will not be able to do technique. …. The training needed to strengthen the parts needed for Aiki is different from “Normal” training.

As for your contention that he did teach it?
Two things in response
First he stated the he DID NOT teach it for most of his career. Then later in his life he was fearful it would be lost so he STARTED to drop hints in his practice.
Sagawa:

So I taught them a little on how to train their bodies. I didn’t even teach that until a couple of years ago. … when I became ninety, I finally decided that I should teach. Unless I teach you now <it will be lost>.

Now what did –HE- say happened when he did?
Sagawa:
All of you became much stronger after I started to teach the Daihiden which Takeda Sensei told me I should never reveal.
He makes it clear that they changed quickly since he died 5 years after stating he started to teach at 90.
So where you stated
According to Sagawa, there are no time shortcuts to developing his *technique*, and in fact advises against trying to develop it too quickly. The above goes against what you have been advising readers to do in this forum. You stated previously "The power of Aiki in the body is not dependant on an art, not expressed in a technique". You also wrote "It is unfortunate that many arts will not openly teach it and tell everyone to train for twenty years “getting it” from repetition of technique. It was and still can be gotten in a much shorter time frame, and without signing on to perpetuate an art."
Sagawa made the point that the body aiki was the …it…and it did indeed come from solo training. The fact that you don’t know this or agree that Sagawa is in fact stating this...is fine.

I don't want to argue anymore and do a pick apart review of each others comments. Let each person decide on their own and go train. I am saddened however to see Sagawa level of skill marginalized, sidelined or reduced in anyway. Or, because of his continued training, research and discoveries that his Aiki is questioned as not being DR Aiki. That he made leaps and discoveries is natural. It is known that you have jumps in your training, and epiphanies to the body method during your career in Daito ryu. It is discussed. I had a 6th dan teacher in the art joyfully express just such a leap in his aiki happening to him a few years ago. I think it’s a natural progression. Takeda’s students did most of their training without him, and the majority of their careers were with them developing on their own. In every sense, they developed differently through their research…long after a comparatively shorter period with Takeda, and even that time was spent mostly in their going home to train and work what he showed them. This is a major contributory factor in explaining the differences in approach the schools have, and their colorful opinions of each other. But nowhere have I read someone saying each is not Daito ryu. So, while Sagawa can attribute a change to his aiki through his research, as can others, I find it dubious to attribute their later leaps to being anything other than DR.
As for Sagawa’s skill, and to change the subject a bit without being specific, I recall the words of a man who is a highly proficient and long time teacher of Daito ryu. His skills, were substantial and tied to a specific school. I spoke and trained with him when he got back from training with Sagawa for the first time. He told me that after training with Sagawa he was shocked. That he felt as if his previous training meant nothing, that he knew nothing about aiki, and that Sagawa was doing the real Daito ryu aiki. Since I took ukemi for him before and after he went, I can offer that his power and his technique changed markedly over the next year. Most worthy of note was that his power was technique-less. I recall taking ukemi while he joked and spoke with those in the room, and without him doing anything I was being raised by touching his body. That never happened before. I know what he said and taught the difference was.
I also know another fellow a teacher, who trained in a DR branch that specialized in Aiki and this fellow trained with all the top men, he went and felt Kimura, who some think is the only one to really get Sagawa’s Aiki. It his opinion that –he- was better than the masters of his own school.
Last a student, who trained in the same school of DR as the other example above, who went to Sagawa’s school and was stunned by the aiki there as opposed to others.
Last, I know there are those who know -at least visually- what Sokaku’s technique looked like, and what two of his first generation students –felt- like. I consider their opinion a qualified one, and their opinion of Sagawa worth consideration. The real question is whether or not …these guys…improved because they were told about changing technique, or changing their bodies and just …what… made that defining difference to doing their..Aiki. And since no one in the art can agree on what aiki is-except they usually are sure it isn’t the other guy.....It remains interesting to speculate.

An arts overall history, feel, and expression is inherent in everything the art contains; its body method, its kata, and it's gokui. All of it together makes the art. More than a few highlevel folks have been surprised when-they- reached the deepest initiation to discover secrets..in the other arts they became deeply initiated into. Menkyo's have stated this.
So, away from DR ...there are folks out there training this body stuff I am talking about. Let’s say what they are doing has nothing at all, nothing in the known world to do with Daito ryu aiki. Lets say you're correct that its a secret that no one can possiibly know without deep initiation.
How did Sagawa get his men to change in 5 years after he decided...to finally teach?
With changing their bodies through solo tanren...we should too.
Happy holidays
Dan
.

Nathan Scott
24th December 2007, 00:14
Dan,

I realize we're not going to agree, and I'm also not going to pick apart your replies and compare them with the Sagawa quotes I posted that contradict things you've said as fact earlier in this thread. Obviously the points are lost. And one of the points I was making, which you noticed, is that reading quotes second hand in a book that were made at different time periods in varying contexts, are not all that dependable when it comes to saying what Sagawa did or didn't do or think. It is not that Sagawa's comments are not of value, but that correctly understanding his point of view through reading a collection of quotes is difficult. Japanese tend to speak in a very context-driven way, meaning that they may say things that seemingly contradict previous statements if the context is not known and considered.


Lets say you're correct that its a secret that no one can possiibly know without deep initiation.

No, once again, what I'm saying is you can't know for a fact what the secrets are without being properly initiated. They may be what you think they are, or they may be different, or change somewhat at higher levels (such as body-aiki). As such, you run a significant risk of spreading more misinformation over the net. Why not just talk about what you know?

Samurai Jack
24th December 2007, 00:31
1. Did you study at the author's dojo and was given that special instruction? I don't think you did, as the author didn't teach non-Japanese. The students he taught as you quote where with the author for decades before the author decided to teach what Takeda told him never to show. I am sure the author wasn't the only one Takeda said that to or taught.

2. When speaking of what will improve someone's skill better, you are simply reading from the pages of a book that thousands of Japanese martial artists and masters have read it and a sweeping revelation through out Japanese martial arts community long before you had the book translated. The sweeping revelations would have been by those, and I paraphrase, as you put it in another thread, with the mindless drones going through the motions. That is insulting, and rude to everyone who trains in martial arts. On top of that you also admonished Nathan in another thread for insulting martial artists which you previously referred to as mindless etc. You based your proclamation on others experiences-not first hand, your only experience is your limited observations (in time and experience with) of others. The result then is from 3 party observations. It is the same thing as not being on the batting against Clemens who pitches a no hitter in the World Series, but rather hearing it from those that where there, or watched the game live, and also reading about it in the paper latter etc. Nothing wrong with that unless you talk like you where actually there, actually see it, where actually on the team and knew how Clemens did it.

3. You also have not indicated the perimeters, or delineated the procedure you claim for improvement. You remain ambiguous, and say it isn’t discussed by the masters- dead ends. Yet indicate you have the knowledge, and point broadly to references such as CIMA without the detail explanations needed to support your claim. You make a claim you have to play by the rules.

4. When it comes to providing people with credibility when making a claim…well you know what I mean. Here is the example, I go to a licensed professional, say a doctor on the board who is professionally trained with years of experience and expertise. A doctor who is well known and respected, top in his field, instead of the guy who is still in his first year of medical school working from text book, lecture theory.

5. Pyrite. As I stated before, why should a man who holds on to knowledge that made him better then his students, that allowed him to defeat others who challenged him, and then not tell his students until he reached 90 years old, suddenly tell it all book? I personally, not think tanren is the Holy Grail. I think it is more of a political self-promotional kind of thing. I don't dispute your personal experiences with those you mentioned improved; I just don't think there is a magic bullet.

I keep in mind none of these guys where rocket scientists with Harvard degrees, other than the writer of the book who is a very smart guy from what I found out. One guy of thousands who has that high of an I.Q. who is as good as he is, and I am sure if it was that easy he would have figure it out long before his master told him when the master was in his 90s. Then he would have surpassed his master before that. I read too that Takeda was uneducated, is this true? Even if it isn't he wasn't a Harvard grad.

6. Fin. You and your friends may be insulted by what I said to you. Or you can think about it. Either way...stuff happens. I don't tend to be over taken by gold rush fever, and don't mistake fool’s gold for the real thing. It is disconcerting to hear those who speak with authority in a field they are not experts in. No one likes getting fool’s gold, thinking its gold. No one likes getting wives tales thinking its real medical advice. If the experts are not speaking we shouldn’t fill in it in with our own speculations, even though it is a human thing to do. People don't like getting the wrong info.

Dan Harden
24th December 2007, 02:05
Nathan
Yeah I'll agree we disagree. Funny, I was thinking the same thing. That you are missing facts of what he is saying and the points are going to get lost anyway.
To change the subject on to other things
Some points on training...that is my method(tm) only.
Tanren and its effects on the body to create power
Fundamentally, connection, or aiki is created through power. The power is within the body of the adept, not in something which you do, that…is an after effect. The power in the body is soft, very relaxed, and fluid, not fixed or static. When it comes to power it would do everyone a service to review some things they already sort of know. Think of how many famous Budo men, when asked why they wanted to do Budo said “To become strong.” Just what did it mean? To what were they referring?Why did Sagawa discuss strength or power over flexibility?What did –he- mean?
It is interesting to talk about power and the type of unusual or unnatural strength that Sagawa may have been referring to but mores the point, how many martial artists realize the importance of power in these so-called soft arts in the first place? And why is it unnatural and has to be trained into the body?
Why is it important to retrain the legs and back? To do what?
First and foremost it involves the spine. Learning to open and strengthen the way it supports load, transfers weight and issues power from the ground, or manipulates incoming force.
In essence you learn to support the spine and turn the body around it, remove slack, have center activated and move. One sentence, much training…….just removing slack is hilariously difficult. In doing so your body learns to absorb force and send it or allow it to sink to the ground, hence any incoming horizontal force goes straight to the ground. And further to rise energy. The hands mean nothing, nor do hand shapes…if anything they can be a crutch and a detriment to training, as they engage too much shoulder power. More on that later. You should be able to have really strong men push on you and you simply stand there. Or gab your body and try to throw you and have their force captured and zeroed out by your body and you throw them in an instant or cast them off. This type of movement where everything is joined and the slightest thought of movement causes results in them is what Sagawa meant by his slightest movement having an effect. There are ways to teach this and the result is that once the body is trained to connect on the inside and to remove slack it understands what it needs to do to manipulate force. What receives/feeds. The cleaner the current, the more your body can create rising or sinking energy in any part that is touched. Head, shoulders, arms, hands what have you. Hand shapes and waza are nothing more than a technique and they…cease to have significance.
When is turning, not turning?
Supporting the central axis, and teaching the pelvic girdle, and opening the arch and strengthening its connection allows incoming force to be absorbed and neutralized, leaving the body to turn on its axis to manipulate that force without losing balance. The spine supports and can generate power without losing balance. And this-the spine- can be wound around once you train to know how, so the absorptive qualities can be neutral and ghosty while you manipulate, or powerfully forward or backward, up, or down. The incoming energy goes to zero while the outer axis manipulate. This is demonstrated in any number of waza.
This is unnatural movement. Most folks turn their bodies, and this opens up an instability in their posture and a highway to their center getting manipulated. Their “out” is usually through technique of some sort or positional change. Which is staple to good martial arts but really isn’t the power we should be training for. Having a highly trained central axis is. The structure and training that creates the central axis gets added to- to create an enhanced central equilibrium There is much more, and of course this is done best through solo exercises and some paired exercises to train the body. But overall someone who is adept at this, is a son-of-a-bitch to try and throw or lock up. It’s damn near impossible, and getting hit by them feels like getting hit from a truck. It gives a whole new meaning to a no-inch punch.
Secondarily, it forestalls the fundamental mechanics of budo for throwing a person. In the mechanics of throwing someone you weight them on one side, or you carry their weight past their balance point forward or back. With this training your retention of balance is greatly enhanced and extends ranges of stablility and it completely changes the natural human tendency to carry weight on one side, the typical walking sway. In the end it is a trained anti-aiki that can stop aiki being done to you.
There is much more to all this, including in-yo-ho, which is fascia training that does and doesn’t require specific breathing to do. Interesting enough Tokimune discussed some of this. While he described it a bit and included the initial steps- with breathing- he didn’t go into detail of what was being trained to connect to what. That’s the really interesting work and is in other arts outside of Daito ryu. The use of breathing when first doing In, Yo ho is an easier way to learn and is the source of the term “breath-power.” As Sagawa noted; you don’t need the breathing... he didn’t see a need. In a sense he is right…..later. But Tokimune’s described and published method (and I bet it was Sokaku's) included it, as do the Chinese arts-moslty likely the source-, as it is easier to learn to identify certain things at first. I wonder if Sagawa offered that as a nice coded way to let some informed Asain readers of other schools know he was past that point in his training. When things are connected they just….are. It’s another reason why his words can be misunderstood by some folks who don’t understand what he could have meant by not needing the breath.
Energy
FWIW rising energy and sinking energy in wrist grabs and hand shapes in any art is a training tool only. It isn’t needed to impart the skills. Aikido’s Kokyu-ho has nothing to do with a wrist grab. I think it can cause a significant handicap and actually slow down the process of learning. As a training device it is virtually meaningless for capturing the correct use of the body, so is doing locks, throws or any other kata. That’s just more art specific, how-to-fight or simply train… OUR way… stuff. Learning to train the body directly can be an easier, and more powerful path as it helps to identify things and keep the shoulders from firing while you retrain the body. There is a training specifically designed to change the body…outside of Kata which is exactly what Sagawa was referring and that Takeda told him not to teach. Once the power is in the body, rising energy or sinking or weight transfer is in anything that is touched. As I said what you do with it after is just the outer form or “art” shape.

Disclaimer
This is artless. It does not involve any art. After training this way for years, It will give you power to stand next to some substantial people. During your journey chances are many people you come in contact with will notice that you…are different. Overall what I am saying is folks…it….works. Currently folks who have been actively training with some folks for a year or so are reporting substantial changes in their bodies and in their power which is effecting their arts waza. What you do with it is up to you. Your art…of choice could be Daito ryu or Aikido or Goju, BJJ, Judo, etc …once you learn their waza of course.
I'm sure this is alian and different for many, and I will be challenged on it. I have in the past..on the net its been a hodgepodge of folks trying to wrap their minds around it.
To my face; shodan to menkyo have agreed that it is what we need to be working on.
Cheers
Dan
Aiki requires an enormous amount of solo training. Only amateurs think that techniques are enough. They understand nothing. Sagawa Yukiyoshi

Kendoguy9
24th December 2007, 04:18
Dan,

You're an interesting guy and while I don't 100% disagree with what you say, I have to say the way you present things is always very confrontational. Haven't you heard you attract more bees with honey then vinegar?

I agree that the parts of the body you are training are very vital in proper budo development. I disagree with the blanket statement that the best way to train them is through solo practice (ie. taiso that are used just to develop these body parts; outside of kata training).

When I find weakness in my own technqiue (and it is often!) I will go back and re-examine the failure and why. The problem that arises for me at least isn't proper knowledge of the tanren you speak about but rather "time in." As you, Sagawa, Akuzawa, my taiji chuan teacher, people who teach progressive muscle relaxation, etc. have all stated this stuff has to be practiced daily in order to benifit someone to the max. So what is it that really make such a bold difference, some special taiso, or regular *proper* training?

The mountain men you speak about, why do you think they came back as beasts? Do you think they all developed the same or similar set of solo exercises on their own and worked them for a month; that there is some mystic Asian conspiracy to keep this knowledge from Westerners? or do you think correct training in *good* kata for a month was the answer? Whatever you think; the key is training for a month! Long hard consistant training. BTW I don't see Mas Oyama standing with his back to a tree to master this stuff, I have a feeling he repeated good kata in the mountains. Maybe I'm wrong?

If someone did a kata that has as much tanren within the kata as you do outside of any kata, which do you think would be better to spend your time on? In the kata not only would you get tanren, you'd be mastering the heiho as well, another very important part of an art. If you don't know how to weild your sword well, it doesn't matter how much tanren you've done you'll still end up cut to pieces (think Boxer Rebellion). I think there are some ryu or arts that have kata or forms (some with partner some without) with a great deal of tanren and by practicing them you will get all the benifits that you are now seeing in your own practice. I think this is why some ryu have created consistantly high level martial artists for decades even centuries and other ryu only a rare master comes along every so often.

On to Sagawa. I am sure he had some serious skills. I would be suprised if he didn't! However, he is a hype-man. Everything he does is always a little better then anything anyone else does. Maybe its true. I've never trained with him, never trained with anyone who trained with him and never met anyone who felt his skill. So I can't really say if he was as good as he said he was. I feel the same about Ueshiba, Horikawa, Hisa, Takeda (Sokaku and Tokimune), etc. But these other guys didn't write about how great they were (or maybe they did I just haven't read it?). Maybe because you keep dropping the same quotes from Sagawa about how great he thought he was and how he got that way by solo training, in support of your own research, it just rubbed me the wrong way.

So is there really an Asian plot to keep this out of our evil Western hands? Maybe, but I've met a few Japanese teachers and at least one Chinese teacher (I don't play much with Chinese martial arts) show me very similar methods to create the skills they had, all within the context of kata. "No, no, no when you do this you need to keep your pelvis tilted and spine lengthened." "No, no, no like this..." (different teacher describing a similar method form a very different position). Maybe I just take them for granted? I am a very poor student.

So when you come down to it, it's all unbendable arm, or spine, or leg, or pelvis, etc. It's not that rare and it's commonly taught, it's included in good kata (I guess so lazy people like me get a little something) it just isn't practiced very hard, stripped from context or in proper context, by many people. I hope you are a more dedicated and harder working student then I am!

Merry Christmas!

Nathan Scott
24th December 2007, 05:58
Dan,

What you've been saying - before my posting a number of Sagawa quotes in my last post - was that aiki can't be performed without body-conditioning, and that aiki is not a technique, but happens once you make your body strong. Not only do I not agree with that point of view, the quotes I provided appear to support that opinion - that Sagawa learned techniques of aiki from Sokaku, then made them better through body-conditioning. And perhaps discovered an alternate / more advanced way of applying aiki.


so I keep talking about someone who is... Sagawa

No, your posting fairly large assumptions about Sagawa based on an incomplete translations of Kimura's book about him. That's the problem.


While trying to argue against my idea that there are specific way to train to shorten the learning curve… you inadvertently point out that there is a solo training method inherent in the art and that it-the body aiki- is the …it…in the first place.

Actually no, I don't, as I don't interpret Sagawa's use of the term "body-aiki" as referring to his body-conditioning, but rather a type of technique(s). Body-conditioning surely helped him perform such techniques, but it is my interpretation that they are more or less two different things. Sure, I could be wrong too, but that's why we don't agree and I am not contradicting myself.

In regards to people getting it quicker once Sagawa started teaching more explicitly, I would guess the students who made the most progress are the ones who had already been training in the basics with him for many, many years. If such a person had not "gotten" it yet, I don't see why getting pushed in the right direction wouldn't produce positive results. On the other hand, I interpret Sagawa's comments about no-shortcuts as referring mostly to those without any real aiki training. But who knows... maybe he was old and couldn't keep his stories straight.


I am saddened however to see Sagawa level of skill marginalized, sidelined or reduced in anyway.

I agree, but I also am saddened to see his level of skill sensationalized by those who never trained with him directly. I guess that works both ways.

As you say, Sagawa's developments may have truly been a natural evolution of DR aiki, or, may have been more a result of his own ideas based on the totality of his cross training experience. Sagawa stated his aiki became different from Sokaku's, as well as "completely different from Daito-ryu aiki". I guess it either is or isn't, but don't get down on me for being the one to post this quote. Sagawa based his understanding of DR aiki from training a kata at 17 years old, then did his own R&D for the rest of his life to get better. I'd say it's quite possible that such a great length of time produced an evolution that can be categorized as "completely different from Daito-ryu aiki".

You've "heard" a lot of things from a lot of people, and based assumptions off of their comments. Maybe you're right, and maybe you're wrong. I happen to largely disagree with you for my own reasons, but I'm not going to post to the internet that you are wrong just because I've formed a somewhat different perspective.

**

In regards to your last post, nice effort at speaking of your R&D in more general terms (for the sake of discussion shall we call it Dan-ryu or Dan-fu?) ;)

I would like to point out the following observations so that you *might* better understand why I'm responding to you in the way I am:

1) Through the substantial effort you made to speak in general terms, you managed to reduce the number of times you mentioned Sagawa from (19) times to just (5). If you are interested in talking about Sagawa because it is an interesting subject, fine. But in most cases you bring his name up in the spirit of comparing what you think he was doing to what you are doing, and that is where problems keep arising.


Or [grab] your body and try to throw you and have their force captured and zeroed out by your body and you throw them in an instant or cast them off. This type of movement where everything is joined and the slightest thought of movement causes results in them is what Sagawa meant by his slightest movement having an effect. There are ways to teach this ... Fundamentally, connection, or aiki is created through power. In the end it is a trained anti-aiki that can stop aiki being done to you.

And this analysis is based on studying with Sagawa? How does "Dan-ryu" define aiki? Isn't there an English term that might be more appropriate? Or if your expertise is coming from CIMA, why not call it by the Chinese term?


There is much more to all this, including in-yo-ho, which is fascia training that does and doesn’t require specific breathing to do.

I know the Daitokan published something about in-yo-ho and breathing, but I don't remember getting all that out of the short paragraph that was written by them. I seem to recall it was pretty vague, and personally, I suspect there may be an error in the translation in part of it. Speaking of breathing again...


As Sagawa noted; you don’t need the breathing... he didn’t see a need. In a sense he is right…..later. It’s another reason why his words can be misunderstood by some folks who don’t understand what he could have meant by not needing the breath.

He didn't just say it wasn't necessary, he said special breathing methods are of "no use", and "is something that is induced artificially, and as a result, will cause movements to become slow or awkward at certain points and the techniques to feel unnatural." Maybe it's really and truly just not part of his method?


Aikido’s Kokyu-ho has nothing to do with a wrist grab. I think it can cause a significant handicap and actually slow down the process of learning. As a training device it is virtually meaningless for capturing the correct use of the body, so is doing locks, throws or any other kata.

We're going to tell us about aikido now? Well, surprisingly, I disagree with you. I would agree that the kokyu-ho that is commonly practiced in aikido is largely misunderstood, but I would not agree with your assessment. But that is my opinion, as a 5th dan instructor who has studied the art for many years.


There is a training specifically designed to change the body…outside of Kata which is exactly what Sagawa was referring and that Takeda told him not to teach.

I seem to recall the statement as being something along the lines of "I began to teach explicitly, even the secrets Takeda instructed me not to reveal". These secrets may have included body-conditioning, but it sounds like your jumping to conclusions based on what you already believe about Sagawa.


What you do with it is up to you. Your art…of choice could be Daito ryu or Aikido or Goju, BJJ, Judo, etc …once you learn their waza of course.

This is called mixed martial arts (MMA). It may be just what you need, or something that it not appropriate for the methods you are use. Do what you want, but for those training in a dojo under a teacher, be advised that integrating training methods or internal methods without the proper level of seniority in your art, or without your teacher's approval, may:

1) begin to alienate you from your teacher and/or classmates.
2) piss off your teacher and get you in trouble. Being a student means following your teachers advise. If you think your teacher sucks or does not have your best interest in mind, then maybe you have the wrong teacher. But either follow them or don't.
3) alter generations of teachings into something different, which may confuse the hell out of you, or, make a significant improvement. Either way, the transmission of the art will change with everyone who studies from you. You are either a student or an independent contractor, and independent contractors are not embraced by most arts or teachers.

On a last point, Dan stated:


FWIW rising energy and sinking energy in wrist grabs and hand shapes in any art is a training tool only. It isn’t needed to impart the skills ... [and previously...] What you see the hands doing to make peng jin, or say aiki age means nothing, that's an art form.

If you haven't gotten to this page in the book yet, here is a little something about hand shapes:


"Around this time I [Sagawa] visited Takeda Sensei, and concurrently there happened to be a photo of Ueshiba Morihei being run in the Asahi Newspaper. When Takeda Sensei saw this photo, he said, “If he performs techniques using that kind of hand shape, even if one hundred years passes, he still won’t understand aiki”. At that time I thought that Takeda Sensei’s comment was strange, but later, when I was in the latter part of my thirties, I finally came to understand his meaning."

Not only does Sokaku seem to feel hand shapes are an important part of aiki, but it appears that Sagawa ended up later understanding the meaning and agreeing with him. I know your opinion is not wrong, and we probably just misunderstood what you were really saying, but in case you hadn't gotten that far I thought I'd give you a little help. :)

Much of what you wrote was interesting. Much of it was stuff I've come across or already knew, but interesting anyway. The problem is when you start making unsupportable comparisons.

Chris, interesting post.

Regards,

Mark Murray
24th December 2007, 14:34
I find that some things in this life are simply amazing. In more ways than one.

Here you have someone (Dan) who is openly stating information about a way of training that has been kept secret or only shown to certain people. Really, that's the first I've seen of someone (not including McDojo people) offering this kind of information.

And you have others who state that only by training in prescribed techniques/kata from certified instructor will secrets be revealed. Nothing bad to say here. Most of us fall into this category. We've found teachers we really like, appreciate, and uphold.

And then the cross talk starts.

Dan never stated that the techniques/kata of an art were worthless. They are the art's form made physical. Dan talks about underlying body skills, not the physical manifestations of an art -- the techniques/kata that define it from other arts.

Techinques/kata and organizations. I've mostly trained in Aikido. And for the record, Dan has told me to stay in Aikido. Now, if he thought the art, its techniques/kata useless, why do that? Why not convert to MMA? And he's told others to stay in their art. Do I think techniques/kata are useless? That an organizations teachings are useless? No. Take the Jiyushinkai. I have a whole lot of respect for Clark sensei and everyone I know in the Jiyushinkai. I think their way of teaching is one of the best. I like the way their syllabus is organized. They do good stuff. But here I am, doing both. Amazing. And I find myself not alone, but in very good company. :)

Learning from others ... If you discount learning from others, then you discount your teacher's teachers. So, when someone comes through and says here's a training method that was kept secret, why aren't you checking it out? And why aren't you checking out all the other people who have checked it out? Even if you never heard of Dan, just doing some research will show you that some fairly well known people do. And no, I won't do that for you, but here's a little start:

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=173906&postcount=13

You can discount what Dan's saying all you want until you're blue in the face, but until you do the research, feel with your body, and meet those who have gone before (those who have met Dan and those that have trained with him, past and present), you are only showing ignorance. (And, no, I don't mean that in a negative fashion. The meaning is that there are things hidden in plain sight that one doesn't see ... yet. Been there, done that. Still doing it, in fact. :) )

But, think about these things. Do the research. Then start forming an educated (mentally and physically) opinion.



I demonstrated what I do to a teacher who also trained with Ueshiba Morihei. When that teacher watched then felt me it was stated flatly and in no uncertain terms the following: "This is Ueshibas Aikido! They don't teach ths anymore you know! It's not in modern aikido."
One fellow and I were somewhat taken a back and explained how this is such a debate on aikiweb.The teachers looked at us puzzled and said.
"What do they know? Did -they- train with Ueshiba sensei?"

We all were sort of stumped being faced with such simple logic.
I posted that experience before. No I'm not going to reveal the source. Ellis and Chuck know who it is as well as a fellow who posts here.


Here you have someone who trained with Ueshiba stating matter-of-fact that what Dan is doing is what Ueshiba did. Ueshiba learned from Takeda. Dan's saying it's aiki, body skills, etc. He's found a connection to his solo training and Sagawa's writings. And per his list, shihan and menkyo kaiden's have, too.

I'd include me, but hey, I'm a nobody. :) For those who want authority to show them the way, well, no need to reply to my post. I'm no authority. For those who have teachers who keep strict adherence to their school and no others, well, no need to reply either. I'm no authority. Certainly not qualified in anything. I'm just a researcher and student. So, for those above, please just ignore me.

IMO,
Mark

Merry Christmas all!

Dan Harden
24th December 2007, 15:01
This is called mixed martial arts (MMA). It may be just what you need, or something that it not appropriate for the methods you are use. Do what you want, but for those training in a dojo under a teacher, be advised that integrating training methods or internal methods without the proper level of seniority in your art, or without your teacher's approval, may:
1) begin to alienate you from your teacher and/or classmates.
2) piss off your teacher and get you in trouble. Being a student means following your teachers advise. If you think your teacher sucks or does not have your best interest in mind, then maybe you have the wrong teacher. But either follow them or don't.
3) alter generations of teachings into something different, which may confuse the hell out of you, or, make a significant improvement. Either way, the transmission of the art will change with everyone who studies from you. You are either a student or an independent contractor, and independent contractors are not embraced by most arts or teachers.
Well for umpteenth time, No where, anywhere, do I encourage folks to become MMA independent contractors, or leave their arts. In fact no one is. As for your advising the general reader? Fine. Advising those coming to train with me? you need to get a grip. Most are dan ranks of various levels, Nathan. Many of them are teachers, some very advanced in theor studies, and more than afew training this are in Koryu. They are big boys and girls, Nathan, able to make their own judgments and evaluations based on years of training with master level instructors. I’m sure, in fact I know, they are enjoying your “advice.”
As a koryu –student…I think you are being a bit crazed and parochial in your views. Why? I know Koryu menkyo who not only have no trouble with it, they want to learn it. As I said earlier adding in your seniors and equals in aikido, and others in DR under Shihan, who once they felt this training considered it the finest skill they could use in their art …are remaining in their art.. They don’t agree with you, nor do I.
We all appreciate your views, but you're just starting to sound a bit over-the-top.


Much of what you wrote was interesting. Much of it was stuff I've come across or already knew, but interesting anyway. The problem is when you start making unsupportable comparisons.
Your understanding, or lack thereof, of things I wrote are simply that. Hands on is the only way to really know what each of us know. Just your stated opinion that it takes the understanding of a 5th dan and many years in Aikido to fix kokyu has helped us understand where you are coming from. For me, it holds no relevance whatsoever, and it doesn’t pan out in the real world. I have met and trained with too many who haven't a clue...in their bodies, and their fix is more of the same stuff that doesn’t work. I think it’s sad, and I am helping teachers, fix that. You can call it what ever you like since I don’t teach any art, but they clearly have a much different assessment of things then you do, So do I. It’s not hurting folks, it’s helping them.
Merry Christmas
Dan

Dan Harden
24th December 2007, 15:27
Well thanks Mark.
I think the "kept secret in the arts" stuff is a bit over the top as well. What I say is that this stuff -is in the arts- just not shown to everyone. It's why I can stand, in a room, with ICMA master level teachers, and with Koryu menkyo's and with Daito ryu folks. So it isn't just me. How do we account for the others who are just now talking about it, and showing things as well? They got it from the arts as well. How do I account for a Taiji guy doing aiki techniques stupendously well, and being asked by Sagawa's students to teach them. They were his direct students, they made their own assesements. Of course Nathan can say what did... they... know. Its a never ending arguement. The ones who seem to argue most fervently are the folks, either protecting their arts or stating that no one can know or compare what is what unless they are a master of both or all. It's actually a very sound and logical argument that I have no problem with. A preservationist wouldn't even consider it. For many of them, its all or nothing. Get each, from its own source, no shades of grey. It's just that as a physical model, it just isn't true. It is the waza, strategies and technical expressions that make more of the arts individual framework. There is a tie that binds us. Many don't want to hear it or believe its even possible. And if you say the word ...aiki. It goes bonkers.
Happy Holidays
Dan

Dan Harden
24th December 2007, 15:56
Wanted to edit in after the bonkers line

Folks will always encounter things they think are unique. If it is highly unusual, then all the more so. It’s only after they see it, and feel it elsewhere as well, and can do it do they start to see things differently.
Maybe the best thing to do is to leave off trigger words like aiki, Kokyu and jins, and so on. There is too much proprietary stuff attached to them. That way when teachers of those various arts feel you and tell you…you.. are doing their arts high level stuff, the onus is on them, not you. In any case it sure as hell doesn't mean you know the art.
From India, to China, to Japan this body training is and was known, and is a corner stone to the arts. Some will forever believe some country boy was unique in all the world and discovered something different. I thought that way for years. Nothing is truer than the fact than some folks think they are traveling down a little known secret path, only to discover it’s a well trodden lane.
Happy holidays
Dan

Dan Harden
24th December 2007, 16:21
I got to go last minute shopping. Just a quick note. Most of us are husbands and Dads and everyday blokes working our butts off to learn stuff. Obviously we are passionate about what we know and what we think we know. Some times it comes across as offensive. I am terrible at getting points across. When we get together, face-to-face, most of us have a blast and we can feel and talk things through. I'm an example of that. I seem to write in a very flat, and short manner-usually while I am taking work breaks- but, all will tell you, you can't get me to be serious in person. Lets try to be nice to each other. I really have no interest in offending, for offense sake and apologize for doing so wherever it applies.
Again, happy holidays
Dan

Samurai Jack
24th December 2007, 16:34
I find that some things in this life are simply amazing. In more ways than one.

Here you have someone (Dan) who is openly stating information about a way of training that has been kept secret or only shown to certain people. Really, that's the first I've seen of someone (not including McDojo people) offering this kind of information.

And you have others who state that only by training in prescribed techniques/kata from certified instructor will secrets be revealed. Nothing bad to say here. Most of us fall into this category. We've found teachers we really like, appreciate, and uphold.

Mark, it is clear you support Dan and it is admirable, you clearly find Dan someone to learn from. That is admirable and I respect that. We have posted to each other in the past and found no contention within differences and misunderstandings. Therefore, the following should be no different. I would like to comment on a few things you brought up in your post that I didn't go into detail with before.

For an over used but true example, Bruce Lee stated strongly and lived it in the 60's the issue that Dan uses and back up using Segawa, who kept it secret. Bruce Lee didn't keep it secret; in fact he pushed it as a candidate for President. He was not the originator of this CIMA philosophy. Also, B.K. Frantzis a CIMA-ist who trained with Ueshiba of Aikido had said that Ueshiba had more (I paraphrase) of an understanding and use of Chinese Internal philosophy/principle then that of anyone he had seen in Daito ryu. Frantzis trained with Ueshiba in 1960s. Ueshiba learned Datio ryu through kata and since I don't know Aikido will make the assumption he still taught and maintained kata.

Dan speaking to this old argument kata vs. no kata reflects on my personal feelings of his disenfranchisement. It is kind of a slap in the fact of those who learned kata which he uses Segawa support him and his position. Segawa is also throwing sand in the face of those arts and the sister arts who still teach kata. Which according to him knew this and he maintained teaching kata until his 90's. Then says everyone else is doing it wrong and he is right. Dan is proclaim his is an Architect because he a drawing table. He is purposely muddling the situation, and confusing people on something he has no authority to do so, for his own benefit. This isn't acceptable in any martial art.

Dan Harden
24th December 2007, 16:44
Jack .
I believe in kata training, I do it everyweek in Koryu, exhaustively so.. among other things. There is a wisdom to not using kata as well.
I don't believe in it for certain things and mores the point, perhaps not in the way you may. It is another training tool among other things.
And me helping folks has not benifited me in any way, financially or in reputation. Other than making some new friends, It has come at a loss more than a gain. there are many reading here who would not agree with you.

Sochin
24th December 2007, 17:58
Goll-eee. Miss a couple of days and you are 116 posts behind!

I started to read every post but my eyes went crossed, :(

I'll sum up my experience:

Aiki = blend, = soft = never fighting against or contesting a person's power

Internal = alignment = use of the joints not muscles for power = creating power thru the turning of the joint and expressing it thru correct alignment and root to the ground

These two terms have been confused for a very long time but have little to do with each other. A teacher may use both simultaneously but that does not mean they become the same thing.

The confusion grows because internal is so mysterious since it is hard to see what the teacher is doing inside. Chen Zhonghua (http://www.hunyuantaijiacademy.com/default.aspx) says that if a 'master' won't let you touch him, he is not teaching you the real internal system.

Internal power has lifted me up into the air and sent me back 6 or 8 feet. No way is it always "soft" or "not contesting."

Mark Murray
24th December 2007, 19:45
Also, B.K. Frantzis a CIMA-ist who trained with Ueshiba of Aikido had said that Ueshiba had more (I paraphrase) of an understanding and use of Chinese Internal philosophy/principle then that of anyone he had seen in Daito ryu. Frantzis trained with Ueshiba in 1960s. Ueshiba learned Datio ryu through kata and since I don't know Aikido will make the assumption he still taught and maintained kata.


Hi Jack,
You make a strange leap of faith here. :) If you don't know Aikido, how do you know Ueshiba learned it through kata?

If you'll do a bit of research, Ueshiba actually did solo exercises. Not only that, but some of his students complained because Ueshiba wouldn't do a technique twice. (In fact, I've read similar things about Takeda.) Somewhere on Aikido Journal, I think it's printed that Ueshiba stated something along the lines of they're (techniques) all the same when asked to do a technique again. Kind of an "aha moment" for some because if outward physical techniques are all the same to Ueshiba, then he's doing something internally. Otherwise, he'd put more emphasis on technique driven work.



I'll sum up my experience:

Aiki = blend, = soft = never fighting against or contesting a person's power



Ted, I have to disagree here. Aiki, to me, is definitely not "blending". Far from it. Matching appropriately, yes. But not blending.

IMO,
Mark

jdostie
24th December 2007, 20:00
Hi Jack,
If you'll do a bit of research, Ueshiba actually did solo exercises. Not only that, but some of his students complained because Ueshiba wouldn't do a technique twice. (In fact, I've read similar things about Takeda.) Somewhere on Aikido Journal, I think it's printed that Ueshiba stated something along the lines of they're (techniques) all the same when asked to do a technique again. Kind of an "aha moment" for some because if outward physical techniques are all the same to Ueshiba, then he's doing something internally. Otherwise, he'd put more emphasis on technique driven work.



Kondo Sensei-- I heard many times from my teacher, Takeda Tokimune, that Takeda Sokaku sensei never taught the same technique twice. Tokimune sensei told me that at the time he was teaching as his father's Representative Instructor, Sokaku would scold him for being "foolishly soft-hearted" if he taught too kindly or showed his students something more than once. My teacher often warned me, "If you teach the same technique twice, the second time your students will figure out how to defeat you with a counter-technique. Teach something different the second time."
(http://www.daito-ryu.org/history4_eng.html)

I believe this is (one) of the references you are looking for.

Dan Harden
24th December 2007, 20:19
I see it as two sides of the same coin.
What makes energy rise or send, and what creates a negative feel, a drawing in of their force? You can't pull your arms back and get it to happen can you?
What does it? What arts use it? The need for it is all over taiji, Aikido, Daito ryu, Bagau, Judo. What happens in the body to make a drawing in. How does it happen in the arms or in the body itself? What supports what to contradict the other force?
Does it happen through power, or collapsing or from turning your whole body to draw?
I say you make it happpen best through power as well, trained in the body. The more potent someone's central equilibrium is, the more disruptive it is to what comes into contact with it. If it draws in or down or pivots through the central axis the more the incoming force is managed in ways that feel magnetic. But nowhere do you have give up your central axis or move your whole body. In fact the more your central axis...remains... the more the other parts feel ghosty and draw. Further the more someone trains to remove slack, the more immediate the result is from your movement.
Where does the knowledge of this exist?
Peng jin or bouncing off is rising energy sort of like an echo down and out which can be enhanced in different ways. But who says it has to bounce off. Why not capture with it? I think the debate here is whether the means and methods to do it are the same in all these different arts or is each one a totally different thing? And is it accomplished through technique or through a trained body that can then express myriad technques at will. Do you need to repeat techniques? Can they be made up on the spot as formless as the ever changing forces and people attacking in different settings? Is it how certain higher level arts or certain sets in arts were actually formed? Is it the reason some arts have evolved so differently?
Happy holidays
Dan

Samurai Jack
24th December 2007, 22:32
Hi Jack,
You make a strange leap of faith here. :) If you don't know Aikido, how do you know Ueshiba learned it through kata?

Thanks for pointing that out, and I shall explain properly. I am familiar with Aikido, from those I know from those who practice it do say kata is involved. Some Aikido schools do and some don't I am told. I am sure Ueshiba did do solo exercises, it is my understanding of other martial arts also have their own solo training/exercises. I think it is agreed that it is a common thing, that solo training has been around for a very long time. I am sure you know what my contention is, it's the whole, speaking unauthorized /out of authority, claim jumping and fire starting things that causes confusion and misinformation, and is unnessesary. :)

I want to also correct myself and say the last post concerning this comment I made "Segawa is also throwing sand in the face of those arts and the sister arts who still teach kata." It should read Dan's use of Segawa words is also throwing sand in the face of those arts and the sister arts that teach kata. This causes a controversy, and Dan speaks (as I have delinated) out of authory.

I think Dan knows what he is doing. He seems to have a lot of experience in Koryu, and has been around many masters of such arts. Dan seems to have an axe to grind. It very much like what happened with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama (for the sake of this thread, we will assume it was not intentional), where one of Clinton's people made unauthorized comments about Obama. I think it would have been worse (egg on the face) if that Clinton staffer was not a staffer. So when Dan speaks that is not his own experience we shouldn't support it. It basically boils down to rumor presented as fact. Where is the truth in that. I don't think Dan is a bad guy, like I said I am sure you have learned from him. But, I would caution the axe he seems to want to grind (something political it seems, that I suspected early on) leads to additional mounds of misinformation and confusion- if you review the thread you will see many examples. The other thing too is that if you go back and read through Dan's old posts this is very telling. I don't think anyone one really wants to experience being part of a conflict that is trying to be started here on the net.

I now wonder if the above post by Dan is his own words and experience or something he is rephrasing and what are his intentions for doing so.

I am big on the truth, and the truth of things. I have been burned too many times not to be. That's the axe I grind. That's my angle. Hopes that helps you understand my posts.


General Interest:
There is a generally good two part article (imo) in the magazine Classical Fighting Arts recently, I believe it is issues #34 and #35 - by Harry Cook, titled "The History and Evolution of Karate-do Kata." I like the quote used in Part II. When you train in karate you must study in advance whether the application of each [move] is more useful for training or defense. Yasutsune Itosu, Ten Teachings, 1908. I also like the quote in the article "After years of practice the student begins to take moves from the kata and make practical applications...Of course, to any kata there can be many variations in the bunkai. It is up to the advanced student to explore these possibilities. " Takayoshi Nagamine.

Also Allan Ruddock recounts his experiences with O-Sensei in Aikido Memoirs (two part article). Ruddock wrote something I found interesting, "...I don't think O-Sensei actually taught anyone, anything in our western understanding of the word." And Ruddock also said, "...aikido cannot be learned by numbers or a "structured" way.
FWIW.

Jeff Cook
25th December 2007, 01:31
Quote:
Kondo Sensei-- I heard many times from my teacher, Takeda Tokimune, that Takeda Sokaku sensei never taught the same technique twice. Tokimune sensei told me that at the time he was teaching as his father's Representative Instructor, Sokaku would scold him for being "foolishly soft-hearted" if he taught too kindly or showed his students something more than once. My teacher often warned me, "If you teach the same technique twice, the second time your students will figure out how to defeat you with a counter-technique. Teach something different the second time."
(http://www.daito-ryu.org/history4_eng.html)
I believe this is (one) of the references you are looking for./end quote

I think there is something fundamentally wrong with ANY system of instruction - no matter how venerated - where the founders and masters take this extremely poor attitude towards "instruction." I think it is deplorable. I also believe Dan when he says that masters have purposely withheld essential "internal" or "aiki" instruction from their so-called students.

This demonstrates a dishonorable personality trait, a lack of confidence in one's abilities, and it cheats the students out of something they have paid for, whether it be through monetary compensation and/or devotion and loyalty towards the instructor(s).

Masters who do this obviously are not loyal towards their students. I do not view these people as "masters" - not even close. I think they are despicable.

Jeff Cook

Mark Murray
25th December 2007, 02:12
Thanks for pointing that out, and I shall explain properly. I am familiar with Aikido, from those I know from those who practice it do say kata is involved. Some Aikido schools do and some don't I am told. I am sure Ueshiba did do solo exercises, it is my understanding of other martial arts also have their own solo training/exercises. I think it is agreed that it is a common thing, that solo training has been around for a very long time. I am sure you know what my contention is, it's the whole, speaking unauthorized /out of authority, claim jumping and fire starting things that causes confusion and misinformation, and is unnessesary. :)


Jack,
Trying to put this nicely. But, reread what you just posted above. So, you don't do aikido, you aren't an authority on aikido, and you are going by what friends have told you. I imagine that it's third hand information at times, too. So, that last sentence of yours is justly applied to what you just said about aikido. See what I mean?

Going just a bit further along those logical lines. You don't have authority in Daito ryu (I don't either). Not only that, but I can't find anywhere on your posts where you've done research on Dan's background. And there is a whole lot of it out there on the Internet (sorry, Dan, but there is.) So, it's kind of hard to see you determine if Dan is or is not speaking from a position of authority. Hence, how can you authoritatively write that Dan is not speaking from authority or providing misinformation? In other words, you're speaking out of authority about someone's potential claim to authority.

See what I mean?

Mark

Dan Harden
25th December 2007, 02:47
Fellas
I just sat down after putting gifts together and wrapping, only to read more divisive commentary. Prarticularly from Jack.
No one is an authority...ok... so lets drop it already.
How about we reserve our comments to actual training and leave DR out of it alltogether.
Forget it.
Let those who think its only here and its only there and its only learned one way and no one can know anything unless they are a master of something or other for thirty years be happy.
Mark, you have been witness to a myriad of skills done at the dojo. You have also felt unusual power. You have also felt it from Mike and from Rob. So, does it really matter what ...it...is? I'd bet no. I thnk the important thing is that it can be learned by just about anyone. And it can be.
Five years from now people will be asking you who the hell you are and what the hell are you doing.
That's all that matters. Make you a better you.

It's Christmas already.
Dan

Dan Harden
25th December 2007, 03:34
You know it calls to mind Ikeda, where did he go to learn it. To Ushiro...a karate guy. And there you have Ikeda, and a whole bunch of his students realizing that this is improving their...aikido. While the neutrality of it, the profound presence it creates is simply universal to improving all the arts... people aren't going to get it till they feel it.

Mark, you’ve seen, met and read too many just like this guy here who said all the same stuff, well maybe worse eh? So, far I think a few hundred have felt it would you say that’s about right? With Europe, Japan, Mass, D.C.and Seattle?
So far I think it’s a 100% affirmation that is it valuable, very unusual and an asset to any art. So, it’s growing and folks are still getting out there to find this training and realizing we have been had, that there is a truth that has been held from many that they can at least try to learn if someone gives them a chance…without waiting ten years.
I think in the long run it’s going to get dicey for some teachers though, as they are appearing weaker and more vulnerable to folks who felt this in those who can do it. I heard from one guy who went to a seminar with a big gun and then went back three times, he couldn’t believe how weak the big gun teacher felt after feeling a couple of nobodies who train this way. It’s going to get harder to show your stuff to men training this way in a few more years. The participants are going to have more of…it… than many teachers have bargained for or thought possible in these shorter time frames. Maybe they will start to trust and begin teaching in a more straight forward way. We know we have some Shihan and several mid-level teachers training this way now, and a Koryu Menkyo. This year I met a MMA guy on the circuit who wants to train it as well. Things may be improving in these crazy arts. You felt Rob after only three years. You felt my guys and gals. Imagine them and the others out there training 5 years from now? Ouch.

Happy holidays
Dan

Samurai Jack
25th December 2007, 04:48
Jack,
I can't find anywhere on your posts where you've done research on Dan's background. And there is a whole lot of it out there on the Internet (sorry, Dan, but there is.) So, it's kind of hard to see you determine if Dan is or is not speaking from a position of authority. Hence, how can you authoritatively write that Dan is not speaking from authority or providing misinformation? In other words, you're speaking out of authority about someone's potential claim to authority.

See what I mean?

Mark


It is pretty clear you support Dan. And feel the need to justify him. The problem is which I and several people have has been made clear has been stated. I just hope your leap of faith is a good one.

See, I backed Dan once, and foolishly may I add as he attacked me without reason.
In a thread here http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=35461 I failed to understand Jim Sorrentino's purpose for asking about Dan. This is the mistake refer to that I made etc. I then came across the Aikido boards where I found out about Dan's attack on Aikido. When someone attacks another art as he did it is clearly for a purpose. Dan didn't make many friends. I then realized that I chimed in a thread here that was basically a hornets' nest. I didn't get stung, no judgment at this point for either side, a red flag to stay clear.

Then I asked Dan a question. His response was to attack me. I thought it was odd. Clearly a defensive maneuver for someone with something to hide, an agenda, and alike. I went back and started to read through the thread again more carefully, and the ones on the Aikido board, a pattern began to emerge. This indicatedsomething was wrong , like the saying goes something smellsrotten in Denmark. This guy Dan is too well schooled and educated in the arts not to be up to something.

Then as the thread continued I realized it was carry over from the Aikido boards, but this time it was an attack on those in the aiki jujitsu arts that practice kata. Dan was using quotes from the book and speaking (in JMA as I am aware of) on authority of a master and an art he has never experienced, as if he experienced it. This angle of Dan's does confuse people and is misleading and misrepresenting. After several exchanges with him, researching his posting on here and Aikido boards, I began to realize he was self-promoting. He set himself up, no seminars, rejecting people etc. very much like a traditional koryu. Accepting people to show or work with he essentially hand picks, people who wouldn't challenge what he said on the net. This is seen over and over again.

Then as time went on I see that he has an axe to grind. Of imo is he is disenfranchised, and has a political axe to grind and uses what ever he can find (i.e. the book he quotes from) to support his agenda. Among other things I mentioned and criticized him for. All red flags.

If Dan didn't have an agenda, and an axe to grind he would keep to himself and not go around attacking other people and other arts in favor of his views on the net. I guess he didn't get into the club or something? He has put allot of time and effort into telling people he knows better and they suck. And has found a source he wrongly uses to help him. Dan made his bed.

If you don't agree with me, I will not take it personally. In fact, I understand. And it is admirable you will stand up for Dan. I don't know how well you know him or how many times you train with him. But that is your business. I will not tell you that you suck or attack you for question I don't like.

Personally, I think it is time to end this for me. Dan is an individual who is bent on grinding that axe, starting fires, burning bridges and stomping on toes, confusing and misinforming people as he goes. And proclaiming he has the answers that really come from others.

Dan Harden
25th December 2007, 05:13
Dan is an individual who is bent on grinding that axe, starting fires, burning bridges and stomping on toes, confusing and misinforming people as he goes. And proclaiming he has the answers that really come from others.

And opening my home to people and going out of my way to truly help where I can, face to face and hands-on with (my own words and methods, Jack) actual things that work for people and get them results and making many friends among ...those....people you claim I attack. Really Jack, in the kindest way I can say it "You're over your head." Your retorts lack cohesion.
As for Mark, well he was among the naysayers, and it was agreed he would come up here to ...er...meet me.. It did not start out as any sort of friendship. Like everyone who has, he decided he liked what he felt and decided to train. And we ended up...as friends. I have many interesting and very well informed friends, Jack. Many of us here have known each other in one form or another for many years. You would do well too lighten up a bit. If you're angry, try forgving a little, if you don't know something and cannot understand some of the conversation ask privately. In any event your not coming across too well. Try relaxing a little. This is nothing to make enemies over.
Happy holidays
Dan

Tom H.
25th December 2007, 05:16
I've been lurking because I'm still nobody, but I thought I'd throw in a few cents so they can get recorded on the internet for me or someone to read in five years...

I thnk the important thing is that it can be learned by just about anyone. And it can be.When I started about a year ago, after seeing Mike again in Austin, I made the conscious decision that if I couldn't make progress with a year of working hard, I would give up, because I didn't know if I could be "anyone" or not. It's been just about a year, and I'm beginning to get heavy and stay mobile under stress without dropping all structure. I can't stress enough how inexperienced, clueless, and disconnected I have been. Once I burn in the good attributes, (24 months? 36 months? not too far off, plateauing excepted) I'm eager to get out and meet people to test myself. Heck, maybe I'll even take up a martial art :-P


... people aren't going to get it till they feel it. Amen to that. The sucky point is that it's about 1000 times easier to know the concepts and talk about them than it is to exhibit them in my body. And it's 501 times easier to not even realize I'm not doing what I say I think I'm doing. Then, after all, it turns out that a lot of it is not very complicated, just hard.

Merry Christmas Everyone,
Tom

Samurai Jack
25th December 2007, 05:26
If Dan is as good as he says he is, and proves it, something that might be possible, then have an open seminar to all those he insulted and said suck. If you are going to say it, then prove it. It is only fair. I don't mean where 100+ guys attack him, and beat the crapola out of him. Though they have cause to. But rather demonstrate and back it up technically why they suck. And what will improve them. Have him show what made Segawa great, what improved Segawa's students on those Dan criticized so harshly, and not to just a those hand-picked. In all fairness have Dan face the music. As the saying goes, either put up or shut up. And if he does and comes out on top, then he can tell the whole world why their arts suck. Rather then doing what he is doing now.

Btw, he could also show his skills and knowledge on Youtube. Explaining step by step why he has knowledge that only a few have and why everyone else sucks. We have Youtube now, we don't need to prove things only in type anymore. No excuses anymore. No more wars of words. Let's cowboy up and get...'er done!


I say this because I am not ruling out Dan being as good as he says he is. I want to see it. Why, well because a key board doesn't qualify a person's martial arts skill, only his typing skill. :laugh:

Samurai Jack
25th December 2007, 05:49
Dan, I am not angry, though a hell of alot of other people are at you. I just feel you got issues.

I quote you"...opening my home to people and going out of my way to truly help where I can, face to face and hands-on with (my own words and methods, Jack) actual things that work for people and get them results and making many friends among ...those....people you claim I attack." Let me point you to http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10287 and http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=35461 for starters am sure there are other threads out there besides those and this one. You don't seem to be very realistic in your preceptions.

So when are you going to do a seminar, go out of your way to truly help, where it is face to face and hands on, where you can make friends, as well as doing Youtube?

Dan Harden
25th December 2007, 06:03
Er...Good choice, Jack. those threads led many guys here from all over to do the very thing you are bitching about...men I never met or heard of...including Mark Murry here to test me. So far its been a whole bunch of ...those...folks under recognized Shihan, who didn't know me Jack. They all keep coming back to train.
Three of them are on this thread with many others reading, you idiot.

The only thing funnier than your choice of threads is that you haven't a clue about what happened...after. To quote you "I put up...they shut up"...in spades.
Then they went to meet others who do this stuff too. Its not just me Jack. This information is known, just apparently not by you.
You poor, poor, sap.
Oh that was rich.
Step on your dick much?
Jack, It's better to keep silent and be thought a fool, then to type...and remove all doubt.
Dan

Dan Harden
25th December 2007, 06:25
Well after that comical interlude, back to real discussion.
Tom,
Amen back at ya.
I think one of toughest aspects with talking about this with so many martial artists is ...they all think they know.:D then when you put your hands on them its...blech! Slack, delay, and little to no connection and the "lightness of being' reveals itself, where you can overcome much of what they try to do. There are many guys who "know" sooo much, and who suuuuck soo bad. Is the issue their lack of knowledge? Yes
Whhhaat?
Your knowledge isn't in your head...it's in your body. From what I have seen a couple of things are obvious. Either teachers are picking wrong students to impart things to, or what they are teaching doesn't work too well. The real question is whether that is by choice, as Jeff pointed out, or due to lack of skill on their part. I was with a bagua lineage holder who knew just about anything you'd care to know about internal work. Yet, he truly had nothing. You could toss him atound with impunity. Was what he knew bad information? No!
He just didn't know, that he-really-didn't know, what he knew.

We can't be lazy, we have to burn it in daily. Once your body starts to connect it needs to be coaxed and reminded, and new windows will open up and other training can be added.
Just about every fellla has lifted weights in cycles and knows you "Go soft, if you slack off. So it is with internal training. The connections need to be trained and worked to be, in-shape. Slack can only be eliminated through attention to intention. permanent and automatic paths can only come though constant attention. Anyway, you're only going to improve. It isn't questionable like some of the training in these crazy arts. You just will. It is worth noting that overtime you can take-off and invent your own training through what you have gained. More and more discoveries happen as your body connects. It talks to you, you lead it.

Josh Reyer
25th December 2007, 08:15
Quote:
I think there is something fundamentally wrong with ANY system of instruction - no matter how venerated - where the founders and masters take this extremely poor attitude towards "instruction." I think it is deplorable. I also believe Dan when he says that masters have purposely withheld essential "internal" or "aiki" instruction from their so-called students.

This demonstrates a dishonorable personality trait, a lack of confidence in one's abilities, and it cheats the students out of something they have paid for, whether it be through monetary compensation and/or devotion and loyalty towards the instructor(s).

Masters who do this obviously are not loyal towards their students. I do not view these people as "masters" - not even close. I think they are despicable.

Jeff Cook

Jeff, I highly recommend this series of columns by Professor Peter Goldsbury.

Part One (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12008&highlight=transmission)
Part Two (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12340&highlight=transmission)
Part Three (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12549&highlight=transmission)

Whether the style of "instruction" is for you or not (and Lord knows I have issues with the legacy of this pedagogy on aikido today), there are certain cultural assumptions inherent in it. IMO, it does no good to write it off as despicable, merely because it doesn't fit our Western conception of "instruction". That said, of course I think it would be highly inappropriate for a Western instructor to adopt this pedagogy with Western students. But in Japan? Well, they put corn on pizza over here.

Jeff Cook
25th December 2007, 14:00
Josh, thanks. I don't care for tofu on my pizza either. :laugh: I remember how proud my hosts were when they served us "pizza" in Japan earlier this year. It took tremendous effort on my part to nod approvingly and keep smiling as I was choking down their version of "pizza."

Let me refine my earlier comment. My comment was inspired by the quote in my post. Note that the reason for teaching that way was not because it is the traditional, correct way to teach. The reason was so the students would not be able to figure out a counter, and thus "defeat" the master. I think that line of reasoning is despicable, not necessarily the method of instruction, but the reasoning behind it.

Jeff Cook

Jeff Cook
25th December 2007, 14:03
Dan, did you get my PM I sent a few days ago?

Jeff Cook

Finny
26th December 2007, 03:31
Jack, you continue to stuff your feet (both of them) further and further into your mouth.

Dan DOES have experience in Daito Ryu. You don't.

You have absolutely no credibility here - your posts are barely comprehensible, and you continually attack Dan like a petulant child throwing a tantrum.

Get the message, please.

Stop posting - period. Read and learn a bit. Stop jumping to wild conclusions, and filling in the blanks in your own knowlege with assumptions.

You have NEVER made a positive contribution to either this thread, or the forum, as far as I can see, and yet you seem to think you are in a position to appoint yourself quasi-moderator, and question people's agendas and experience (when most here already know these)

I really hate posting like this, especially when I am, for all intents and purposes a child piping up among men, but you really don't seem to take the point.

Samurai Jack
26th December 2007, 07:04
Ignoring the above ????? who got a lump of coal for X-mass. I guess human growth hormones are legal down under, HGH bad voodoo. Joke, how do you make a hormone-since this is form isn't only read by adult and the punch like is PG-13 PM for the punch line.

What Dan is espousing is fundamental to CIMA arts. Not that CIMA are better then any other, it is simply in terms information in CIMA is very available.

What I am saying to the sane and civilized if they choose to expand upon further what Dan is saying- in his most charming post. The info is out there, fæðms (see fathoms Wikipedia) everywhere to those who want it. All the martial arts secrets are out there nothing is secret or can't be known. There isn't just one person who has knowledge. It isn't just one person who has the answers.

Regardless of anyone's personal opinions of those I am going to list, their relevance is that they demonstrate the information is out there.

I recommend reading Bruce Lee. I hate using Bruce Lee as an example, but what he did was to explain the Chinese martial arts philosophy (principles included) in a more western platform to be understood by us westerners.

My personal suggestion more relevant to today, is to watch on DVD or Youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuP6cApKAD8 , and read Tim Cartmell. Very insightful, no non-sense and he knows what he is talking about, and he is legit CIMA and MMA. Also, the main books published concerning CIMA, or even better a Chinese instructor. Figure this there are millions of Chinese around the world who practice these arts. Even millions more martial artists in Hong Kong, and main land China, so the odds of you getting a knowledgeable instructor is pretty good. They are much more open then as late as 1970s.

Books for example, though there are hundreds more, try, Study of Taijiquan by Sun Lutang, Xing Yi Quan Xue: The Study of Form-Mind Boxing by Sun Lu Tang, The Essence and Applications of Taijiquan by Yang Chengfu, Combat Techniques of Taiji, Xingyi, and Bagua by Lu Shengli. Xingyi Boxing Manual: Hebei Style's Five Principles and Seven Words.

Since the above books are slow reading you can try, try Nei Jia Quan: Internal Martial Arts Teachers of Tai Ji Quan, Xing Yi Quan, and Ba Gua Zhang. And for a faster read try Bruce Kumar Frantizis. Frantizis, an Aikidoist as well, is the one who said Ueshiba of Aikido mastered CIMA philosophy/principles applied.

I am sure what Dan speaks of is also in aiki arts masters' books or DVDs.


FWIW, Tim Cartmell demonstrates clearly here a Bagua throw. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5f26JAtKZtw&feature=related

FWIW Something interesting:

What I find interesting in Ueshiba's book, "Budo Training in Aikido" translated by Larry E. Bieri and Seiko Mabuchi under the chapter "The Secret Teachings of Budo (Poems)" on page 17, #27
Embody 'Yang' in your right hand
Turn the left into 'Ying'
Then guide your foe.

Possibly, Ueshiba did body conditioning via weapons training ?

I am just saying no one is telling anyone anything new (we archive everything), that isn't already written about, or anything that can't be found out. If you don't know something, no worries, it just a matter of time and recourses. Thousands of in a myriad of terms etc. have said it all there is to say about martial arts. It’s just a matter of a delivery system. Also there isn't just one bagua player, there are thousands and thousand of them. And technology is bringing them closer and closer together at a rapid rate. Technology (spreading the word) also creates interest and more and more people are trying and become good at bagua. Just like what happened with BJJ, the more people exposed the greater the interest, thus the greater the fighter pool for UFC. The greater the fighter pool a greater number of better fighters, like Couture, Huges, Liddell, Shamrock etc. then compared to the first UFCs. It was easy pickin's for Gracie.

We can't judge an art on one personal experience or one account which names are not given- there is two sides to every story. It isn't prudent to take one side of the story. The smart martial artist does the homework, digs deeper to find the truth.

All I am saying is there are no hidden secrets, don't judge the validity or rarity of something on one account. The CIMA knowledge is out there and it ain't hard to find, unless you think you can shoot electricity out of the tips of your fingers! One of the greatest secrets go martial arts success is the same as most everything else. Music has a saying for it, practice makes perfect. Though perfect doesn’t mean great, and it doesn’t guarantee a virtuoso. Caution: just because someone verbally recycles information (which is an occurrence these days) doesn’t make them Muhammad Ali. What are those old saying about talk is cheap, and about teaching a man to fish. There is allot of qualified people out there with the correct and proper knowledge who are accessible in person, or in book in CIMA. :)

Dan Harden
26th December 2007, 17:44
Dan, did you get my PM I sent a few days ago?

Jeff Cook

Hi Jeff
I got it. I'll send something later. I'm trying to put something together for Ricky as well.
I have to tell ya that descriptions are almost a waste of time. Now that I am trying to show this stuff long distance- the one thing that remains a constant is that folks who train here, or the more they visit, the faster they get it, from training at home. It can be learned long distance since most of the work is your own. Which makes more sense out of the fact that certain arts were taught by “visiting teachers,” then the students trained for long periods away from them. You are shown what to do, and why and how it works

By the way I don't know ICMA, other than in a thread title, although in some strange, eery manifestation, I could meet a master level teacher, and do what I do and have him put his hands all over my body while I was doing it, and then have him invite me to come live and train with him in China “to share.” As I stated many times, others know this stuff too, I am sure, there are guys out there way better then me. I say it to point out, that I had to learn the truth, that this power, and the method to develop it- is NOT proprietary to single arts, Japanese, Chinese, or otherwise. It’s just held back in several arts. To re-state it, this same Chinese teacher for some –strange reason-could do er…waza… on two of Sagawa’s students, and they were stunned that he was doing…Daito ryu Aiki! And then asked him to teach them. How did that happen? Because the real power or essence is essentially trained the same way. Resulting ideally in the same connected body.

It’s very romantic and sweet to think your teacher “discovered” a unique way to move the body, I once thought so too. However, I think more and more men are going to discover it simply isn’t true. The one true secret, if you want to call it that, is that there are stunningly effective ways to train the body that have nothing at all to with martial arts, yet is at the core of the best of them.
Trying to “find” the correct way to connect the body, and strengthen the connections to receive, and transfer load, and manipulate it…. by training a kata… specifically a single move, single step…stop- kata is slow, inefficient, and unnecessary to training the body. Actually, I think it can be counterproductive. And being indoctrinated into “taking ukemi” that way can be disastrous to live movement. There isn’t any need to seize-up, and be thrown and it is far better to train men specifically how to stop that type of capturing energy from working on them, then to teach them to receive it, in the first place. It makes a great show, however, the body can and should be trained to not be thrown and to manipulate energy with manipulated energy in their own body with no one falling down or being taken down without a contest. It’s one area the CMA have a leg up on the JMA.
Anyway, moving, while under load and under attack, and being able to capture force and deliver power, knock out power, is best trained in solo work then in live movement. And that is two completely different topics. Since the majority of most martial artists in the world are involved in doing kata…that isn’t going to go over very well. We see the same in Karate, not coincidentally mostly a Chinese source- to develop solo training to train the body, outside of Kata.



Below is a post on Aikiweb, concerning kata training. It is the opinion of a Uechi ryu fellow who came to train after the debates there.
About Kata…….


Mr.____________________ wrote:
What I take issue with is your assertion in post #35 that "Learning it though Kata is the source........... of all the problems."

****************
To which Murray replied
Hello Mr. _________________

Unfortunately, having a background in Uechi Ryu, too (in the Shohei Ryu line, but having broad experience to the other two lines, plus Gushi Sensei's interpretation), I would have to agree with Dan. But that's because I've been on the receiving end of what he does. Either one of you can correct me, of course, but I think your interpretation of kata is slightly different than his. I don't think Dan thinks of kata as just a single person form (as in the Chinese or Okinawan conception of it), but rather any method of prescribed movement. Even where that prescribed movement/form might allow for a varied range of responses between an attacker and defender. In other words, any encounter between two people that is not fully resistive, and does not allow for free-form attack can be considered a kata. In that light, aikido as it is practiced today is a kata based art. Solo kata, in this light, is equally as worthless. Unless, that is, it is an exercise that works the development of "internal" physical ability. Not as a means of combative visualization that serves to develop technique.
Although I have great respect for good Uechi Ryu, I wouldn't bother to use it as a reference for what Dan is doing. What I'm about to write could tarnish me as either highly arrogant, or extremely stupid, but here goes: none of what Dan is doing is found in UR today. At least not in 99.9% of what I've experienced. Subjective? Of course. But still true (I had a good friend who could do some of the things that Dan does, but he only "stumbled" into most of it by focusing solely on sanchin. One of the best I've ever seen, he left as a sandan because what he was doing didn't fit in within the UR paradigm), from my experience. What Dan's doing just isn't taught in the art today. Oh, I think it was - once. There's a reason Uechi Kanbun spent three or more years learning sanchin. But I think it died out with him. It's still a highly effective art, but it's not internal. I would say the same thing about aikido, but my experience there isn't as wide.
I've rambled on, and I apologize if this is too off-topic (although I'm starting to see that the "secret" of aikido probably happens to be the "secret" of Uechi Ryu, too...or judo, or kendo, etc). But I would once again strongly encourage you to make the trip up to MA. It's fairly evident that you and Dan are talking about two entirely different paradigms. You don't have to take it from me, because I know you know others who have made the trip up to meet Dan. But enough of us have traveled up there and have had our collective assumptions blown out of the water by the experience - no matter what art we were coming from - that you should give it strong consideration…..snip.

snip...from separate reply later. and to discuss the facts that it is teachable...for many if not most of us.
...Second, and the real reason I wanted to write this, is the fact that it was his students who were getting us to do this and that, as well as Dan. Yes, of course Dan was there teaching, and getting hands on - literally - but his crew took turns with each and every person there for lengthy periods of time, and gave of themselves quite openly. (Again, no accolades, no scrolls, no acclaim.) What this demonstrates to me is the fact that, because his students were so effective in imparting this work to us (the well-intentioned, but painfully oblivious), it proves that it is all replicable. No, it is not easy, and nobody was moving 310lbs grapplers when said grapplers didn't want to be moved. But everyone there learning was able to demonstrate the effects of sound structure and power transfer because of a systematic method of instruction. Did I fly up the staircase in a blur of motion to evade my attackers? Dan says that's lesson number 43, but no. (Ron did, if I'm not mistaken...or maybe he just really had to go use the can). We all did, however do things - minor things - that were jaw-dropping to us, and things that most of us have not felt from the majority of ten or even fifteen year students in other arts. Okay, I'm being diplomatic: feel free to read that as twenty or thirty year students. Take from that what you will.
But there should be no misunderstanding that any of these skills are flukes of genius, or inaccessible to mere mortals. They're real, they're replicable, and they're hard, hard work.
[I'm going to qualify this yet again: *none* of us there were able to do what Dan or his students can do in a practical, workable manner. If you have to crawl before you can walk, then all of us there were able to wiggle our toes by the end of the day. Maybe flex an ankle once or twice. But we felt what could be done, and were shown the building blocks. And, again, what little we could do was lightyears ahead of what most of could do prior to walking in the door.]

Sincerely,
Murray McPherson


Everyone can and will continue to happily pursue what they will from their “Masters” in these body arts, which I differentiate from weapons arts. Since I have trained with some seriously indoctrinated and deeply initiated…teachers, all I will say is “Good luck with that.”
If your power hasn’t gone through the roof in 5 years, power demonstrated clearly outside of your art, and recognized instantly as unusual..Your teachers either don’t know how to teach, or they ain’t teaching…you.
Cheers
Dan

.

Thomas_Campbell
26th December 2007, 20:38
[snip]
What Dan is espousing is fundamental to CIMA arts. Not that CIMA are better then any other, it is simply in terms information in CIMA is very available.

What I am saying to the sane and civilized if they choose to expand upon further what Dan is saying- in his most charming post. The info is out there, fæðms (see fathoms Wikipedia) everywhere to those who want it. All the martial arts secrets are out there nothing is secret or can't be known. There isn't just one person who has knowledge. It isn't just one person who has the answers.

Regardless of anyone's personal opinions of those I am going to list, their relevance is that they demonstrate the information is out there.

I recommend reading Bruce Lee. I hate using Bruce Lee as an example, but what he did was to explain the Chinese martial arts philosophy (principles included) in a more western platform to be understood by us westerners.

My personal suggestion more relevant to today, is to watch on DVD or Youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuP6cApKAD8 , and read Tim Cartmell. Very insightful, no non-sense and he knows what he is talking about, and he is legit CIMA and MMA. [snip]
Books for example, though there are hundreds more, try, Study of Taijiquan by Sun Lutang, Xing Yi Quan Xue: The Study of Form-Mind Boxing by Sun Lu Tang, The Essence and Applications of Taijiquan by Yang Chengfu, Combat Techniques of Taiji, Xingyi, and Bagua by Lu Shengli. Xingyi Boxing Manual: Hebei Style's Five Principles and Seven Words.

Since the above books are slow reading you can try, try Nei Jia Quan: Internal Martial Arts Teachers of Tai Ji Quan, Xing Yi Quan, and Ba Gua Zhang. And for a faster read try Bruce Kumar Frantizis. Frantizis, an Aikidoist as well, is the one who said Ueshiba of Aikido mastered CIMA philosophy/principles applied.

I am sure what Dan speaks of is also in aiki arts masters' books or DVDs.


[snip] The smart martial artist does the homework, digs deeper to find the truth.

[snip]

Jack,

You've certainly done a lot of reading and watching video footage. That is good as far as it goes, but is no substitute for--and in fact can lead the inexperienced away from--the proprioceptive understanding and "how-to" essential to developing the kind of skills that Dan Harden is attempting to describe. There is a very good reason why Dan will not go into specific verbal descriptions here, or post video footage on Youtube . . . and it's not necessarily because he's being secretive and trying to drum up business (he doesn't earn a living from this). It's because you can't understand or fairly evaluate what skill is being demonstrated without hands-on experience . . . literally hands-on. You can't from simply reading about the skills, and most definitely you can't from simply watching, even watching live (let alone from watching a clip on Youtube). You won't really understand it, and might dismiss such a skill demonstration as fake. Once you experience it, though, you will fully appreciate its visceral reality.

My own background is primarily with Chinese internal martial arts, mostly taijiquan. The little aikido, karate and jujutsu I've trained does not qualify me to speak from the perspective of Japanese martial arts training. However, I can speak with some credibility about what is openly or commonly taught in CIMA training (or Chinese martial arts training generally, since "internal" is an ambiguous and controversial label that is more accurately applied to specific training practices rather than entire martial arts). I've made a close study of the way in which knowledge and skills are transmitted in the arts I've practiced, since such transmission is part of the interest MA practice holds for me.

The real core skills of body/mind usage in CIMAs come from the jibengong, or work/practice on basics. The solo and partner forms are just the vessels into which the gong is poured, techniques just particular expressions of movement reflecting the gongfu of the exponent.

Depending on the CMA system, some jibengong practices may be taught openly, and others may be closely guarded and shared only with bairumen ("inside the door/gate" disciples). Traditional CIMAs can be as fragmented in their teaching and as jealously held as koryu arts.

There is a saying in Chinese martial arts (attributed by some to Kongtze or Confucius), about the teacher showing the student one corner of the handkerchief and letting him/her find the other three on their own. The sorts of skills that Dan describes are not commonly taught, and are rare even among accomplished teachers. I've felt a number of famous and highly-skilled CIMA practitioners (famous and highly-skilled are not always the same thing), who are not able to demonstrate the sorts of things that Dan writes about--even with their own students. There are others who can demonstrate at least some of the skills--but their own experienced students cannot.

One of the only times I personally experienced some of the skills that Dan writes about was in a seminar with Akuzawa Minoru. Akuzawa demonstrated to illustrate specifically how certain of his exercises trained particular internal connections and skills. Akuzawa's skill is impressive, and he teaches openly and systematically. I have not had the opportunity to feel Dan directly. But according to people who have met and worked with Dan personally as well as with Akuzawa (including one of Dan's koryu brothers), Ark and Dan share the same basic training paradigm (emphasizing solo tanren) and the basic exercises they teach seem to aim at cultivating many of the same basic internal connections and usage skills. The basic difference is that Ark openly teaches and would eventually like to be able to support himself teaching his methods, whereas these skills are just a personal interest of Dan's and the teaching he does is more along the lines of introducing a few people to these skills and making friends along the way (the latter statement is, again, based on what people who have worked with Dan say as well as his own writing).

I'm also personally familiar with all of the sources you mentioned in your post quoted above. I'm not sure the example of Bruce Lee supports your position; a few of his direct students taught, or used to teach, up in this area, and they do not exhibit the range of internal skills Dan writes about. The one exception might be the "one-inch" or "no-inch" punch, which I would agree is a known skill, where the specific training methods are openly available. But being able to produce that kind of power from any part of the body in close contact, without overt wind-up/compression, is not at all common and not something Bruce Lee demonstrated. Additionally, there is the set of skills involving neutralization and return of jin/energy, that Bruce Lee did not appear to have demonstrated or written about in any detail. Whether he had such skills is a possibility now but beside the point, since he is (lamentably) dead now, and his students do not appear to be demonstrating or teaching such skills.

I've had some limited opportunities to work with Tim Cartmell directly, both one-on-one and in seminar settings, and I have felt him demonstrate particular aspects of the skills that Dan writes about. [Note: I am not claiming to be a student of Tim Cartmell's, but have worked enough with him to recognize that he is a gentleman, a superlative teacher and a skilled martial artist] Tim has an intensive training and physical conditioning regimen of his own, in addition to the basics/jibengong that he shows his Shen Wu students in class. Tim gleaned some of his internal skills directly from his teachers, but much if not most of it is what he's figured out and trained on his own. Tim is the one who first made it clear to me that the jibengong are the real jewels of any CIMA, and that they are not always part of the public curriculum.

None of the books you've cited detail specifically the "how-to" for becoming aware of, and then cultivating, the internal connections and usage skills (simple proprioceptive awareness of internal connections, or lack thereof, is the too-often-overlooked first step in this kind of training). In my experience with the Chinese internal martial arts, these internal skills simply cannot be learned and trained without hands-on experience with someone who will openly demonstrate them. That appears to be an essential aspect of authentic "transmission," whether in a lineage or in more informal "exchanges" of skills of the sort that Ueshiba Morihei (for example) engaged in.

And even with that kind of hands-on experience, the slow, tedious, difficult process of solo training, reflection, adjustment and adaptation is an absolute necessity.

That's just my personal opinion and experience. I just thought that my CIMA background might provide some useful perspective.

To a certain extent, it's good to challenge and discuss these kinds of things online. Everyone can benefit from a civil discussion. I never would have encountered Aunkai and Akuzawa if Rob John hadn't come onto this forum and others talking about his training methods. And I've learned from what Dan wrote in response to your comments, Jack. I'd just hope that the dialogue can continue in a less inflammatory manner, rather than spiralling down the Internet toilet as these threads too often do.

Thank you to everyone for their contributions to this thread.

Samurai Jack
26th December 2007, 22:17
Jack,

The sorts of skills that Dan describes are not commonly taught, and are rare even among accomplished teachers. I've felt a number of famous and highly-skilled CIMA practitioners (famous and highly-skilled are not always the same thing), who are not able to demonstrate the sorts of things that Dan writes about--even with their own students. There are others who can demonstrate at least some of the skills--but their own experienced students cannot.



I disagree, otherwise Dan would be the only one in the world talking about it. Yes, famous and highly-skilled I agree is different. Just as those who very well don't do it so well. But, I wasn't getting into that. That is another topic. I am talking about all the information here being espoused is already out there in plain sight. And it has been for decades in volumes. :)


What I cited is just a place to start with examples of the bulk of knowledge out there people can access. Point is you simply can get info other then what is being posted from a variety of sources if you look and are easily accessible. Like you said, you had access to Cartmell. Cartmell is well respected and skilled.

You don't have to be dependant from someone on a pulpit, or become fanatical because they provided information that someone has not yet found. I find this dangerous because that someone can become a Piped Piper. We all know that to avoid this is to develop independence and autonomy. More clearly, independence is found through referencing other sources and gapping cultural bridges. Cultural gaps often inhibit and make people dependent, as what I have seen, they become narrow in scope. For example, western sports has the martial arts CIMA or CEMA philosophy/principles, and secrets. That is understanding eastern martial arts though western sport. Take a eastern martial arts principle, and you will find it in western sports, is all I am saying. Those of us who have or do both see this early on. You don’t have to be dependent on one person delivering information that is already out there, is my point.

I am not telling anyone anything, I am not interested in people looking at me as an authority, or that I have the answers, I don't need to my ego feed, I don't feel the need to build an empire. I am only passing on that the information is out there. It is highly accessible, either written by masters or accessible by experiencing masters. And some people figure it on their own and put it all together, but like the Japanese saying goes there are many paths to the top of the mountain. Again the point of my post was a needle on a compass pointing to a different and more indepent direction. Think of it as an alternative. :)

Jeff Cook
26th December 2007, 23:28
Dan, thanks! Am greatly looking forward to it. Hope to meet you someday too.

Jeff Cook

Samurai Jack
27th December 2007, 05:39
"...a fighter can condition his body to go hard certain rounds, then to coast certain rounds."
Muhammad Ali

Samurai Jack
27th December 2007, 05:48
"Our intelligence is imperfect, surely, and newly arisen; the ease with which it can be sweet-talked, overwhelmed, or subverted by other hardwired propensities -- sometimes themselves disguised as the cool light of reason -- is worrisome."
Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan, 1992

Samurai Jack
27th December 2007, 06:06
"There are no shortcuts to any place worth going."
Beverly Sills

"It is only through work and strife that either nation or individual moves on to greatness. The great man is always the man of mighty effort, and usually the man whom grinding need has trained to mighty effort."
Theodore Roosevelt, in a speech about Grant, delivered at Galena, Illinois, April 27, 1900

"Spirit...has fifty times the strength and staying power of brawn and muscle."
Unknown

"Continuous effort -- not strength or intelligence -- is the key to unlocking our potential."
Liane Cardes

"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity."
George S. Patton, War As I Knew It

"You can learn little from victory. You can learn everything from defeat."
Christy Mathewson


Just some quotes that I think relate.

Dan Harden
27th December 2007, 06:43
How to write Consistently Boring and meaningless Literature unrelated to topics of discussion

Oikos 116: 723 Á 727, 2007 doi: 10.1111/j.2007.0030-1299.15674.x, Copyright # Oikos 2007, ISSN 0030-1299 Subject Editor: Per Lundberg, Accepted 25 January 2007 How to write consistently boring scientific literature Kaj Sand-Jensen Kaj Sand-Jensen (ksandjensen@bi.ku.dk), Freshwater Biological Laboratory, Univ. of Copenhagen, Helsingørsgade 51, DK-3400 Hillerød, Denmark. Although scientists typically insist that their research is very exciting and adventurous when they talk to laymen and prospective students, the allure of this enthusiasm is too often lost in the predictable, stilted structure and language of their scientific publications. I present here, a top-10 list of recommendations for how to write consistently boring scientific publications. I then discuss why we should and how we could make these contributions more accessible and exciting. ‘‘Hell Á is sitting on a hot stone reading your own scientific publications ’’ Erik Ursin, fish biologist Turn a gifted writer into a dull scientist A Scandinavian professor has told me an interesting story. The first English manuscript prepared by one of his PhD students had been written in a personal style, slightly verbose but with a humoristic tone and thoughtful side-tracks. There was absolutely no chance, however, that it would meet the strict demands of brevity, clarity and impersonality of a standard article. With great difficulty, this student eventually learned the standard style of producing technical, boring and impersonal scientific writing, thus enabling him to write and defend his thesis successfully (Fig. 1). tible original articles. It has been a great relief from time to time to read and write essays and books instead. Because science ought to be fun and attractive, particularly when many months of hard work with grant applications, data collections and calculations are over and everything is ready for publishing the wonderful results, it is most unfortunate that the final reading and writing phases are so tiresome. I have therefore tried to identify what characteristics make so much of our scientific writing unbearably boring, and I have come up with a top-10 list of recommendations for producing consistently boring scientific writing (Table 1). Ten recommendations for boring scientific writing 1. Avoid focus ‘‘There are many exceptions in ecology. The author has summarized them in four books’’ Jens Borum, ecologist Introducing a multitude of questions, ideas and possible relationships and avoiding the formulation of clear hypotheses is a really clever and evasive trick. This tactic insures that the reader will have no clue about the aims and the direction of the author’s thoughts and it can successfully hide his lack of original ideas. Why are scientific publications boring? I recalled the irony in this story from many discussions with colleges, who have been forced to restrict their humor, satire and wisdom to the tyranny of jargon and impersonal style that dominates scientific writing. Personally, I have felt it increasingly difficult to consume the steeply growing number of hardly diges- 723 Fig. 1. ‘‘Congratulations, you are now capable of writing technical, impersonal and boring papers like myself and the other gentlemen Á welcome to Academia ’’. Drawing by Sverre Stein Nielsen. If an author really wants to make sure that the reader looses interest, I recommend that he/she does not introduce the ideas and main findings straightaway, but instead hide them at the end of a lengthy narrative. The technique can be refined by putting the same emphasis on what is unimportant or marginally important as on what is really important to make certain that the writing creates the proper hypnotic effect which will put the reader to sleep. 2. Avoid originality and personality ‘‘It has been shown numerous times that seagrasses are very important to coastal productivity (Abe 1960, Bebe 1970). It was decided to examine whether this was also the case in Atlantis ’’ Fictive Cebe Publications reporting experiments and observations that have been made 100 times before with the same result are really mind-numbing, particularly when no Table 1. Top-10 list of recommendations for writing consistently boring publications. “ “ “ “ “ “ “ “ “ “ original ideas are being tested. Comparative science requires that particular measurements be repeated under different environmental and experimental conditions to reveal patterns and mechanisms. Therefore, results should be written in a way that does not explain the experimental conditions. This will insure that repetitious experiments remain uninteresting and no synthetic insight can be generated. I also recommend that these studies be reported with no sense of excitement or enthusiasm. Nowhere in the approach, analysis and writing should there be any mention of the personal reflections leading to this intensive study that robbed five years of the author’s youth. This is beyond boring; it is truly sad. 3. Write l o n g contributions ‘‘A doctoral thesis is 300 pages reporting something really important and well reasoned-out Á or 600 pages’’ Erik Ursin, fish biologist One should always avoid being inspired by short papers, even if they are written by famous Nobel laureates and are published in prestigious journals like Science and Nature. One should insist that the great concepts and discoveries in science can not be described in relatively few words. Scientists know that long papers display one’s great scientific wisdom and deep insight. A short paper should, therefore, be massively expanded from its original two pages to its final 16-page layout by including more and more details and mental drivel. Avoid focus Avoid originality and personality Write l o n g contributions Remove implications and speculations Leave out illustrations Omit necessary steps of reasoning Use many abbreviations and terms Suppress humor and flowery language Degrade biology to statistics Quote numerous papers for trivial statements 724 4. Remove most implications and every speculation ‘‘It has not escaped our notice that the specific pairing we have postulated immediately suggests a possible copying mechanism for the genetic material ’’ James Watson and Francis Crick (1953) This famous closing sentence suggested a perfect copying mechanism for DNA. Had the implication of their DNA model not been included, Watson and Crick could have prevented its rapid acceptance. In many other instances, reluctance to state the obvious implications of important findings has successfully delayed their recognition. This has generated room for repeated rediscoveries and insured that the person finally being honored was often not the original discoverer. Thus, enjoyable speculations on possible relationships and mechanisms and presentation of interesting parallels to neighboring research areas should be dismissed from the paper’s discussion. This will stifle the creative thought process and prevent the opening of new avenues for research, thereby securing the research field for that author alone, while retaining the paper’s necessary boring tone. 5. Leave out illustrations, particularly good ones Examiner: ‘‘What can’t you identify on this microscope picture of a cell lying in front of you’’? Resigned student: ‘‘A tram car ’’ Jens Borum, former student Poetry stimulates our imagination and generates pictures for the inner eye. Scientific writing, on the other hand, should not be imaginative, and the immediate visual understanding should be prevented by leaving out illustrations. Scientific papers and books can be made impressively dull by including few and only bad illustration in an otherwise good text. Because illustrations, which are fundamentally engaging and beautiful, can often portray very complex ideas in forms that are easy to visualize but impossible to explain in thousands of words (Fig. 2), boring science writing should not use them. 6. Omit necessary steps of reasoning ‘‘I once knew a man from New Zealand who did not have a single tooth left in his mouth. Nonetheless, I have never met anyone like him that could play the drums ’’ Freely after Mark Twain, journalist Sentences that are needed in an ordinary text to gradually unfold the necessary steps of reasoning and insure the logic of an argument should be omitted in the scientific writings by members of the chosen clerisy of a particular science discipline. If restricted reasoning is practiced in textbooks, the authors are certain to educate only a very small but elite group of students who may guess the meaning of these words, while the majority of readers will be lost. The style will also effectively prevent communication with ordinary people Á a process which is far too timeconsuming. 7. Use many abbreviations and technical terms ‘‘When I started my geology studies in 1962 what we learned above the level of minerals and fossils was absolutely nonsense. The poor teachers did not understand what they were lecturing, but hid their ignorance behind an enormous terminology. All this changed with the theory of plate tectonics ’’ Finn Surlyk, geologist (2006) Scientists train for many years to master a plethora of technical words, abbreviations and acronyms and a very complex terminology which make up the ‘‘secret Fig. 2. A drawing can say more than a thousand words ; the marine plankton food web Á including the microbial loop. After Fenchel (1998). 725 language’’ of their specialized scientific discipline. I recommend this approach for all scientific writing, because it tends to enhance the author’s apparent wisdom and hide his/her lack of understanding. The approach makes the field of study inaccessible to outsiders who are unfamiliar with the terminology. After all, since we went through all the trouble to learn this ‘‘secret language’’, we must make sure that the next generations of students suffer as well. This practice will also prevent breakthroughs and interdisciplinary understanding without a massive investment in cooperative translations between jargonridden scientific disciplines. It must remain mentally overwhelming for readers to cross the borders between disciplines on their own. 8. Suppress humor and flowery language ‘‘We found a new species of ciliate during a marine field course in Rønberg and named it Cafeteria roenbergensis because of its voracious and indiscriminate appetite after many dinner discussions in the local cafeteria ’’ Tom Fenchel, marine biologist Naming a new species Cafeteria , or for that matter calling a delicate, transparent medusa Lizzia blondina , shows lack of respect and will prevent us from ever forgetting the names. I highly discourage creating these kinds of clever names, because science writing should remain a puritanical, serious and reputable business. Fortunately, scientists that do not have English as their mother tongue are reluctant to use this wordy language of science to write funny and/or natural flowery narratives. Furthermore, many Englishmen who enjoy this precise and flexible language as their native tongue also regard it as bad taste to use fully in their professional writing the language’s potential for poetic imagery and play-on-words humor. 9. Degrade species and biology to statistical elements A very special beech forest, located 120 km away, houses numerous rare plant species. There is no reason to make a fuss about this particular forest because the number of common species in a nearby forest is not significantly different. Our scientific writing in biology should reduce all species to numbers and statistical elements without considering any interesting biological aspects of adaptation, behavior and evolution. The primary goal of ecological study should be the statistical testing of different models. This is especially true because, on further examination, these models are often indistinguishable from each other, and many have no biological meaning. Hence, writing about them will inevitably produce dry, humorless, uninspired text. 10. Quote numerous papers for self-evident statements When all else is lost, and one’s scientific paper is beginning to make too much sense, read too clearly, and display too much insight and enthusiasm, I have one last recommendation that can help the author to maintain the essential boring tone. My advice is to make sure that all written statements, even trivial ones, must be supported by one or more references. It does not matter that these statements are self-evident or that they comply with well-established knowledge, add a reference, or preferable 3Á5, anyhow. Excessive quotation can be developed to perfection such that the meaning of whole paragraphs is veiled in the limited space between references. This technique maintains the boring quality of scientific publications by slowing down the reader, hiding any interesting information, and taking up valuable space. When authors are unsure of which paper to cite, they should always resort to citing their own work regardless of its relevance. Alternative writing style and variable outlets There are movements among scientists and editors which are in direct opposition to the disgraceful advices in Table 1. They have the alternative goal of producing exciting and attractive publications for a wider audience. Many journals do in fact insist that articles must be original, focused, brief and well motivated, and that technical terms and concepts are fully explained. Very few journals and editors, however, endorse the idea that flowery language and poetic description promote readability or that thoughtful speculations advance the science. While the original article continues to be the most standardized and efficient (albeit puritanical) outlet of all science contributions, books can, in contrast, provide an alternative venue that encourages personal and entertaining styles of scientific writing that may include humor, poetry and speculations. For example, zoologist Steven Vogel (1994) has combined humor and clear explanations in his books on the application of fluid dynamics to biology. Other exceptional books have played a similar catalytic role in the education of new 726 generations of students and the development of ecology (Warming 1896, Odum 1971). Over ten years, ecologist John Lawton’s (1990 Á 1999) informal essays entertained numerous readers. The basic idea of essays is that they should have few restrictions to their form, but be brief, personal and humoristic. Essays have the additional advantage that they can treat important aspects of scientific activity in the fields between science and politics, science and culture, science and ethics and, the renewed battle field, science and religion. These topics are not normally covered by articles, reviews and textbooks. Journals should encourage discussion and debate of timely issues and synthesis of ideas within and across disciplines by combing reviews, synthesis, short communication of viewpoints, reflections and informed speculations (Lundberg 2006). In an atmosphere of increasing competition among educations and scientific disciplines, I argue here that we desperately need more accessible and readable scientific contributions to attract bright new scientists and produce integrated understanding. Acknowledgements Á Thanks to Henning Adsersen, Jens Borum, Carlos Duarte, Tom Fenchel, Michael Kemp and Carsten Kiaer for help and suggestions. Michael Kemp polished the language and strengthened the irony. References Fenchel, T. 1998. Marine plankton food chains. Á Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 19: 19 Á38. Lawton, J. 1990 Á1999. Views from The Park. A series of 27 essays. Á Oikos 59 Á87. Lundberg, P. 2006. Editorial. Á Oikos 113: 3. Odum, E. P. 1971. Fundamentals of ecology, 3rd ed. Á Saunders. Surlyk, F. 2006. Pladetektonikken. Á Aktuel Naturvidenskab 3: 28 Á30. Warming, J. E. B. 1896. Lehrbuch der okologischen ¨ Pflanzengeographie. Á Borntraeger. Watson, J. D. and Crick, F. H. 1953. Molecular structure of nucleic acids. Á Nature 171: 737 Á738. Vogel, S. 1994. Life in moving fluids, 2nd ed. Á Princeton Univ. Press. 727

Nathan Scott
27th December 2007, 06:53
Hello Mark,

It doesn't seem as though you are really reading my posts, which is disappointing, because I spent a fair amount of time choosing my phrasing so as to avoid readers assuming the worst and getting defensive.

I'm not stating that secrets can only be revealed by qualified instructors. You might stumble across such secrets on your own, or through a combination of training or R&D. What you won't know is how these secrets compare to a given art without being deeply initiated in it. "Aiki" appears to be the root of Daito-ryu's inner-teachings, so much of its transmission is withheld for those in the upper ranks. It doesn't mean that the rest of the teachings are useless to those studying them, just that some teachings are reserved for kyoju dairi, or shihan, etc. Some teachings are reserved only for the next head of the art. That is the nature of Japanese koryu arts.

That being said, there's nothing wrong with learning from others, or doing your own R&D. However, if you are a student of a traditional art, you are expected to develop within the context of the art - not add whatever seems practical from whoever you come across in other arts. YOU can become a talented martial artist by learning from others outside your art, but you may not be considered an exponent from a particular art. It sounds like many in the west don't care about mixing things up as long as they obtain personal skills. There is nothing wrong with that, but such an approach is called "Mixed Martial Arts" (MMA). You either are a student of an art or you are not.

Sometimes you pick things up from someone else that ends up being something you now recognize as being in your own art/teacher. This type of thing is the most useful way a member of an art can apply information from outside their school (ie: cross-training or outside R&D). Nothing wrong with that. However, mixing in anything that seems useful to you is where perspectives diverge between MMA and TMA.

FWIW, I realize many on or reading this forum are saying that they never got any inner-teachings from being a student of an art. But myself and others who have written to me have in fact been exposed to most of the types of principles and/or methods being described in this thread while sticking with good teachers in a good arts. And yes, it is members such as us that are not all that driven to check everyone else out, or live on youtube, because we are ALREADY getting more information and homework than we can keep up with from within our own arts.

In regards to Dan, throughout this thread, I have never discounted Dan's methods, or implied that he may not have the skills he claims. I don't know either way from first hand experience, but I've never attacked him personally or discounted his writings. What you may not be aware of is that Dan and I have corresponded over the years and crossed paths on the internet many times, and he has told me of his training experiences and what not. The fact is, Dan and I have found ourselves in agreement on pretty much every point regarding martial arts - until now. The only thing I have done in this thread is get on him when he compares himself to Sagawa Sensei and his own methods to arts like Daito-ryu, because he is not able to qualify such comparisons based on the reasons I've stated previously. That is my only beef, and all I have asked for him is to use plain English to describe his methods, or, the language in which he learned them. You post a quote from a student of Ueshiba telling everyone who hasn't trained with Ueshiba to shutup. How is that different from my pointing out that it is likewise inappropriate for Dan to state what Sagawa was or wasn't doing without being personally initiated?

As far as un-named Shihan's and Menkyo's, let them speak for themselves if they care to.

I for one am not looking for authority to show me the way. I have someone showing me the way. Several someone's in fact. You are either qualified to speak with authority about a subject or you are not. What say we all go to a medical forum and give our opinions to them on how surgery should be conducted? Do you suppose those with medical degrees might take exception to us pushing our opinions? As another example, even though I know how to punch and kick, I publicly defer to those who specialize in such arts, since in comparison they may be considered experts, or at least professionals, in the subject, whereas I specialize in other areas. Maybe those that know me will say that my P/K is better than some professionals, but that is not for me to say.

Everyone is welcome to express their opinion. On the other hand, anyone can post unsupported opinions and imply themselves into a following. Expressing opinions is at any level of initiation is not the problem.

Dan, I never said you encouraged people to become independent contractors. I said that those incorporating outside teachings into an art without permission or authority is *the same* as conducting yourself like an independent contractor. It was a warning to those thinking about mixing in whatever they learn into an art they are supposed to be studying. I don't know who trains with you, outside of the general implications you keep posting, but there are typically only a very small amount of members that are in a position to add outside influences into their art. It is those that are not in such a position I was appealing to. It may or may not have any impact on you or your "shihan and menkyos". I am not trying to "give advice" to those who aren't interested, or who are not in the position I'm referring to. A koryu menkyo is in fact perfectly qualified to include whatever the hell they want into "their" art, whether it ever existed before historically or not. If my "seniors" in aikido wish to come explain why they think your methods are appropriate for aikido, then let them. I never said they were or they weren't. Aside from pointing out errors in your understanding of Sagawa's book, I don't remember personally evaluating the majority of information you have posted. I've withheld most of my opinions of what you're talking about because I don't care to post them. That doesn't mean I agree or disagree with them, or that I think what you are doing is useless.

I'm not on the net to build up my fan club or impress anyone. You've got people writing to you saying what an "A" I am, and I've got others writing to me saying the same thing about you. I know shihans and menkyos, and so do you. A number of them we surely have in common. Who cares? If we don't agree, we don't agree. But I can't believe such a simple point takes 10 pages of bickering to make. This is sounding like the legitimacy threads where we say "you aren't really teaching X-ryu" and the supporters say "but his techniques are really effective and he is a nice guy".

Yourself and others keep defending your statements based on the value of the teachings, and your ability to perform the methods. I have been simply arguing against the comparisons to arts like Daito-ryu and aikido. Why does that make me the enemy, as the moderator of a Japanese forum on aikijujutsu? If members are interested in the subject, I'm happy to provide them with the thread to do it in. Have a great time, that's what it's here for. Just don't jump to conclusions about how it compares to other things without some type of qualifier. Misinformation is harmful to those in the arts. That's it.

I qualified my opinion about aikido kokyuho so that yourself and readers can understand what my opinion is based on. That doesn't mean I expect everyone to agree with me, I'm simply providing an example of how one might qualify an opinion stated with the sound of "authority". In all things you can find "experts" who will disagree about a subject, that in itself doesn't mean anything.

As far as preservation goes, even koryu arts were intended to be further developed. To not develop an art in each generation causes stagnation, and eventually to the loss of transmission and death of the art. But development can be made within the construct of the art, or, enhanced by outside elements by those qualified to do so.

**

Folks, how many 20 page "aiki" threads do we need in this forum? Is everyone waiting for that one perfect written definition of aiki? It ain't going to happen. The best answers are too general or vague to be of much use, and the more specific ones are often interesting but too limiting in definition and scope. It seems to me that those fanatic about aiki should simply redirect their energies toward the source (aiki arts) and learn it directly.

Jack, cut it out. You are way over-saturating this thread with posts. If you really have to post something, then think it through and post it. But don't just post everything that comes to your mind to pass the hours of the day. Please.

Ho ho ho,

Aiki Klaus

Nathan Scott
27th December 2007, 06:54
BTW, if this thread doesn't begin to improve dramatically, it's done. If we need to take a break and come back, then let's do it. But this is really getting pretty bad.

MarkF
27th December 2007, 09:26
Or you could lengthen the number of posts per page in your prefs and have only 8 pages like me.:laugh:

I have founded that simply closing the thread and inviting everyone/anyone who wishes to continue the current topic, to simply start a new one on his/her own.

So far, it comes to 0%, but then that's me.


Mark F.

Woody
27th December 2007, 13:45
BTW, if this thread doesn't begin to improve dramatically, it's done. If we need to take a break and come back, then let's do it. But this is really getting pretty bad.
Nathan,
I do not share the same feeling regarding this thread that you do. I have followed it intensively. (albeit heavily utilizing the scroll wheel for certain posts.) Dan's methods intrigue me greatly and I always enjoy reading what he has to say. I would love to learn more about what he is doing and I really don't give a dam what he calls it. Personally, I like the name you gave it; Dan-ryu. Has a nice ring to it.;)


Folks, how many 20 page "aiki" threads do we need in this forum? Is everyone waiting for that one perfect written definition of aiki? It ain't going to happen. The best answers are too general or vague to be of much use, and the more specific ones are often interesting but too limiting in definition and scope. It seems to me that those fanatic about aiki should simply redirect their energies toward the source (aiki arts) and learn it directly.
Are you suggesting that the "aiki arts" are the only source for "aiki?" I don't agree with that. "Aiki" is known by various people of different cultures by various names. That doesn't mean it's not the same feeling.
I think I remember reading about a sumo wrestler that studied with O-sensei saying something about feeling defeated the moment he grabbed him. No waza, just immediate feedback from some internal source of power. I think that is "aiki" and I think that is what Dan is teaching. That is the flavor of aiki I would like to develop.:cool:

Mark Murray
27th December 2007, 13:56
Hello Mark,

It doesn't seem as though you are really reading my posts, which is disappointing, because I spent a fair amount of time choosing my phrasing so as to avoid readers assuming the worst and getting defensive.


Nathan,
Reading online is never as good as talking in person. We do the best we can with electrons on a screen. :) Maybe one of these days, I can give you a call? Or better yet, if I'm on your side of the country, I'll stop by for a visit.



I'm not stating that secrets can only be revealed by qualified instructors. You might stumble across such secrets on your own, or through a combination of training or R&D. What you won't know is how these secrets compare to a given art without being deeply initiated in it. "Aiki" appears to be the root of Daito-ryu's inner-teachings, so much of its transmission is withheld for those in the upper ranks. It doesn't mean that the rest of the teachings are useless to those studying them, just that some teachings are reserved for kyoju dairi, or shihan, etc. Some teachings are reserved only for the next head of the art. That is the nature of Japanese koryu arts.


Not that I'm an expert or anything, but as far as I can tell, or have seen, you can't just stumble upon aiki. So, if aiki is DR's inner teaching, then I can see where the teaching could be held back for higher level students and then taught to all once they reached that level. I don't think many of us would have any problems with that. Course, there's always some that want things handed to them now. :)

So, let's just set that situation aside. Now, what if a school had this aiki teaching only for the next head of the school? I dunno, but do you think there would be that many students in the school? Knowing you weren't going to get taught the whole, complete art, but only the next head of the art would get taught it? I wouldn't join, but that's just me. Course, if you didn't know that's what was happening, how would you feel when you did find out?

And then there's the last example. Where only certain people are taught aiki and it's either random, pick and choose, or a whim. Let's say some have spent 10 or more years in an art and find out someone else had been taught differently. Or that someone new was being taught differently? And this difference was some of the aiki teachings. I think most of us find ourselves in the first example. I'd not want to be part of the second, but think about what a position you'd be in if you found yourself amidst this third example. It would suck big time. Would you still hold your ideals of the koryu in this third example?



FWIW, I realize many on or reading this forum are saying that they never got any inner-teachings from being a student of an art. But myself and others who have written to me have in fact been exposed to most of the types of principles and/or methods being described in this thread while sticking with good teachers in a good arts. And yes, it is members such as us that are not all that driven to check everyone else out, or live on youtube, because we are ALREADY getting more information and homework than we can keep up with from within our own arts.


Sounds great for them, Nathan. I don't know anything about it, but if that's true, then they have something like my first example above. Good school, good teacher. But, consider this. What happens if these students should find out that they aren't really working under the auspices of example 1, but are really in example 2 or 3? That you're never going to get the whole, complete art because either a) it is reserved only for the next head of the school or b) it is only taught to certain people. It's one thing to openly declare how things are done and another to keep it hidden on purpose.



I for one am not looking for authority to show me the way. I have someone showing me the way. Several someone's in fact. You are either qualified to speak with authority about a subject or you are not. What say we all go to a medical forum and give our opinions to them on how surgery should be conducted? Do you suppose those with medical degrees might take exception to us pushing our opinions? As another example, even though I know how to punch and kick, I publicly defer to those who specialize in such arts, since in comparison they may be considered experts, or at least professionals, in the subject, whereas I specialize in other areas. Maybe those that know me will say that my P/K is better than some professionals, but that is not for me to say.


I know someone who is very well versed in things biblical and religious. He has conversed with people holding B.S., Masters, and Doctorate degrees in those fields. And he runs rings around them, knowing things they don't, understanding complexities they don't, and generally holding more knowledge. But, the thing is, he never went to college and doesn't hold a degree.

Or I know someone who is quite competent in the computer field. He works better than anyone with certifications or degrees. And, no, he has neither. He's had to redo work that people with certs and degrees have done.

So, yes, I agree. People are qualified or not. But, my point here is that you can't tell qualifications from the Internet. Which goes back to one of my more often asked questions, why haven't you gone to meet these people who are talking about aiki? Heck, Akuzawa studied in Sagawa's dojo.



You've got people writing to you saying what an "A" I am, and I've got others


Just to clarify, Nathan. I'm not one of them. :)



Folks, how many 20 page "aiki" threads do we need in this forum? Is everyone waiting for that one perfect written definition of aiki? It ain't going to happen. The best answers are too general or vague to be of much use, and the more specific ones are often interesting but too limiting in definition and scope. It seems to me that those fanatic about aiki should simply redirect their energies toward the source (aiki arts) and learn it directly.


Certainly, if the aiki arts taught it, I'd wholeheartedly agree. But, what if it wasn't taught at all? Let's say the Sagawa quotes are right. That he never really taught the core skills until way later in his life when he realized that they would die with him. I don't know how the Japanese would react, but Americans? Yuck. That the head of system never really planned on teaching the core skills, and didn't teach them until way later. Imagine spending 10 plus years learning an art only to find out the head of system purposefully didn't teach important, integral skills of the art. Or even just taught those important, integral skills to one student who was chosen to take over? Now, I don't know Sagawa and I haven't read the book. I'm just creating an example here. But, that would suck big time. You're a student supposedly learning a whole, complete art throughout your lifetime. And you find out that the core skills aren't taught at all, or are only taught to one person?

Mark

Cady Goldfield
27th December 2007, 15:51
Originally Posted by Nathan Scott
Folks, how many 20 page "aiki" threads do we need in this forum? Is everyone waiting for that one perfect written definition of aiki? It ain't going to happen. The best answers are too general or vague to be of much use, and the more specific ones are often interesting but too limiting in definition and scope. It seems to me that those fanatic about aiki should simply redirect their energies toward the source (aiki arts) and learn it directly

Seems to me that "aiki" is the only topic on E-Budo right now that is stimulating any kind of conversation, and such a passionate response on this specific thread. Why do you suppose that is?

E-Budo has been pretty... uh... "sleepy," lately (like for the past couple years), and it could use a shot of passion to get people thinking and discussing.

Ya know, if E-Budo were a money-making site that somehow racked up $$ for the number of posts submitted and number of "views" per thread, "aiki" -- and Dan Harden's discussions of it, in particular -- would be a moneymaker for John Lindsey. Investors would be clamoring for a piece of the action. And the moderators would get their cut, of course. Might be a different picture, then, eh? :)

Cady Goldfield
27th December 2007, 16:08
How to write Consistently Boring and meaningless Literature unrelated to topics of discussion


*snip*

:laugh:

Actually, that was a very entertaining and spot-on accurate essay (speaking as someone who was once immersed in the world of natural-sciences academe). I only wish you had put in paragraph breaks, because my eyes, along with the rest of me, are getting old. (Of course, you intended for it to be looooong and run-on to make your point...)

Dan Harden
27th December 2007, 16:27
While the topic is a difficult one to discuss, aiki as a principle is everywhere in the arts. As a model and ideal it is discussed by many in several arts in both cultures. I just find allowing folks with nothing to say to hi-jack discussions and blather- to be counter productive.
Glad my point got across. Its better then the internet version of ingnorantly burping, farting and belching... all over a thread.
Cheers
me

Dan Harden
27th December 2007, 16:30
Nathan
Nice reply. Thanks for taking the time. FWIW, and of course I realize it doesn't matter much, everyone who has spoken and or written to me knows our history and what I think of you and that we happen to agree almost all of the time on many things in Budo. I don't think anyone's going to be... what did you say "calling you an A_______?" To ...my...face, anytime soon. Sorry to hear you can't say the same.;)
My reply was only to point out to you that you were sometimes perhaps inadvertently talking down to folks who train this with us, as if they were among the unknowing, disloyal, and incompetent. While retaining respect for you, some of them, and me…took umbrage to that. Respect needs to work both ways particularly in an argument. I not only “heard” you, I modified the approach to help.

Thread title
I think it was wrong to call the thread Chinese martial arts/ Dan Harden since I am discussing tanren training. Add to that this training is being advocated by two fellas who trained mostly in Japanese arts and another who trained ICMA and those training it are mostly coming from the Japanese arts: Koryu, Daito ryu, Aikido, Uechi ryu and Judo.

And thanks for the comparison of this thread to the fraud threads. I’m sure many will appreciate your opinion there as well. I try appreciating your views even if we can’t agree. But peppering in words like fraud, fan club, and ego, in replies isn’t necessary. There is no fan club, No one is being defrauded by me Ark or Sigman, and the ego is in conquering failure. I doubt you’ll find any of the accomplished Japanese budo men training this appreciating your responses, Nathan. In my case no money exchanges hands, in their case they travel cross-continents and are still barely covering expenses. Why?To help folks. Folks who, to a man, consider this essential to what…they…do.
In most cases, these..folks…are experienced artists, in many cases teachers themselves, some high ranked and deeply initiated who are training this way.

Independant contracting
You cite the only two plausible options that come to your mind and leave out others. Other options do indeed exists.

I am addressing a difficult topic. One that will endear me to no one, nor garner support. Personally, I have never studied a Chinese art, nor invented anything. What I do, I was taught to do, and I built on it through-some-personal R&D. If you want to address why we bring up what others are saying about this method- it is for the simple reason that it is….artless. It is a body method sans any particular art. We do so not only to validate and discuss it as a method, but to let folks know it helps across the board. How is it by some very strange and completely weird phenomenon we can stand in rooms with master level teachers from cross cultures and have them be flummoxed as to how we can know what we know, in our bodies? I have had this happen to me many times. Why is that?

No one anywhere is saying we or I “do” this or that art. We are saying this training makes these arts come alive. And accomplished folks in these arts say it to …us. You state only those “deeply initiated” can say what their art is or does. Fair enough. I think you are wrong, but fair enough, so to address YOUR opinion, I offered some observations of folks from a myriad of styles in support of a counter opinion to your own. I have continually stated that folks very highly ranked in their arts have stated this is …it. As for DR? Both Ark and I have had students of teachers like Sagawa, Kiyama, and Okomoto come and train and state flatly that this feels like what their teachers feel like and they see training it change and greatly improve what they are trying to accomplish in their art. Sagawa’s men stated their opinion of a Taiji teacher as well. That HE was doing Daito ryu aiki. Their views are their own. How do they qualify it? They train it. Oddly the way to train it-solo tanren-is what Sagawa said is a secret to his art. Here, just now ,in a strange paradox you claim I cannot speak to arts that do aiki as it takes a “deep initiation” to know aiki. There simply is no other way to know, or know you know..in your view. Yet...you... claim to already know the things I write about, and that, without really "knowing" what I do. How'd that happen?
We are trying to tell people there is a way to train the body that is key and core to these many arts. Oddly, Shihan, Menkyo, 6th dan down to nidan all seem to agree once they have felt it. They, are qualified to say what ever they like, and for the strangest reason they have chosen to spend many agonizing hours burning it in.
Goals here
I'm done qualifying who is training it, and why. For anyone who wants to read it there is enough here, I'll just be repeating. Overall, I think the remainder of the thread should be discussing how it has affected those who train it, or their views about it, and I'll try to keep talking about what it is and how it makes things come together.
Cheers
Dan

Dan Harden
27th December 2007, 16:48
Edit
Thread title
I think a more appropriate title is Tanren training. The only argument then can be from which art, and we can say from no art or many arts ...whatever. But it is about tanren, mostly done by those in the Japanese arts.
What do you think?

Jim Sorrentino
27th December 2007, 17:52
Dan,
Edit
Thread title
I think a more appropriate title is Tanren training. The only argument then can be from which art, and we can say from no art or many arts ...whatever. But it is about tanren, mostly done by those in the Japanese arts.
What do you think? I agree --- and a definition of tanren would help to move the discussion forward. I offered one back in post 72, when I described tanren as "a process of forging and strengthening the body and spirit for martial purposes, through the mindful repetition of specific movements and stances. It may involve an apparatus (such as a suburito or a weight), a fixed physical reference (such as a wall or a plumb line), or even another person working with "cooperative resistance" (as in Uechi-ryu's kotekitae [arm-rubbing and pounding, leg pounding] or aikido's kokyu tanden ho)." I did not intend that to be the last word on the subject, and I hope that you and others will offer your definitions as well.

For those of you who question the importance of definitions, especially in the realm of speech, I refer you to Plato's Meno. A serviceable (and free) translation is available at http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/meno.html.

Sincerely,

Jim

Nathan Scott
27th December 2007, 19:04
Well I can see we are just going to continue talking in circles about these points, for whatever reason. I don't see how much more plainly I can explain what I'm objecting to, but I'll address some of the last comments on the way out.


Are you suggesting that the "aiki arts" are the only source for "aiki?" I don't agree with that. "Aiki" is known by various people of different cultures by various names. That doesn't mean it's not the same feeling.

No. I'm not. In the bazillion words I've written in this thread I've never said it couldn't exist elsewhere, or that components of what certain arts call aiki don't share them. However, aiki is defined in various ways, and at various levels of initiation. To say that "aiki" is known by various people of different cultures imples that everyone uses the word the same way, *which is what I'm objecting to*. How about just using English? What is so hard about that?


I think I remember reading about a sumo wrestler that studied with O-sensei saying something about feeling defeated the moment he grabbed him.

I remember a similar quote coming from Judo in regards to Saigo Shiro, who was the adopted son of Saigo Tanomo. But in any event, I thought I illustrated that many arts, weapon arts in particular, condition the tanden. I described one method in which Ueshiba conditioned his tanden, and Dan scoffed it off as "nonsense". Maybe Ueshiba just thought it was fun to hit a pile of sticks repeatedly?


No waza, just immediate feedback from some internal source of power. I think that is "aiki" and I think that is what Dan is teaching. That is the flavor of aiki I would like to develop.

"I think that is aiki" sounds like your opinion, and you're welcome to it. Nicely phrased. Folks, see how easy it is to give an opinion without stating something as (an unsupported) fact?


So, let's just set that situation aside. Now, what if a school had this aiki teaching only for the next head of the school? I dunno, but do you think there would be that many students in the school? Knowing you weren't going to get taught the whole, complete art, but only the next head of the art would get taught it? I wouldn't join, but that's just me. Course, if you didn't know that's what was happening, how would you feel when you did find out?

Can anyone expect to learn "everything" from their teacher/art? Even in modern arts, the vast majority of teachers don't teach "everything". As far as aiki goes, many koryu would view this teaching (as DR appears to do) as it's highest gokui. Daito-ryu used to just be called jujutsu, so if you joined the art, you would be joining the art to learn jujutsu. There are many people who spend their whole lives studying various styles of jujutsu, or judo for that matter, that don't feel ripped off. DR is now called "aikijujutsu", so maybe students might feel like they have a right to be taught aiki. Obviously we are speaking in general terms here when it comes to "how koryu teachers teach", and "koryu arts", as they all vary to some degree.


And then there's the last example. Where only certain people are taught aiki and it's either random, pick and choose, or a whim.

What does a teacher look for in a qualified student? Probably someone who, above paying their annual or monthly dues, trains hard with them regularly; is clearly focusing their attention on what is being taught; has the appropriate character; is trusted; and is shown deep commitment to the art - and its well being. Would such a student, given enough time, have any reason to be deprived of the advanced level teachings? There is a problem within DR in particular with members learning various levels of aiki and developing a huge ego. Ego/power corrupts, and nobody is served by it. Especially the art when the members quit to give away what they were taught without discretion. Instead of succeeding in forging a gifted budo-ka, who is an asset and appropriate representative of the art, you might have ended up producing a monster who is exploiting the teachings for their own fame. And no, I'm not implying this about anyone on this thread, so don't get all defensive and flame me. I'm speaking in general.

DR may be guarding their aiki seriously, but maybe its for a good reason. But each generation of students since Sokaku has produced a growing number of exponents that are skilled in DR aiki, and that's a fact. Paying membership dues does not give anyone special rights. But being a good "student" will allow you to learn the art in the way it was designed to be learned. Of course, most would agree that finding the right teacher is more important than finding the right art. IMO there are way too many people teaching MA right now that should have stayed a student longer, so choose carefully and change if you loose confidence in their motives.


I know someone who is very well versed in things biblical and religious. He has conversed with people holding B.S., Masters, and Doctorate degrees in those fields. And he runs rings around them, knowing things they don't, understanding complexities they don't, and generally holding more knowledge. But, the thing is, he never went to college and doesn't hold a degree.

I'm not saying it is impossible to know more than someone more qualified than you. What I'm saying is that those more qualified than you will naturally take exception to someone with little or not qualifications *telling them* how things are. Why not state your points as opinions, such as "I think", and have those more qualified say "Good point, tell me more"? I'm talking about approach and attitude, and as I said, dissuading possible misinformation from being spread about specific arts.


Heck, Akuzawa studied in Sagawa's dojo.

If you're going to bring that up, then go ahead and tell us how long he studied there, and during what period of time? Unless I forgot or missed it, this hasn't been disclosed yet. I've been told by a credible source that it generally takes 2-3 years to get through the ichigen waza (first of ten levels of teachings), which is a necessary step before reaching black belt. The first 3 years in teh Sagawa dojo apparently focuses on foundational work, so depth of initiation is very limited. I've also heard that Sagawa didn't throw many of his students, only those who were most senior or showed the attitude and spirit he was looking for. So just because someone was a member of his dojo does not mean they felt his technique. It sounds like some felt his technique many times, others only a few times, and many not at all. This is why I ask now, and have asked before. I've been told that many people joined the Sagawa dojo during the latter years of his life, which is something that happens with every famous teacher prior to their passing. So there are probably a great many people in Japan who can say they were students of Sagawa Sensei. Disclaimer again - that's not to say that Akuzawa doesn't have skills, or is teachings something worthless. But if his time there was short maybe it's a credit he should keep within his student base.


Seems to me that "aiki" is the only topic on E-Budo right now that is stimulating any kind of conversation, and such a passionate response on this specific thread. Why do you suppose that is?

Aiki is of course a popular topic. Many, including Sagawa, believe that it can't be talked or written about in a useful way. While interesting points are made in such discussions, they usually result in many pages of heated arguments that do not bring us any closer to understanding what "aiki" is, as defined by the various arts and exponents.

Furthermore, Daito-ryu is an extant art that is, like many, trying to survive to the next generation. It's not fair to those in the arts trying to contribute towards their survival and development to exploit their inner teachings publicly. Yeah I know many non-members don't care, but after these arts are gone, they are gone. All the mixed martial artists will only be able to research documents and possibly video footage to understand what these arts were once like, unlike today where they can meet and talk with exponents directly. And for an art like DR that has internal elements, that will always fall way short of the hand-to-hand experience. So yeah, aside from expressing opinions, I think long drawn out discussions about aiki is a bad idea (unless you call it something else).


Ya know, if E-Budo were a money-making site that somehow racked up $$ for the number of posts submitted and number of "views" per thread, "aiki" -- and Dan Harden's discussions of it, in particular -- would be a moneymaker for John Lindsey. Investors would be clamoring for a piece of the action. And the moderators would get their cut, of course. Might be a different picture, then, eh?

Who cares? If e-budo existed as a business for the purpose of generating hits for money, I for one wouldn't be here. The same for martial arts. Even in arts I've been in that have commercial elements to them I've resisted studying/teaching them as a business. I don't believe budo can be taught that way, so the day that becomes impossible is when I discontinue affiliations. I'd rather see the AJJ forum slow than flood it with heated arguments and misleading information.


Nice reply. Thanks for taking the time. FWIW, and of course I realize it doesn't matter much, everyone who has spoken and or written to me knows our history and what I think of you and that we happen to agree almost all of the time on many things in Budo. I don't think anyone's going to be... what did you say "calling you an A_______?" To ...my...face, anytime soon. Sorry to hear you can't say the same.

I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean. You are the one who posted that you had all these people writing to you pissed off at what I'm posting. I didn't get defensive about it, why are you? When it comes to confrontations, I've got a thick skin, and nothing to prove. I get plenty of that at work.


Oddly, Shihan, Menkyo, 6th dan down to nidan all seem to agree once they have felt it. They, are qualified to say what ever they like, and for the strangest reason they have chosen to spend many agonizing hours burning it in.

They all agree that it fits within what they understand aiki to be. Great. I suspect many of these are from aikido, which has a more commonly found definition of what aiki is. Okamoto from the Roppokai is credited as innovating what he learned from Horikawa with his own ideas. It may be good stuff, but how much has it changed from the original teachings? I suspect the menkyo you keep mentioning is licensed in an art that does not specialize in aiki, and may have a definition for what they call aiki that is not consistent with all the other definitions out there. I'm not saying that your people aren't qualified in their opinions, but pointing out that the feedback you keep posting up here is not as black and white as you are making it sound.

Enjoy the rest of this thread,

Nathan Scott
27th December 2007, 20:12
I stand erected - it looks like someone has already posted that Akuzawa was enrolled at the Sagawa dojo for a total of 2-3 years (95 or 96 to 1998), up until Sagawa's death.

FWIW,

Dan Harden
27th December 2007, 21:05
I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean. You are the one who posted that you had all these people writing to you pissed off at what I'm posting. I didn't get defensive about it, why are you? When it comes to confrontations, I've got a thick skin, and nothing to prove. I get plenty of that at work.
Uhm..It meant that no one was pissed, but that they took exception to what they thought you were saying about folks training this way as to include them. No one used your word a______and they wouldn't get away with it with me. Sorry you took it the wrong way, Nathan I...was just trying to be er...nice big fella. It's also why I told you I "heard" you about certain issues and was modifying my approach to the topic. Don't lose your normally cheery internet self will ya.:cool:
Thank you again.

With that folks can we sort of switch now and stop talking about qualifyers and whos who, and just talk about how it has effected their training. Mark? Tim? Ron? Josh, Rob, Stan, Chris, Murray, Jeremy and a host of lurkers? Isn't that the real point?
Cheers and happy holidays
Dan

Cady Goldfield
27th December 2007, 22:06
Quote:
Ya know, if E-Budo were a money-making site that somehow racked up $$ for the number of posts submitted and number of "views" per thread, "aiki" -- and Dan Harden's discussions of it, in particular -- would be a moneymaker for John Lindsey. Investors would be clamoring for a piece of the action. And the moderators would get their cut, of course. Might be a different picture, then, eh? :)
Who cares? If e-budo existed as a business for the purpose of generating hits for money, I for one wouldn't be here. The same for martial arts. Even in arts I've been in that have commercial elements to them I've resisted studying/teaching them as a business. I don't believe budo can be taught that way, so the day that becomes impossible is when I discontinue affiliations. I'd rather see the AJJ forum slow than flood it with heated arguments and misleading information.

Nathan, that paragraph was meant as a joke. Hence, the smilie. Oy. ;)
Happy Holidays!

Dan Harden
27th December 2007, 23:04
The joining of opposites. in-yo-ho
The body works best when it is supported by opposing tensions. These work in front and back, and side and side and up and down. People do not move this way naturally, neither do most martial artists. You can watch it on video and see it, and feel it , in an instant, at a touch or moment in time. Once you feel it, and are shown how to do it you see the sense of it, at least theoretically. When you are walked though steps of it in a gradual manner and learn to manipulate it, there is a great logic to it as a support system. This union of opposites has a reason for being. It both supports and manipulates at the same time. So that it, in and of itself, within the body, “the duality held” - say in stasis, becomes a “duality in application.” What keep me supported, manipulates what comes in. This is the birth of….joining energy. For many it’s a cool symbol, an ethereal, spiritual model or a hokey drawing to be placed on a placard or dojo walls, but as a method to train the body it is deep. So how do we suppose a held tautness, can be completely relaxed and how does that happen in the first place? And what would create a joining energy between people?
How is this different from the same idea in breathing? How could breathing be powerful?
Cheers
Dan

ZachZinn
27th December 2007, 23:29
Ok, i'm gonna butt in here where I don't belong i'm sure and give my unsolicited opinion. Hey it's the internet, what'cha gonna do?

There is way too much lofty abstract talk in this thread and not enough talk about functional ways to supposedly gain 'aiki' or whatever you choose to call this skill.

I really think that this level of abstraction doesn't do the subject justice on the internet, maybe it'd be better to to talk methodology and actual excercises.

The excuse of "well you've got to feel it " is nonsense here, if that's the bottom line then there is no point in conversing about this in the first place. I am fully convinced by the efficacy of these kinds of training methods, i've been exposed to something like them in Karate (of all places huh?!!) and I have no question of it's importance, however it seems really fruitless to just wax philosophical on it if people aren't gonna be discussing methods. It gives the whole conversation a creepy "I have the secrets" feel.

Anyway that is my unsolicited opinion as someone with virtually no 'aiki' who does not practice Aikido, Aikijujutsu, or CMA. Lol.

Dan Harden
28th December 2007, 00:18
I really think that this level of abstraction doesn't do the subject justice on the internet, maybe it'd be better to to talk methodology and actual excercises.

The excuse of "well you've got to feel it " is nonsense here, if that's the bottom line then there is no point in conversing about this in the first place. I am fully convinced by the efficacy of these kinds of training methods, i've been exposed to something like them in Karate (of all places huh?!!) and I have no question of it's importance, however it seems really fruitless to just wax philosophical on it if people aren't gonna be discussing methods. It gives the whole conversation a creepy "I have the secrets" feel.

Anyway that is my unsolicited opinion as someone with virtually no 'aiki' who does not practice Aikido, Aikijujutsu, or CMA. Lol.

Mr. Zinn
If you read, you will see some of us are NOT surprised to see that you have found or heard of some of this in Karate. Yes it is very important but the jist of the reason behind talking about it is not that you leanr it on the net-you can't. You simply can't, but rather to get the word out that it
a. Exists at all.
b. Is relevant to the arts
c. Where to go where people will actuallu show you what to do to achieve it.
Even then its going to take years to accomplish something substantial, maybe shorter for some folks with more "time-in" than others.

As for the creepy "I've got the secrets" feel? Well there are secrets in the arts. It just doesn't mean others don't know them as well. ;) The only way to get em is to join up, train, wait to possibly be sifted and selected (or not) and find out. Or...if you hear of folks with unusual skills and power go check em out. Maybe they will teach you how they got there.
Either way its going to be up to you. And chances are...you'd never have found out who or where alternatives may be had, if it were not for these kinds of.....discussions.;)
Cheers
Dan

Mark Murray
28th December 2007, 00:22
Pushing.

Well, I can't say that I can do, with any regularity, the stuff I've experienced. I have my moments, but they haven't gotten to the point where I can do them consistently. With that said ...

I've read reports and seen video where Ueshiba lets other people test him by having them push on him. Seated or standing. In one video, he's seated and then rocks back and lifts his legs. I initially thought that he was being off balanced a bit, but later read reports that he was showing off. :)

In Harrison's book, Kunishige has Harrison pull on his ears as hard as Harrison can to try to move him. No effect.

Harrison's book again recounts a similar tale, only it regarded Jiro Nango and a push to the chest. The results were the same. Jiro Nango could not be pushed over.

There was a post about Tomiki offering his wrist/hand and letting people try to do whatever they wanted and they couldn't do anything. Shioda and Tohei used it, too.

Many Chinese did it. There are a lot of accounts of people with body conditioning skills doing this as some sort of test to show levels of skill.

I had the pleasure of testing this against Dan. And found that, no, I couldn't push him over. The feeling is sort of like pushing a wall and a void at the same time. You feel the body, yet it isn't moving, and yet you feel like you're pushing but you don't know where the force is going.

Can I do this now? Not really. Yet. I know it can be done, though. Not because Dan can do it. Not because Dan had me doing it at his dojo. Not because his students can do it. But, because, one time, at my dojo, with a student there who weighs 250, I did it. Feet side by side and stood there while the 250 pound student pushed against my chest with a lot of force. And it didn't feel like I had any force/push on my chest. Seeing it and feeling it are one thing. Doing it is a world of difference. :)

Mark Murray
28th December 2007, 00:28
Sticky.

Attacking and then feeling like you can't disconnect. Like you're stuck to tori. It's a weird feeling. Well, all of these things are weird. Not normal.

I was at Dan's and met one of the other people who, like me, also went to meet Dan. She then started training with Dan. At my second meeting, we worked on a technique of her choosing. When she got the technique right, I felt like I couldn't disengage or let go. And I really, really tried. At one point, in the middle of the technique, my brain was saying, stop her. I couldn't. Then it said, well, just let go. I couldn't. I was stuck. Not from being held because I was the one holding her wrist. And not for lack of trying, let me tell you. I was actively trying to let go and it just wasn't working. The difference in her skill level was really neat to see since she couldn't do this kind of stuff the first time I met her. Timewise, it was less than 6 months apart.

I've talked to other people and found that they've experienced this kind of "feeling". :)

Can I do it with any consistency. No, not yet. But I have done it a few times with students at my dojo. And they say the same thing -- I couldn't let go. Course, usually, I don't feel like I was doing anything when it happens. Except trying to keep the body training skills intact. :) That's the hard part. Keeping them intact while stationary and then trying to do that while moving.

More to follow ... (maybe tomorrow)

Dan Harden
28th December 2007, 00:31
And how do we suppose that could possibly aid in energy control
A strong chest push horizontally or rising up 45 deg from the groun trying to lift you how is that meaningful in real fighting? Dissolving then manipulating incoming or pulling away force. Howcan the two be joined and resolved to one? The two sides of aiki that are one in the same? In-yo ho. What would happen if...say he was grabbing a hand instead of pushing on your chest?
And say you could take all of his force and make it dissapear somewhere? The full force of big men say a big grappler? Wink..If-unlike so many in the arts who can be stopped just by grabbing their hands, you can actually stop there power cold-could you then...say...capture it since it turned to zero?
Could you then...say...manipulate it since your not doing much of anything to stop it?
What if he was grabbing your sleave intead? Your head?
Why would in-yo ho connect the body so well, so inexorably intertwined that the slightest movement is an impulse or pulse to move them?
How would the expanding, breath add...to that?
Where did the pushing energy go when you pushed? 250lb guys pushing you horizontally while you stood there sounds like B.S. to most folks. But seeing is believing.
Do you see a value in the idea that "What receives...feeds?"
Could it then produce say unusual force in close distances? Say a stomach or kidney punch from laying on your back with someone in the mount or guard?
Could it be used stop judo/ jujutsu throws?
Cheers
Dan

mjchip
28th December 2007, 00:36
Hi,

So, I've been reading this thread and I'm not sure if I missed this or not so I'll ask it (possibly again):

Regarding some of the body conditioning that we've been discussing (the forging of balanced connections within the body):

Why doesn't it naturally occur to a greater extent in humans? Do you think there ever a time when this sort of development was more commonplace (hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of years ago, etc)?

Curious,

Mark Chiappetta

Dan Harden
28th December 2007, 00:48
Hmmm....interesting. Since it takes soo much concentration, and training and the manipulated forces have to be controled by your mind do animals exhibit it? we see they move with out flexation, maybe even move without isolated flexation. But such a mind/body connection....hmmm.
Cheers
Dan

R_Garrelts
28th December 2007, 04:56
I've read reports and seen video where Ueshiba lets other people test him by having them push on him. Seated or standing. In one video, he's seated and then rocks back and lifts his legs. I initially thought that he was being off balanced a bit, but later read reports that he was showing off.

Lifting the legs only seems more impressive if you haven't thought about the physics involved. In actuality, in the demo you are describing, any downward force applied to the ground by the legs serves only to create a torque in the same direction as the torque resulting from the pusher's force. For Ueshiba to remain (rougly) fixed in place, the sum of the external torques must have been (roughly) zero (though we can, of course, quibble about the exact direction and magnitude of the pusher's force). Therefore, it would have taken less force to topple him if he didn't lift his legs. Extending the legs forward also moves one's center of mass forward and, therefore, serves to increase the torque due to gravity (the torque that directly opposes that of the pusher).

If you think about it, it's rather simple: when you are sitting on the ground with legs outstretched in front of you, the parts of your legs which are in contact with the ground are applying a torque to keep you in place under the influence of gravity. When someone starts to push on you, though, they are now applying that torque and less force is required of your legs to maintain equilibrium.

I suspect this is at least part of the reason why so many people believe the pusher's force to be "channeled" somehow into the ground (as in the often used analogy of an electric current): If the person being pushed wishes to remain in place, both the net external forces and torques must be roughly zero (otherwise, there would be appreciable translation or rotation, respectively, of the person's body). But this means that, if one is initially in a forward stance, for example, the forward foot must become "unweighted" in response to the pusher's force, and, therefore, an increased vertical force must be applied by the rear leg (to prevent the body from translating vertically). The increased weight on the rear leg is then responsible for the sensation that the pusher's force has been routed "into the ground."

Another trick you can add is lifting under the arms of the pusher (per some of Gozo Shioda's demos). The effect is, again, to increase the torque in opposition to that of the pusher, since lifting up on the arms tends to make one's body rotate forward.

Dan Harden
28th December 2007, 14:53
Torque? Not that I am overly concerned about pushing on chests-it's just another demonstration of handling power- as well as a training tool to test results of understanding and progress. but your description doesn't cut it for me, and I imagine for Mark as well.
We can do it and more. Can you? Can you stand there and have someone push on your chest horizontally-and remain standing without flexing? How about upward and still stand there? How about pushing on your head? If you can do it, and if you claim it occurs by torquing, care to describe what you are torquing?
Please leave out spreading the arms of the pusher, that trick is known by many. This isn't a trick, its a constant in the body

That Little guys like Ueshiba did this standing and moving is more important than static standing. That he also did this with Sumo, Judo, and any number of comers, that Sokaku did this in public at the Budokan with Judoka hell bent on taking him down, albeit I am sure with just standard Japanese waza- and Takeda handling them with ease, (which one witness-Sugino-calling it the finest display of budo skill he had ever witnessed )-and much later 85 yr old Sagawa handling gold and silver medal Judoka in the same fashion, is more my cup of tea. It is long been held and believed these things were done by “technique.” I contend the secret to the power (and the explanation for the differences) was never in technique-which oddly enough were so drastically different in execution as to defy that bit of logic. Their one consistent power was in their body method, not what they did with it.
Cheers
Some readers here have felt it from me and others who can do it. Then they were brought through steps to do it themselves. They have 'felt" waza before. From the highest Daito ryu reps in the world and from Shihan in Aikido as well as Judo. I am sure they won't agree its torque or waza either.
Dan

Mark Murray
28th December 2007, 15:42
Relax Completely

We often hear this phrase, or one like it, in our training. Attempts are made to describe how to do this, what not to do, and then one can feel it in one's teachers. For me, at least, the biggest part of relaxing is the shoulder/chest muscles. Shoulders go up -- you know specific muscles were engaged. Pushing back into uke -- again, specific muscle groups are usually used. It's a tough thing to teach, "relax", let alone "relax completely".

Once again, when Dan (I use Dan here in these examples, but really, you can replace Dan with any of the others -- Mike Sigman, Rob John, Akuzawa, etc, etc.) moves, it is a relaxed movement. You can't really feel any muscle being engaged.

I visited a dojo sometime in 2007 and trained with new people. Well, actually, I trained at a lot of different places in 2007, but in this one, I actively tried using some of the body conditioning training. Usually, I don't do it because I'm not very good at it. yet. But, this one time I did. I was trying a technique and not getting it right. Using too much shoulders and chest muscles. So, I concentrated on the six directional training and what do you know -- my uke said it was great. Felt like no muscle at all. To shorten the story, every time I "correctly" used the six directional training, my techniques were "relaxed" and very effective.

So, yes, I'm finding that these exercises do teach/train one to "relax" and "relax completely".

Ron Tisdale
28th December 2007, 15:50
But this means that, if one is initially in a forward stance, for example, the forward foot must become "unweighted" in response to the pusher's force, and, therefore, an increased vertical force must be applied by the rear leg (to prevent the body from translating vertically). The increased weight on the rear leg is then responsible for the sensation that the pusher's force has been routed "into the ground."

From my limited and new understanding of the subject, using the back leg as the primary channel, or especially as a brace, is one of the signs that you are NOT using these methods correctly. I still have a lot of trouble channeling using the front leg. If you find someone who can do this without up weighting the front leg, spend some time with them...

Best,
Ron

Mark Murray
28th December 2007, 15:55
Whole Body Movement

I think I might cover slack in here as well. Since I seem to view them both as being closely related. Ever try a technique and find that part of your body got left behind? Like the left foot? Or one hand? Or that the shoulder started the movement first and then the rest of your body followed? Or your first movement was delayed and when you think about it, you found that you loaded weight on one foot to push off of it for your movement? Sort of half a second or less of extra movement that really isn't needed.

I'll skip the examples and go straight to my experiences. This body conditioning/tanren/whatever you want to call it, develops whole body movement and eliminates slack. I know this not from experiencing it from Dan, Mike, etc. Not from seeing it done by their students, not from feeling it done by their students, not from seeing it progress through new students -- no, all that is true. But, the real illumination is from doing it away from all that, in a setting with people who haven't been exposed to it. It is in this kind of setting where I really didn't feel like I did anything special (especially speed up), but uke states that I seemed to move quickly or fast. Or that they ran into a wall, that was moving. Not muscled, mind you, but whole body movement without lag or slack. Again, I say that my skill isn't anything to brag about. If I get 1/50 right now, I'm happy. :) I'm just posting my experiences so far when I actively try using whole body conditioning.

Mark Murray
28th December 2007, 16:13
Power

I hate this one. Okay, not really. It's just the one that I'm really, really bad at. This and the push are the toughest for me.

I really, really, really suggest people get out to test out Dan, Mike, Rob, and Akuzawa's power. Simply amazing. I haven't met Akuzawa, but I have met Rob. I felt kicks to the leg from Dan and Rob. No inch releases from Dan and Mike.

I've been punched and kicked with muscle. But, the body conditioning power is on a different scale. One of the differences I can relate is the felt effect. Muscle strikes are more localized to the target area. Body conditioning strikes affect the target area, too, but they produce something of a wave effect, going through the rest of the body. Kind of weird to feel and hard to describe.

I have yet to do any of this. At least with the push, I did it once. :)

This is the last part. There are other applications that I could write about, but I think these five cover the general overview of body conditioning.

If you think these exercises are easy, you haven't been reading enough. Everyone will tell you that they're hard. It isn't a shortcut of any sort. But it does seem to be a much better training methodology to gain the abilities I've mentioned in parts I through V.

I will note one important thing, though. I've only been doing these body conditioning exercises for 9 months: That includes just 2 visits to Dan and one visit to Mike/Rob in DC.

Jeremy Hulley
28th December 2007, 17:31
On the most basic level the solo training exercises have given me a frameowrk to more deeply examine what I already do. I am developing a deeper understandign of "correct posture." I might have gotten that soely through kata training but I think that it would have been a much longer tiem coming.

In some respects I'm still srtruggling with the same things that always stay with me. But folsk that I train with have commented that I move more lightly, gracefully and with more power than I did before.

In the TNBBC group eveyone's ability to generate pwer has improved to the detrement of many a bokken, jo and hanbo last summer. I had sevreal moments of thinking "crap, (insert name) did'nt need to learn to hit harder."

I am continually intrigued by how, as I get stronger at the solo stuff it actually becomes more and more challenging.

I've only been at it a little over a year so I still think I'm a relative newbie.

FWIW

Jeremy

chrismoses
28th December 2007, 18:33
With that folks can we sort of switch now and stop talking about qualifyers and whos who, and just talk about how it has effected their training. Mark? Tim? Ron? Josh, Rob, Stan, Chris, Murray, Jeremy and a host of lurkers? Isn't that the real point?


Hey Dan, I’m assuming I’m the Chris in your post? To be honest I haven’t been lurking over here. E-budo’s been so quiet the last year or so, I haven’t even been stopping by lately. Kind of bums me out since I love e-budo. :’(

Hope this isn’t too long or round about, but here goes.

I’ve been very open that being introduced to ‘this stuff’ (which in this case would be Ark, Rob and the Aunkai methods) has changed how I train, how I now understand ‘aiki’ and how I perform waza/move. I admit to avoiding a lot of the calls for specifics. There are a couple reasons for this. First is a question of ownership. If I were to talk about what my training looked like, and how one could apply that kind of training to ones open hand waza, I would basically be describing the basic Aunkai training method. I do not feel that I have the ownership of that material necessary to present that kind of information in a public medium. I am not in any formal sense affiliated with the Aunkai (although I do have one of their 4w350m3 t-shirts now!). I have about 15 hours of face time with Ark and another 12 or so with Rob. That’s less than a workweek. I have spent a few hundred hours over the last year or so doing (to the best of my ability and memory) some of the exercises that I have been taught. There’s too many people on the internet already who attend a seminar or workshop and then “update the resume” to reflect their newfound deep relationship and knowledge. I don’t need to be one too. In the instances where I have tried to offer something, a certain somebody invariably calls into question my ability to make the statements that I have. So it’s not really worth it to me. Online, there is no way for me to justify or validate my statements or understanding. In person, my ownership of these skills/concepts can be validated directly. Whether that’s in the form of push-out, feedback on someone’s form, or my waza, people are free to come to their own conclusions about what they think I know/can do and what I don’t/can’t. I don’t claim to have mastered anything. I’ve been rather selfish in fact over the last 4-5 years, stepping away from teaching at a fairly large dojo to study with people who I felt could help *me* improve *myself* as a martial artist.

I can talk a bit about how my training, thinking and understanding of “aiki” has changed over the years however. The real shift in my thinking began when I started training with Neil, and has continued to shift ever since. Going back to your initial question, “What is Aiki?”, I would offer the extremely overly simplistic definition that “Aiki is a kind of martial interaction that manifests physiological and psychological phenomena in both tori and uke to an end that seems almost impossible or magical to uke.” This is my own definition, and will probably be different in six months. I’ve written over on aikiweb about how it’s my belief that this is specifically not the definition of Aiki that OSensei or the Nidai Doshu held. That’s one of the big reasons why I no longer consider what I’m doing to be Aikido. This is however how I understand the term.

In order to get where I am now however, I’ve had to start over several times. When I started training with Neil, I had to come to terms that, as a nidan in Aikido, nothing I knew would work on him or any of the guys who were training with him. That meant going back to judo/jujutsu, then slowly brining in the basic principles of aiki interactions (which it’s safe to say in our case are based on the Yanagi-ryu principles which he learned from his time with Don Angier, but for the same ownership issues I discussed above WRT the Aunkai, I do not really discuss online. Also to be clear, I’m not saying we study Yanagi Ryu, we don’t by any stretch of the imagination.) For me, these principles gave me a lexicon that allowed me to put words to the things I had seen and felt in Aikido. I could watch what someone was doing and tell you why what they did worked. Conversely, when someone was teaching something that was not in keeping with these principles, it stopped having much of any effect on me. I knew what real aiki felt like.

We had already started doing some solo/tanren stuff with Neil before I ever met Ark. I honestly credit that with Jeremy and my ability to get and remember as much of Ark’s stuff as we were able to from that very short first meeting. But, again, I had to start over to a large extent. The thing that was different this time, is that instead of having to throw out what I already knew (or thought I knew), Ark’s stuff filled gaps in my ability to actually accomplish what we were already doing. My stuff just worked better. And it had to, because everyone who I train with got harder and harder to throw as we kept hammering at this stuff. For me, it was like Ark’s stuff built the car and Neil’s stuff told me where to drive.

Finally, I believe exploring this stuff has brought a much deeper understanding to what OSensei was actually doing and talking about back in the day. (I realize this is the aikijujutsu forum, but please allow the thread drift.) I feel that I was better able to understand some of the comments he made (see some of my recent posts on the 1957 interview over on aikiweb for example). I’ve also been much more interested in the Chinese arts than I ever had been before, and have been reading up on Xing-Yi and other arts, and really appreciate the additional concepts and terms that has brought me (li + qi = jing is so much more useful as a concept than “just relax!” or “Extend Ki!” for example).

All for now, hopefully someone finds that remotely useful.

Thanks too to Tom Campbell for his excellent post a couple pages back.

R_Garrelts
28th December 2007, 19:59
Torque? Not that I am overly concerned about pushing on chests-it's just another demonstration of handling power- as well as a training tool to test results of understanding and progress. but your description doesn't cut it for me, and I imagine for Mark as well.
We can do it and more. Can you? Can you stand there and have someone push on your chest horizontally-and remain standing without flexing? How about upward and still stand there? How about pushing on your head? If you can do it, and if you claim it occurs by torquing, care to describe what you are torquing?
Please leave out spreading the arms of the pusher, that trick is known by many. This isn't a trick, its a constant in the body

I'm not sure what you mean by "torquing"; it conjures up in my mind images of grunting and gnashing of teeth--things not at all implied by me. You will notice that "torque" is used only as a noun in what I wrote above. This isn't just semantics: Torque really is just a thing (really, it's a characterization of an interaction), and it is a thing that is present any time there is a force applied to an object. The real descriptive power comes from the fact that the net torque about an axis is numerically equal to the time-derivative of the object's angular momentum (about that axis).

This means that, for a stationary object to remain so (that is, for its angular momentum to remain zero), the net external torque must be zero. Otherwise, there would be a change in the object's angular momentum. And this is true any time an object is in equilibrium.

It's a relatively simple idea but also a very powerful one. For example, suppose you apply a force to an object and notice that it doesn't move. You now have evidence that there is another force being applied to that object, and you know its magnitude and direction... without having to know anything about what is applying the force!

In the human body, it's a bit more complex since we have so many joints, but the basic idea remains the same. In such a case, for the body to maintain equilibrium, the sum of the forces and torques applied to each and every part of the body must be zero. For simplicity, I took it as a given that the muscles involved in holding each part of the body in place would actually be strong enough to do so. In my experience, for the demonstrations I was describing, this is a pretty reasonable assumption for most people. I'm actually surprised that you didn't object to this assumption but instead chose to focus on the most unassailable part of what I wrote, above--that, for an object to remain in equilibrium, the net force and torque must be zero.

I suppose this is the part of the post where I should emphasize that it is not at all necessary to understand any of this in order to actually do these sorts of demos; I doubt Ueshiba or Shioda thought much about things in these terms. Nonetheless, I still find these ideas useful, if only to prevent me from beginning to believe novel (and possibly incoherent) ideas of my own design based on subjective experience ("he sure hits hard", etc.). Perhaps others don't believe themselves to be in need of such a filter.

R_Garrelts
28th December 2007, 20:02
From my limited and new understanding of the subject, using the back leg as the primary channel, or especially as a brace, is one of the signs that you are NOT using these methods correctly. I still have a lot of trouble channeling using the front leg. If you find someone who can do this without up weighting the front leg, spend some time with them...

Best,
Ron

Whether the front or rear leg becomes "weighted" will depend on the direction of the applied force as well as the stance you are in (more precisely, it depends on the position of your center of mass relative to the parts of your body in contact with the ground). If you are trying to statically "weight" the front foot of, say, a 60/40 forward stance in response to a completely horizontal push from the front (without resorting to tricks like lifting under the arms or "fooling" the pusher into applying force in some other direction), then it doesn't surprise me that you are having a lot of trouble. And I definitely agree that anyone who can do it would be worth studying under!

chrismoses
28th December 2007, 20:04
From my limited and new understanding of the subject, using the back leg as the primary channel, or especially as a brace, is one of the signs that you are NOT using these methods correctly. I still have a lot of trouble channeling using the front leg. If you find someone who can do this without up weighting the front leg, spend some time with them...

Best,
Ron

Yeah, what Ron said. The rear leg may be 'full'/extended whatevah, but it's the forward foot/heel that the real power comes from. This concept has been emphasized by both Yanagi principles and Aunkai walking drills to me. Toby Threadgill also spent a decent amount of time discussing this at a TSYR workshop I attended a few years back. Like Ron said however, it can be difficult to do.

Dan Harden
28th December 2007, 20:12
I suppose this is the part of the post where I should emphasize that it is not at all necessary to understand any of this in order to actually do these sorts of demos; I doubt Ueshiba or Shioda thought much about things in these terms.

Again...your description doesn't cut it for me, and I imagine for others here who can actually do things. Can you? Can you stand there and have a large guy push on your chest horizontally-and remain standing without flexing? How about upward and still stand there? How about pushing on your head? How about not offering tactical reistance but give a judoka your body and have him not be able to throw you? Can you do it? Care to describe what you are doing?
I'm sure there are guys who know you and train with you that can verify you can do these things and have been doing them.
If not why not just say these are your theories?
Cheers
Dan

Dan Harden
28th December 2007, 21:50
Chris, Jeremy thanks for sharing a bit of your journey with the internal training. Hopefully you will continue.
FWIW, it was not my intent to take anything away from Ark or Mike, This thread title was not of my making. I know this is Japanese tanren, I also know its Chinese tanren as well, but all of us are using it in everything including; Koryu, Aikido Daito ryu, Judo. Karate, and MMA, so the "Body conditioning" title was a "nuetral" choice by the moderator. My name on it, while ridiculous, at least helps a host of folks I know who google and follow my poor writings and journey. I want to write a bit more about discoveries and uses I have seen folks make, and I'll do so later.

Mark Murray
28th December 2007, 23:55
Chris, Jeremy thanks for sharing a bit of your journey with the internal training. Hopefully you will continue.
FWIW, it was not my intent to take anything away from Ark or Mike, This thread title was not of my making. I know this is Japanese tanren, I also know its Chinese tanren as well, but all of us are using it in everything including; Koryu, Aikido Daito ryu, Judo. Karate, and MMA, so the "Body conditioning" title was a "nuetral" choice by the moderator. My name on it, while ridiculous, at least helps a host of folks I know who google and follow my poor writings and journey. I want to write a bit more about discoveries and uses I have seen folks make, and I'll do so later.

Ditto to Jeremy and Chris. Thanks for the posts.

I wanted to post some applications or usages that I can see for Aikido, but probably not tonight. Maybe tomorrow...

Tom H.
29th December 2007, 00:45
If the person being pushed wishes to remain in place, both the net external forces and torques must be roughly zero (otherwise, there would be appreciable translation or rotation, respectively, of the person's body).That's a refreshingly direct statement of the applicable physics. I was a big fan of that approach, but now (that I'm making significant measurable progress), I do not find understanding the real physics useful. I care more about capturing, identifying, and repeating feelings and phenomena,then testing the results in various controlled or live settings.

None of the training methodologies I have encountered, as far as I've been able to understand or benefit from them, focus very much on mechanical analysis. Those methods include traditional systems like taiji, xing-yi, aikido, as well as modern methods like Aunkai. I haven't ruled out the possibility that a static or dynamic mechanical analysis might lead to a wildly successful training approach, but it's rather irrelevant to my training now.

Maybe this is another way of saying it: the sum of the forces equals mass times acceleration; the sum of the moments has an equivalent equal, but these are boundary conditions. They do not tell you very much about what to do inside your body, or how to do it. My personal opinion is that anyone brave enough to start on deeper mechanical analysis will quickly cross into the control system (i.e. spine, brain, and nervous system), and hit issues in controls (e.g. non-linear feedback) as well as psychology (e.g. attention and arousal), and quickly get too messy for anyone but PhD students and their ilk.

The good news, I think, is that your kind of analytic approach can pay off handsomely if you get the chance to apply it to the skill-building myself, Dan, and others are talking about.

R_Garrelts
29th December 2007, 02:41
None of the training methodologies I have encountered, as far as I've been able to understand or benefit from them, focus very much on mechanical analysis. Those methods include traditional systems like taiji, xing-yi, aikido, as well as modern methods like Aunkai. I haven't ruled out the possibility that a static or dynamic mechanical analysis might lead to a wildly successful training approach, but it's rather irrelevant to my training now.

Nothing I was taught in the dojo focused very much on mechanical analysis either. You might be surprised to hear this, but I don't think an analytical approach is going to revolutionize much of anything in the martial arts. As I said before, this is really more of a sanity check for me as well as a way to avoid spending time training in something that is based on questionable theory. In karate, for example, every so often one hears about the efficacy of "snapping" punches (pulling your punches back as they make contact with the opponent). There is usually some accompanying theoretical justification for this ("the force is greater since the contact time is smaller," etc.), and, if I didn't have much knowledge of physics, I might be inclined to spend a bunch of time training this stuff. After all, some of the people who espouse "snapping" punches can hit pretty hard, and, if I can't get it to work, I might just decide that it is simply because I haven't spent enough time practicing. It would probably never occur to me that those instructors might be hitting hard in spite of their insistence on snapping punches rather than because of it.

On the other hand, I have had some minor successes specifically because of an analytical approach: My karate instructor used to do a demonstration where he would stand on one leg and have someone (generally the strongest person in the dojo) push horizontally against his hand as hard as they could--the instructor, of course, remained stationary. He would then explain the theory he was taught ("grounding forces") even though he, admittedly, couldn't vouch for its validity. He also described a demonstration performed by his own teacher which involved sitting on a folding chair, rocking it onto its back two legs, and having a student (or students) push on the demonstrator's forehead. I wasn't able to do either demo consistently until I had thought about the physics involved. (Heck, I couldn't even bring myself to try the second demo until I was confident I understood the physics.)

In the end, though, was it really that important to learn to do those demos? Probably not (that's why I call it a minor success), but it was a fun puzzle--and I like trying to figure out how counter-intuitive things like that work.


Maybe this is another way of saying it: the sum of the forces equals mass times acceleration; the sum of the moments has an equivalent equal, but these are boundary conditions. They do not tell you very much about what to do inside your body, or how to do it. My personal opinion is that anyone brave enough to start on deeper mechanical analysis will quickly cross into the control system (i.e. spine, brain, and nervous system), and hit issues in controls (e.g. non-linear feedback) as well as psychology (e.g. attention and arousal), and quickly get too messy for anyone but PhD students and their ilk.

Agreed 100%. But I was only pointing out that lifting the legs in the seated push demonstration doesn't require more skill than not doing so. Let's not make it so complicated just yet.

Samurai Jack
29th December 2007, 21:10
After a lot of proclamations, discussion and testimonials here, and the discussion and critiques posted on Aikiweb in 2006 http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11178 (long thread worth reading through)

What are we really talking about here is performance martial arts stunts, which had little or no combat relevance. But, have more to do with persuading others of supernatural or extraordinary power for fame or profit. The history of this probably goes as far back almost to the start of civilization. The Chinese martial arts is probably the most illustrious with a period where magical and supernatural demonstrations where saturating. These performance stunts and demonstrations that entertained and Wowed audiences clearly had a long lasting impact. Another influential player for such things is India. Audiences and those who are unable or deigned subscribe to scientific perception and skepticism, by default subscribe to supernatural performances of martial arts stunts. They walk away totally convinced of what they see. Those who assist lacking the understanding of the tricks often are fanatical believers and followers. Stunts success often attributed to exotic broad and ambiguous terms as Chi, and Ki. -Or in this case In-Yo, which is the Japanese translation for Ying and Yang, defined in western terms simply as polar opposites, or dualism; a state in which there are two distinct parts which are opposites.- The real constitution of these terms of Chi and Ki is anyone’s guess. Finding the constitution of these terms is not the point, but rather noting that such blanket terms lends to mystical powers that are credited to these stunts. Yet, in reality, Chi etc. usually is nothing more than physics in play as described in early western martial arts by E. Barton-Wright founder of Barjitsu, in Pearson's Magazine 1899, v. 7, pp. 59-66, titled How to Pose as a Strong Man. This article is reprinted in Classical Fighting Arts v. 2, No 12, (Issue 35), pp 41-45. -great intro and commentary by Harry Cook. That explains the use of physics to explain the illusion of what has been considered feats of chi.

I remember when a young man, I seen my first demonstration of performance martial arts. It was done a by a touring Korean martial arts team. All the feats such as being unable to push a person over, move a person standing from one spot, or being able to lift a man in the air with ease by several others then on a second attempt unable, and other such feats as Bruce’s Lee’s famed 1” punch, among other strength tricks where preformed. They also used individuals from the audiences with mixed success. All aquatinted into the minds of the audience as supernatural martial art power. Not having knowledge to such tricks of the interplay of physics, no having a fully formed scientific education, I was easily impressed of the existence of such power.

These feats of chi power demonstrations i.e. not being able to push a person over, also require psychological phenomenon, such as the Ideomotor effect or also known as Ideokinetics. Never doing these demonstrations does a participant think to change the angle or movement requested to a more advantageous one when a stunt is being preformed, such as being unable to move a person, or push a person over. The participant is willing to be compliant and imperceptive in behavior to see the result. If the performer like a magician makes a suggestion it is followed willingly though. Usually the participant is asked to push or lift the demonstrator in a way that is counter to move or lift. This is exemplified in Barton’s article. The participant is not asked to lift a person from around the waist and hoist them up. But, rather from behind underneath elbows and forearms of the performer that are parallel to the floor. The principles in play make the trick effective are physics, posture (body alignment), relaxation and isometric muscle tension. Oh the participant isn’t a person who is a Power Lifter, and is some one of equal or smaller frame.

Such martial arts tricks of supernatural power look great with willing and compliant participants. What they lack and usually escapes most of us, is the lack of effectiveness and performance under combative situations. When attacked in your home or on the street, and not being able to be moved is not impressive with the guy swing a baseball bat, or brandishing a handgun, or who doesn’t think of pushing you off where you stand but rather taking your head off with a right cross, or jumps you from the behind.

We really have to keep things in perspective, and those who have been in the martial arts for years, and take the arts seriously know all of this. They know martial arts parlor tricks purpose is for some to have fun or fame to show the new students, prospecting students, the unsuspecting public, or those martial artist who haven’t had experience with such things yet. I don’t think those of responsible and quality martial arts training and background allow these performers to confuse real martial arts with their stage acts. It is dangerous and irresponsible.

I understand that you will always have such people preforming these stage acts in the martial arts. If we are going to credit them in any way it should be in the area of entertainment and not martial arts.

Commentary End.

Kendoguy9
29th December 2007, 21:16
Hey Dan,

I had some well thought out commentas about training and what is going on when I train in kata and solo, but your quote below rubbed me the wrong way:

"Again...your description doesn't cut it for me, and I imagine for others here who can actually do things. Can you? Can you stand there and have a large guy push on your chest horizontally-and remain standing without flexing? How about upward and still stand there? How about pushing on your head? How about not offering tactical reistance but give a judoka your body and have him not be able to throw you? Can you do it? Care to describe what you are doing?"

Dan care to explain what you are doing?

You come on here trying to open discussion about Chinese methods in the aikijujutsu forum and claim you just want to make friends with people and share and help people grow. Instead of being friendly, you challenge anyone who mentions this stuff in terms other then doing solo training like yours. Richard, I believe was explaining it in terms of physics (I confess I was lost but then I'm not that smart) and you offer challenges and doubt. The only people you are friendly to in this post and don't stubbornly confront are your own students. I don't think you want to discuss methods of training (in fact you haven't really offered any training methods to help anyone improve, you only talk about how great your methods are and then quote Sagawa to back you up) I think you want your friends and students to come on here and post how great your methods are. Too bad, you probably have interesting insight to share.

So can you learn to do this stuff you talk about from doing forms and partner practice? Yes. When I did Taiji Chuan there was an elderly lady who was very small and frail. She could barely finish the form without sitting down to rest. The only solo training she did was the form. She also did push hands. Our tecaher didn't offer any extra methods to develop internal power because we were learning at a college, and he said this wasn't for fighting but for health. Anyway the elderly lady pushed me (I was about 18-19 at the time and worked out a lot) and threw me back about 3-4 feet. She never did any other martial arts and trained just a year or two more then I had. This fa jing aiki what ever you're calling it can be developed through forms and partner practice. Are there other ways to do it? Yeah of course. I'm sure your method works, too. It isn't as rare as you may think it is. Or maybe I've just been lucky with the people I've met?

So, how does your tanren taiso method and kokyu affect seme, zanshin, metsuke, etc? Aiki methods you don't make contact with (and no I'm not talking about silly aiki magic throws)? Just curious.

BTW, can you quit with the elipses? It... really makes... your stuff... hard to read...

Happy New Year,

Mark Murray
29th December 2007, 21:27
After a lot of proclamations, discussion and testimonials here, and the discussion and critiques posted on Aikiweb in 2006 http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11178 (long thread worth reading through)

What are we really talking about here is performance martial arts stunts, which had little or no combat relevance.



Jack,
That reference is the thread I started on AikiWeb. :)

As to your latter point. Well, If that's what you believe, then I certainly won't try to change your mind. And if that's truly what you think, I wonder if you could let the thread go forward without interruption for those of us who don't hold your viewpoint? Some of us believe just the opposite, that the body conditioning training has very applicable combat relevance. So, instead of sidetracking the thread, would you let us continue the discussion unhampered?

Thanks,
Mark

Samurai Jack
29th December 2007, 22:28
Mark, being unhampered would be allowing Dan Harding to proclaim ideas as his without critical review then unhampered is the word of the day.

Everything Dan has claimed is nothing new and is found in other arts. And his skills as described fall into performance art. Which he could be very good at.

In-Yo, is the Japan translation for Ying and Yang. Principles used in Judo as push and pull etc. Much of what Dan says and concerning In-Yo is also found in push-hands. Body condition is I agree something lost in modern martial arts, though I perfer others I have more confidence in explain it. Dan feels his gleening from Segawa provides authory on the subject of body conditioning. Therefore, I would like Dan to expound futher in detail, give a seminar, put it on Youtube. Though he will not. This makes it difficult to understand and make accurate evaluations on his skills, abilities, and knowledge. Which is always done when people make public claims. I just can't take testimonials alone.
:)

Mark, I honestly believe, what you experienced to you is substanstancial. You are fanatical in the original positive sense, of Dan's abilities, so clearly he impressed you. I don't debate that. But you have to understand that doesn't mean we all should take his word for it. You must allow us to test the waters the only way that Dan is allowing. He does a lot of posting on his abilities, and resently due to the recent translation of Segawa's book latched on to the Tanren term. And there is no way that those of us who read Dan's posts he puts out so well and so thought out can determine the truth. Dan wants us to accept his claims and agenda based on his words and the words of a select few. You have to allot me or others to test and try and determine what the truth is.

Dan Harden
29th December 2007, 23:30
Chris
You state you couldn't understand Richards physics description- it was over your head. I stated it doesn't cut it for me either. So?
I asked him if he could do it and if he could- to explain it in simple terms.
The differences may be, I have had a host of men try and explain this stuff by means of physics who can't do much of anything at all. Well, really nothing at all. We have been through two years of another fellow trying the exact same process but he willingly admits he cannot do the things many men wrote in they had felt and experienced in the hands of guys who can use these skills. And FWIW, the guy who responded to Richard-Tom H.- who happens to agree with the technical analysis and who himself is able to do some of these things in his body stated flatly that it doesn’t begin to cut it for him either. And he agreed with the guy. I think your being rubbed the wrong way was your choice, Chris.

Chinese arts? You need to read my posts better if you are going to bother to reply. I have never trained in Chinese arts. Of the guys I know openly teaching this stuff each has trained mostly in Japanese arts, and some in Chinese arts. Of the hundreds of men who have felt it, and oddly decided it was very much worth their time to train it? They are just about all, to a man in Japanese arts as well. Most under shihan in: Aikido many branches, Daito ryu three branches, Koryu various schools. Most of who, have been in the arts for many, years. It’s not exactly an uneducated, novice crowd, in fact I’ll state the opposite is true, though some keep alluding to having to give them advice.

Sorry you feel I am insulting folks. From the responses I am getting and the list of those reading and writing, I’d say that’s just a very few. I am not interested in convincing folks as much as I am trying to get the word out. There is no way, now way in hell, to convince someone on the net. Instead I am writing for the smart guys who are curious to see if they are missing or not getting something. Many guys here, are going to be smart budo guys, they are going to check around, write intelligent private emails and end up training with guys who teach this stuff.
Chris, you and I have one thing we do not share in common. I spoke of it here before and do again. I and the people I share this with have felt top men in the world, in Daito ryu, Aikido, ICMA and Koryu, and some teachers in Koryu have felt this. The men who train it have made a judgment of value. You have not shared their experiences. Thus cannot comment on it for them, can you? Folks may freely write me and them off as fools-not saying you are bud-or perhaps, just perhaps something is brewing, that has been there all along.
Magic throws? I think many aiki throws are anything but magic. I see them as silly and insipid and simply won’t work on many skilled men. I also think other Aiki-men feel as stiff as boards and are easy to throw or screw with. Most waza are a collection of hopeful “what-if’s” that ain’t gonna happen against trained men. There is also Aiki that is valid and powerful, but used in highly controlled conditions, on folks with pre-conditioned responses. There are many ideas of “Aiki” all over the place. In fact there is so much- and it is splitting yearly with too many Daito ryu and Aikido schools branching off that it becomes meaningless to anyone but themselves. I’m not interested in any of it.
These guys are still all in their arts and love them and their teachers. I think it’s just great.
Tanren
Contrary to you telling me I haven’t described how it affects an opponent I and others certainly have in various posts. If you read them again I think you will see it. Again, how my tanren affects others in contact with you is largely in how it changes your own body in the first place. Where it may be hard for you to understand is the fact that it is indeed not openly shown, and in the opinion of men who trained all over the world, not exhibited in students and several teachers alike they know. Were your body trained this way, you would be noticed. Period. You could invite just about anyone to try and throw you, and they would have one hell of time doing so, if at all. Your trained balance would be so profound that others coming into contact with it are manipulated by your choice of where and how you choose to move and they have little option to resist. I don’t try this out on Japanese trained Ukemi dummies. I hate the Japanese model of “taking” ukemi, and always have. I’ve tried this out on people from a myriad of arts, MMA and wrestlers, all of whom did not believe it and wanted to stop me. Thus I have my own collection of experiences. Hitting is a whole other topic. Power delivery to hands, elbows, knees and chest wall is best described by others. Again, others have demonstrated the results if this training, Ark, and Sigman are two. Techniques are an expression of an art. The more connected you are the less important they become.
As for folks writing in “who are my students?” I’ll try responding one more time to this in the hopes that you just missed it and are not being sarcastic or denigrating.
None…of the folks writing in are or were my students. They heard about it, some asked me for years and I refused to meet them, and finally about a year ago after an unpleasant exchange I agreed. Initially the groups were there to test it. Then others heard about it. Last, in case you missed it as well. Most/many have trained with Arkuzawa and Sigman as well. Why? to test it and us. No one, not one, previously believed or accepted this training as being valid or something they needed.
They were you, Chris. ;)
Happy Holidays
Dan

Dan Harden
30th December 2007, 00:02
What are we really talking about here is performance martial arts stunts, which had little or no combat relevance. But, have more to do with persuading others of supernatural or extraordinary power for fame or profit. These performance stunts and demonstrations that entertained and Wowed audiences clearly had a long lasting impact.

We really have to keep things in perspective, and those who have been in the martial arts for years, and take the arts seriously know all of this. They know martial arts parlor tricks purpose is for some to have fun or fame I don’t think those of responsible and quality martial arts training and background allow these performers to confuse real martial arts with their stage acts. It is dangerous and irresponsible.

I understand that you will always have such people preforming these stage acts in the martial arts. If we are going to credit them in any way it should be in the area of entertainment and not martial arts.
Jack Robison
**************************************************

Hey Jack
Old tradition. Budo is a funny topic to discuss among some men. Every once in a while you get guys who'll call you on your opinions. You have ignored the information in these posts and offer insult, by choice.
Wrong guy Jack.
Since you are now insulting me personally as
a. some sort of trickster
b. only citing others for borrowed knowledge, not my own.
c. performing slight of hand
d. Now misleading others for money, which would by inference extend to men who are training this way for free.

Why don't you come explain all this to me.
To my face.

While here,
1. You can meet some men who have been in the arts for ten to twenty years. I'm quite sure they will drive or fly in, just to meet you, and you can tell them how they are unable to judge things…as good as you...for their own training.

to show the new students, prospecting students, the unsuspecting public, or those martial artist who haven’t had experience with such things yet. Maybe in person, I'll tell you again about shihan and Menkyo who are training it since you cannot comprehend the written word.
2. Then, nothing but movement. You may try to do anything to me you like: Aikido, Daito ryu, Judo, or, I have pairs of 6 oz gloves you can use.
Mind you, I won’t teach you a damn thing, but, I will welcome the chance to demonstrate my ideas and their relevancy to the martial arts...on you.

You wrote and offered me the advice to "Put up, or shut up."Which Nathan deemed apropriate for this forum for some reason. Since I, have been doing that very thing, and men have written in here to tell you of it and you have chosen to ignore them, I'll take you up on it.
Come on up!

If not, then for the umpteenth time from everyone including the moderate on down to most of us here who know each other or have known of each other for many years... take the second half or your own advice.

Dan

leavittk
30th December 2007, 00:34
Hey guys, been following the thread for a while. I will be training with one or two of these guys soon. Don't want to mention names as there is no need to drag anyone into this that does not want to participate in this discussion.

I also want to make it clear that I am not approaching my training with them as an attempt to debunk or "get on the bandwagon".

Frankly I think there is some merit to the methodology of these guys, and I have started trying to focus on developing a base for learning it in the last few months.

Throwing ego and personality out is important I think, and looking at it for what it is and what it can do for you.

I have discussed this topic with many of you over on aikiweb, and don't see getting involved here again as much of it would be a re-hash of the same thing.

What I will do, however, is go, train, and then get back with my own experiences and impressions. Which may or may not be the same as others.

What I expect will happen is that I will probably come back and say "yeah there is value, yes, it is helpful, necessary, and relevant."

What I don't expect will happen is that I will become over enamored with it, and say "lets through out all that we learned or are training."

Frankly, Dan and I have had our own disagreements and colored discussions on this topic. There is much that I disagree with him on. Much of it Nathan has covered.

However, there are somethings I would tend to agree with him on.

Anyway, I will let you know what I "feel" and find relevant.

I have enjoyed the discussion thus far! Thanks.

Samurai Jack
30th December 2007, 00:39
Dan,

Let's make this clear as the blue sky over Montana. I really don't want you to get the wrong idea.

You are mistaken, it's not a put up or shut up situation. It is an issue, born from so many requests and mine, reaching the most people you can with your skills. You make the claims in volumes of post on many boards for years, espousing your skills. So, logically it would reason its about time that you would do a seminar, put your stuff on you tube, go global. Right? That is all I am saying, and I don't know why your so defensive about it? It seems odd.

An oddity, demonstrated by you of you being abrasive and defensive when I asked you a simple innocuous question on the onset of this thread? I am not the only person you have addressed in this manner. It doesn't need to be addressed now, it is water under the bridge. The point is, it a very odd defensive behavior. But hey, that is your right, right? You can't criticize others. :)

--

Mark, by no means do I want to belittle anyone who believes Dan. Just because I don't believe Dan, doesn't mean I judge those who do. Every person has their own journey. You learned something from Dan, and that is good. Now expand your horizons keep learning and developing. Who am I to say that your wrong.

Eric Joyce
30th December 2007, 01:04
Lifting the legs only seems more impressive if you haven't thought about the physics involved. In actuality, in the demo you are describing, any downward force applied to the ground by the legs serves only to create a torque in the same direction as the torque resulting from the pusher's force. For Ueshiba to remain (rougly) fixed in place, the sum of the external torques must have been (roughly) zero (though we can, of course, quibble about the exact direction and magnitude of the pusher's force). Therefore, it would have taken less force to topple him if he didn't lift his legs. Extending the legs forward also moves one's center of mass forward and, therefore, serves to increase the torque due to gravity (the torque that directly opposes that of the pusher).

If you think about it, it's rather simple: when you are sitting on the ground with legs outstretched in front of you, the parts of your legs which are in contact with the ground are applying a torque to keep you in place under the influence of gravity. When someone starts to push on you, though, they are now applying that torque and less force is required of your legs to maintain equilibrium.

I suspect this is at least part of the reason why so many people believe the pusher's force to be "channeled" somehow into the ground (as in the often used analogy of an electric current): If the person being pushed wishes to remain in place, both the net external forces and torques must be roughly zero (otherwise, there would be appreciable translation or rotation, respectively, of the person's body). But this means that, if one is initially in a forward stance, for example, the forward foot must become "unweighted" in response to the pusher's force, and, therefore, an increased vertical force must be applied by the rear leg (to prevent the body from translating vertically). The increased weight on the rear leg is then responsible for the sensation that the pusher's force has been routed "into the ground."

Another trick you can add is lifting under the arms of the pusher (per some of Gozo Shioda's demos). The effect is, again, to increase the torque in opposition to that of the pusher, since lifting up on the arms tends to make one's body rotate forward.

You wouldn't happen to be a fellow Boilermaker would ya ;)

Dan Harden
30th December 2007, 01:25
Frankly I think there is some merit to the methodology of these guys...
...What I expect will happen is that I will probably come back and say "yeah there is value, yes, it is helpful, necessary, and relevant."

...What I don't expect will happen is that I will become over enamored with it, and say "lets throwh out all that we learned or are training."

I have enjoyed the discussion thus far! Thanks.

Which is what I have quoted in some twenty pages.
1. Everyone pretty much stays in their art and improves their skill.
2. "No one...not one" has quit their art (I am quoting myself from repeated posts)


Frankly, Dan and I have had our own disagreements and colored discussions on this topic. There is much that I disagree with him on. Much of it Nathan has covered. However, there are somethings I would tend to agree with him on.
Well, you haven't trained this yet have you? Be open to us maybe agreeing more than you think possible...in the end.
I still think you will find relevance in what it will do for your conditioning, sensitivity and ability to chang-up and positioning and power delivery in grappling. I -know- you will as well. If you stick with it-and it takes a while, delivering knockout power from your back or in a clinch is very valuable.
Have fun training. Its agonizing, but fun.
Cheers
Dan

Dan Harden
30th December 2007, 01:56
1. Body conditioning in a way most have never felt or seen before used as a tool to increase their______________ in their __________art

Perhaps another intriguing question is why or how is it that so many from such diverse backgrounds could find the training from three men who don’t know each other, so valuable in what they do, that they travel, train, and sweat to get it? What have we/they been missing or not been told or shown?

Cheers
Dan

lucky1899
30th December 2007, 02:21
Body conditioning….the physics of training the body to “feel aiki” are hardly a secret. Tony Annesi has a HUGE library of videos he made with Don Angier (along with several other highly ranked martial artists) that demonstrate several of the principles that make “aiki” happen. Steve Pearlman has a great book out with very well written chapters on principles of martial power. Therefore, outside, or in addition to these principles, what have we learned in this thread….probably not much. Not much technical advice has been given on any one exercise that allows one to “feel aiki”.

The issue of “parlor tricks” in the martial arts and their applicability to real life situations has been brought up. This can actually go either way (as most things in life). If you can do the parlor tricks and understand the physics and the “feel” and you stop there, then your training is leaving the ability to apply them in real life to chance and luck. If on the other hand, you have people attack you with “real” speed and power and you practice the principles and feel, then your training is setting you up nicely to be able to apply the principles to a real life situation.

So I’ll digress a little here. Let me point out (perhaps to the choir) that learning an ART and learning to FIGHT are two different things. I’m a much better fighter than I am an artist. I may be bad at both but my fighting is clearly better than my artistry. Because of this, I believe I am better positioned to judge someone else’s skill in fighting much more than in the art. Many persons have vouched for the techniques and power that Dan has, but (not being offensive, just playing devil’s advocate), are those people vouching ANY GOOD. Dan has written that students of a Shihan in Daito Ryu consistently tell him he has “it”. The only recognized Shihan in the West Coast in Daito Ryu that I know of is Kiyama Shihan. I’m fairly positive that Kiyama Shihan does not teach his third or fourth dans the inner secrets of “aiki”. Since the last time I checked there were less than a handful of persons higher than third dan in the Kodokai living in the west coast, those persons training with Dan, if in fact they are Kiyama Shihans students, may erroneously vouch Daito Ryu aiki being the same when compared with Dan’s aiki. I can throw people with or without “internal” power; I suspect Dan‘s skills are developed similarly. How do we know how Kiyama Shihan throws his lower ranked students? I believe Nathan addressed this in a different way when he wrote portions in post #147 and #158. But I wanted to expand on it a little bit more in my way.

So let’s hypothesize, we all get “it” at some point. And let’s further hypothesize that we all get “it” in a real life fight. Is this all we train for??? Are we really going to be in a “real life” situation that will decide life or death. The reality (sadly) is that most of us will die in a hospital, hopefully surrounded by loved ones. I write this as a person who carries a concealed hang gun and knife almost 100% of the time. I train to be exposed to one of the most beautiful arts ever created by mankind. The art of war but more specifically, the art of war as it was taught and practiced in the feudal era of Japan. No time in history has ever been without the need for warriors. Of course, warriors today (on the front line) are trained in a variety of methods including a myriad of technological weapons training.

My post point is that even if we get the physics and we get the feel and we‘re the “toughest“ person, there is more to our training and more to the martial arts and more to each respective style that I’m searching for. Hopefully, my fellow e-budo’ers are too!

Regards,

A De Luna

Dan Harden
30th December 2007, 02:49
I'm less concerned about anyone agreeing on what -it- is in the first place. As no one ever has and ever will. Regardless of who they trained with. Its still only their opinion. My interest isn't in a Japanese jujutsu art form or a Chinese art form of any kind. My interest are elsewhere. I'm more concerned with giving folks -from several different arts -a set of training tools which they have determined is giving them what they say they need for their art, as it feels like this or that or him or them in their view. Their teachers may either know or not know, then either care or not care. Seems the students know what they are struggling with and see this fixing a host of issues in their training.And mores the point showing them that this is past an art...form. It is formless and manifest itself all the time. 24/7. It isn't a "trick" or a series of "tricks" to do. It becomes who you are and how your body carries itself. So you lift, carry, transmit force, pull, turn, or interact with anything differenty. Sometimes this creates wierd controlling effects like a ghosty, falling into hole feel, drawing-in, in ways folks cannot resist, lifting up or weighting down in ways that capture the feet or center, stickyness etc,etc. The punches and kicks and the bodies ability to aborb hits are icing on the cake. Everyone and anyone can say it is ____________or it most certainly is not it is_____________. I really don't care.
As I stated, the interesting and unanswered question is how can this be? How can folks from such diverse backgrounds find the body training from three men who never trained together yet learned weirdly similar things so beneficial to their use?
Dan

Mark Murray
30th December 2007, 02:52
The joining of opposites. in-yo-ho
The body works best when it is supported by opposing tensions. These work in front and back, and side and side and up and down. People do not move this way naturally, neither do most martial artists. You can watch it on video and see it, and feel it , in an instant, at a touch or moment in time. Once you feel it, and are shown how to do it you see the sense of it, at least theoretically. When you are walked though steps of it in a gradual manner and learn to manipulate it, there is a great logic to it as a support system. This union of opposites has a reason for being. It both supports and manipulates at the same time. So that it, in and of itself, within the body, “the duality held” - say in stasis, becomes a “duality in application.” What keep me supported, manipulates what comes in. This is the birth of….joining energy. For many it’s a cool symbol, an ethereal, spiritual model or a hokey drawing to be placed on a placard or dojo walls, but as a method to train the body it is deep. So how do we suppose a held tautness, can be completely relaxed and how does that happen in the first place? And what would create a joining energy between people?
How is this different from the same idea in breathing? How could breathing be powerful?
Cheers
Dan

It's funny. There's an article in the latest T'ai Chi magazine. It's Vol 31 No. 5. The article is "Applying Sink, Turn and Expand" by Joseph Eber.

First, let me say I don't know T'ai Chi or any Chinese art.

So, the article asks what is the secret to elegant push hands without using muscular force. Me, I thought that was a great question. :)

Here are bits of the article's answer.



When we talk about Sink, Turn, and Expand, let us be very clear that they must be done simultaneously and NOT as separate movements.




Sinking is related to vertical




... all movements have some turning and spiraling.




Generates power by allowing force to come up from your feet and out through your hands




The classics tell us that "All movement starts at the feet." Therefore, to turn, it is the feet that must start the turning. Do the feet actually turn (in stationary push hands)? No!

Neverless the mind tells them to turn




one foot must pull as the other pushes




... sinking is NOT the same as going into a lower stance.


Anyway, the article talks about sinking and expanding, vertical expansion up and down at the same time. None of this is done physically, but with the mind. Expansion like a balloon, in all directions. Granted, it isn't an in depth article, but it was interesting to read and see similar phrases and ideals coming from someone else. :)

Mark

Mark Murray
30th December 2007, 03:08
Pushing

I study aikido. One of the things Ueshiba did was have people push on him in a myriad of ways. Shioda did it, Tomiki did it, and Tohei did it. I certainly would say that it is something of a test of skill.

So, yes, history-wise, I would say this is worth learning. And they didn't have their uke's push on them. They had sumo and judoka doing it. People who really wanted to push them over -- and failed, I might add.

But, let's go beyond using this as a sort of test of skill. Let's look at some uses of this kind of training.

Incoming force is dealt with in some way, shape, and form. That force might be grounded, dissipated, or dispersed over the body. Heck, it might even be stored for later use. How does that translate to aikido? The big thing is relaxation. If you can manipulate this kind of energy, you aren't using muscle. So, it ends up creating a relaxed body. Or relax completely. Because you can't have pathways in your body if your muscles are independently engaging/disengaging.

I like to use the example of a water hose. Picture a path from one hand to the foot. That pathway is a hose. Energy is the water. If someone grabs the wrist, that energy is like water flowing through the hose. But, if a bicep flexes, then it kinks the hose. Now, the energy doesn't flow, but congregates at that kinked point.

The shoulder muscles are a big point of contention. It's why I feel top heavy and easy to push over sometimes. Because the pathway is stopped when the chest/shoulder muscle engages and creates a stoppage. Then my body is easily manipulated because of that.

Seems worthwhile to be able to do this kind of body training for pushing. Least to me.

Not to mention actually controlling what you're doing with the energy, bouncing it back, storing it, etc. Or even what happens when you can do this and you have a weapon in your hands. Someone tries to create an opening by moving your bokken and it doesn't move. Jo. Stick. Whatever.

Mark

leavittk
30th December 2007, 03:22
Mark,

You can see it in many places of literature. I am finding interpretations of it in Vanda Scaravelli's work she did in yoga. She wrote a wonderful book called "awakening the spine". she describes her "power" in three things. Wave, Breath, and Gravity. She talks about roots extending down into the earth. Gravity allowing us to extend up and out as a tree, and the connection of breath.

She is dead now, but as far as I know she never set foot in a dojo, never threw one punch. Learned it all from Ienvengar, (sic), and J. Krishnamurti.

A De Luna: Can you define for me what you mean by "FIGHT" or "fighter". I am sensing that you mean it in the sense of reality, that is, "on the street" or combat or something like that? I assume that is your definition because you talk about carrying a concealed weapon or knife.

I ask this because I too am concerned with the realitive value of the application of these skills in many such situations. (I am a soldier and train soldiers in CQB type stuff on the empty hand side of the spectrum.) The application of empty hand arts for me in these situations can cover a huge area over the escalation of force/rules of engagement from breathing, trigger pull, squeeze, all the way to grappling in a struggle for your life.

Anyway, my ONLY issue I have ever had with this whole topic is based on realitive value of this training. Many in budo will say that this stuff is more additive or the holy grail of what we do, AND that it will benefit you immensely in your "martial effectiveness", however they fail to specifically say "HOW", or demonstrate in what ways.

I am not here to start a war with Dan Harden. In fact, Dan has said in the last several post...take it for what it is and what I offer...THEN figure out what you can do with it.

This is what I plan to do with it.

I really don't care too much about "who shot john" or "who has the true lineage and whether it is from DR or CIMA, JIMA or what not.

The only thing I really care is looking at applications of use and were various fellow pracitioners find it useful.

I don't care for the whole "martial effective" thing because it typically means different things to different people. If you say that it is useful in fighting or "combat effective", it will improve your ability to strike...then it means something to me. If you state this, then I would sincerely and honestly expect you to demonstrate "How". I would discuss with you in great detail prior to actual training what you actually mean by "effective" to ensure we agreed to the definition, then I would want to work with you in that manner.

Anyway, again, not here to start a fight with anyone, especially Dan, as we have had this conversation before, and I believe we are on the same sheet of music in this regard.

It is up to the individual seeking to discover to go out there, train and then adapt it to their training.

Thanks again!

Mark Murray
30th December 2007, 03:29
Sticky.

Oh, can this one be fun. :) Especially on the receiving end where you just can't let go. LOL.

Applications? Like all the rest, just too many.

Aikido-wise. Hmm ... Let's talk kuzushi to tsukuri. Yes, in ideal situations, one would hope to have kuzushi, tsukuri, and kake as one. For those not yet that skilled, there is a time frame between kuzushi and tsukuri.

I like to think of kuzushi as destabilizing structure or even destroying structure. Tsukuri is the fit, the point where tori takes advantageous positioning, usually in a physical sense.

So, once the attack has started, tori should gain kuzushi at the moment of contact. And if you can be sticky, then you have in essence gained kuzushi. Not only that, but uke can *not* let go or disengage. So, going from kuzushi to tsukuri is an easier thing to do. No need to worry about timing or exact placement because you're sticky. Uke goes where you go, or rather goes where you want them to go.

With weapons ... wow, what advantage. Someone tries to move a bokken to create an opening and you're sticky. You've captured them.

And, really, if you think about these things -- Not one one of them invalidates an art. Instead, they make an art better, stronger. And create a specific training tool for teaching certain principles (like relax completely).

Mark

Eric Joyce
30th December 2007, 03:41
From my limited and new understanding of the subject, using the back leg as the primary channel, or especially as a brace, is one of the signs that you are NOT using these methods correctly. I still have a lot of trouble channeling using the front leg. If you find someone who can do this without up weighting the front leg, spend some time with them...

Best,
Ron

Hey Ron,

I sent you a PM. Talk with you later.

Samurai Jack
30th December 2007, 04:06
Mark,

After reading you posts that you are looking into CIMA, which I think personally, is great. Kudos. Maybe I can be of assistance in pointing out some principles core to CIMA. Keep in mind, there are no standardizations as we know it, therefore, definitions can vary from teacher to teacher, or system to system on terminology etc. but the principles stay the same.

A common belief is chi is developed through breathing, which is said to beget internal power. That internal power can be transferred/projected into action. The Chinese call it Fah Jing, which translates (I am told) to transfer/projection. Essentially, chi built up/stored and turned into an action is what they are saying. Some people have likened it to kinetics, and other scientific models. Hence it is an internal principle, and not external. External told to me is simple dumb brute force. Internal transfers power i.e. a punch that comes from the foot pushing off that drives the hips to turn/torque, that turns the torso that moves the shoulder, that drives the punch. Where as external is not using physics to the fullest extent, in terms of a punch the power doesn't come from the use of the whole body, it only is generated from the arms muscle groups. Nothing new there, universal knowledge, from boxers, to baseball batters, to tennis players to golf swings. When I speak of internal this is what I mean.

Back to Fah Jing, it can be practiced alone or with another person. It has many applications. You find these applications in sticking hands and push hands. I know of 26 applications. I am sure there are more. One application is chuen jing or inch power. Another is chen jing or sinking power, the counter to being uprooted. Uprooting Power is ti jing and basically described is the action of being shoved off your feet and traveling in a backward direction. Then sinking power in brief is preventing this action of uprooting by relaxation and sinking the body weight. There is more to it then that, but you get the idea. The point here is all the Fah Jing applications have corresponding scientific models (imo). There is nothing mysterious or difficult to understand if you are familiar with these models. The difficultly at first that I had was understanding Fah Jing due to the way it was first explained and translating it to familiar scientific models. The latter provided me with a greater understanding, that understanding lead to increased skill. Once Fah Jing applications where framed in a familiar way, I was able to better apply the applications.

I am sure this would be true for you, as the article you discuss is Fah Jing. I am sure you do much of this already, and was taught to you early on in different terminology and framework. Heck if you ever played contact sports, or sports like tennis you have a good understanding. The issue is again terminology and framework. Once you get past that I think you will have a flood of Gestalt moments, thus improving greatly your skills and abilities.

Cady Goldfield
30th December 2007, 04:25
Mark,
External told to me is simple dumb brute force. Internal transfers power i.e. a punch that comes from the foot pushing off that drives the hips to turn/torque, that turns the torso that moves the shoulder, that drives the punch. Where as external is not using physics to the fullest extent, in terms of a punch the power doesn't come from the use of the whole body, it only is generated from the arms muscle groups. Nothing new there, universal knowledge, from boxers, to baseball batters, to tennis players to golf swings. When I speak of internal this is what I mean.

Jack,
What you're describing as "internal" is actually external power generation in a nutshell. In fact, you've just listed the basic sequence for executing an external-style (as in Shotokan karate, etc.) punch or strike.

"External" is not "simple dumb brute force," but, rather, power generated by "external" sources of potential energy -- forward momentum and gravity -- combined with accelerated hip torque (hip torque is considered the bread-and-butter source of "external" power). It is very much based in the efficient and effective use of physics. I spent over 20 years honing this very external power, became quite adept at it, and have discovered that it is entirely unrelated to (and, in fact, a hindrance to learning) internal power generation.

Do you train in any sort of martial art? Just wondering if you do, and if so, what, and for how long.

Samurai Jack
30th December 2007, 05:10
Cady, that is the problem I stated to Dan at the start early on in the post, I guess you didn't read that. Internal to some is not to others. That is why I say "told to me." Inferring that is what my teacher told me, but from others it is different. Cartmell, disregards the terms completely. Personally, I agree with Cartmell, and with you. You can define internal or external anyway you wish, I am not telling you your wrong. Like I said before it is complicated and controversial issue. Personally, I alluded to internal is being the use of physics, I didn't stand on that because I don't like the terms. But ya got to do, what ya got to do. What can ya do. (shoulder shrug)

Yes, Miss Goldfeld, I do. I stated it early on in the thread, I guess you have dropped in late. Aren't you Dan's sidekick? That is posting sidekick as well as student? Or his spouse? I am not sure from reading so many of Dan's posts. Just curious - nothing personal :) If so, good for you. Do you do taichi for health. It is good for the health if you don't you should try it. But, I don't think it is a magic bullet like many proclaim. I have seen many people start taichi with bad health and simple aliments improve. It does improve your health, but so does any general daily exercise, and good diet.

I have studied gungfu, gigong, bagua, various taichi, and have dabbled in other arts over the years. I now just do taichi for health, considered an internal art by my Chinese master with all the other old folks (mostly elderly Chinese ladies...growl....:laugh: you single? ;) Hey, old men can flirt it's one of the perks. :laugh: ) in the park at the break of dawn. Ya every try Snake Creeps Down or circle walking in 5 inches of snow, or Golden Pheasant/Rooster Stands On One Leg on an ice patch or during a storm? Winter is hell, that is why we practice in doors during the winter :laugh: .

Anything else you want to know ;)

Samurai Jack
30th December 2007, 05:29
Also I am not an advocate of the mysterious powers of chi like some are. If you search my posts you will see why. Therefore, some consider internal to be mysterious forces such as chi. I suggest you also go back to my earlier threads and read them where I cite internal references. This would help in making sense of what and why I stated what I stated concerning what is internal v. external arts, i.e. taichi (considered to be internal) Iron palm, White Crane (considered to be external). Me personally, I don't think about it. After awhile it all gets blury and runs together. The divisions get blurred and the concepts run together.

I will be off here for a while, I can see Dan jumping for joy, PM and I will get back to you if you like ;) that is if you have further personal questions.

Signing off.

Finny
30th December 2007, 06:58
Signing off.

Praise the lord

lucky1899
30th December 2007, 07:42
Kevin,

I'm using the term fighter very narrowly and applying it to myself and my experiences. When I write "fighter", I mean someone that can take a hit and come back for more as well as deliver pain that makes others not want to come back for more. Yes, I do mean on the street. I’ve never been at war so I can’t speak to combat in a military sense. I worked as a bouncer and for several years just found myself in bad situations. I have no doubt luck and my guardian angel were with me most of the time (hence my username "lucky"). In the past ten years my "fighting" has strictly been in the dojo (unless you count my kids beating me) ; ).

Regards,


A. De Luna

Samurai Jack
30th December 2007, 07:50
What are we really talking about here is performance martial arts stunts, which had little or no combat relevance. But, have more to do with persuading others of supernatural or extraordinary power for fame or profit. These performance stunts and demonstrations that entertained and Wowed audiences clearly had a long lasting impact.

We really have to keep things in perspective, and those who have been in the martial arts for years, and take the arts seriously know all of this. They know martial arts parlor tricks purpose is for some to have fun or fame I don’t think those of responsible and quality martial arts training and background allow these performers to confuse real martial arts with their stage acts. It is dangerous and irresponsible.

I understand that you will always have such people preforming these stage acts in the martial arts. If we are going to credit them in any way it should be in the area of entertainment and not martial arts.
Jack Robison
**************************************************

Hey Jack
Old tradition. Budo is a funny topic to discuss among some men. Every once in a while you get guys who'll call you on your opinions. You have ignored the information in these posts and offer insult, by choice.
Wrong guy Jack.
Since you are now insulting me personally as
a. some sort of trickster
b. only citing others for borrowed knowledge, not my own.
c. performing slight of hand
d. Now misleading others for money, which would by inference extend to men who are training this way for free.

Why don't you come explain all this to me.
To my face.

While here,
1. You can meet some men who have been in the arts for ten to twenty years. I'm quite sure they will drive or fly in, just to meet you, and you can tell them how they are unable to judge things…as good as you...for their own training.
Maybe in person, I'll tell you again about shihan and Menkyo who are training it since you cannot comprehend the written word.
2. Then, nothing but movement. You may try to do anything to me you like: Aikido, Daito ryu, Judo, or, I have pairs of 6 oz gloves you can use.
Mind you, I won’t teach you a damn thing, but, I will welcome the chance to demonstrate my ideas and their relevancy to the martial arts...on you.

You wrote and offered me the advice to "Put up, or shut up."Which Nathan deemed apropriate for this forum for some reason. Since I, have been doing that very thing, and men have written in here to tell you of it and you have chosen to ignore them, I'll take you up on it.
Come on up!

If not, then for the umpteenth time from everyone including the moderate on down to most of us here who know each other or have known of each other for many years... take the second half or your own advice.

Dan

Oh, before I go, Dan, I am not concerned with those you teach or those who support you. They very well may learn things from you. I don't judge them, infact kudos to them. It is you I have been addressing. Why use and bring others in on this. What I am mainly concerned about is you.

Second of all, concerning the red text above from your post. Doesn't this violate E-Budo rules? If I am not mistaken I would say this is a theat. I don't intent or ever implyed violence to you. Though you bait me. I don't intend nor in any manner implyed or otherwise said I would harm you. Yet, you imply you will use violence on me. Should I take it seriously? Will it be you or one of your buddies who will hunt me down and harm me, is that what your also implying? You really are odd, someone I would not like to ever met. You are frightening, Dan. Lots of red flags with you. I agree now whole-heartedly with Chris.

I suggest the Moderator and others to look at your post more closely, and take some action upon your threats.

Finny, why do you care? That concerns me too.

I am taking time off.

Finny
30th December 2007, 09:59
Jack, you continue to stuff your feet (both of them) further and further into your mouth.

Dan DOES have experience in Daito Ryu. You don't.

You have absolutely no credibility here - your posts are barely comprehensible, and you continually attack Dan like a petulant child throwing a tantrum.

Get the message, please.

Stop posting - period. Read and learn a bit. Stop jumping to wild conclusions, and filling in the blanks in your own knowlege with assumptions.

You have NEVER made a positive contribution to either this thread, or the forum, as far as I can see, and yet you seem to think you are in a position to appoint yourself quasi-moderator, and question people's agendas and experience (when most here already know these)





That's why I care Jack

Maybe if you actually read what other people have to say, you'd know that.

But who knows, keep stuffing your feet down your throat, maybe one day they'll end up where they're meant to be.

There was nothing threatening in what Dan wrote - another case of your stupid childish tantrum getting the best of you.

As to what you wrote about Human Growth Hormone and me down here in Aus, well - I thought you made my point for me perfectly... that is to say, it wasn't even legible english.

Maybe if I could understand what you were saying I might find a personal insult there - which certainly WOULD be contravening E-Budo policy.

You keep saying you're leaving, but you continue to post.

Maybe you should leave, go to massachusets and meet Dan.

elder999
30th December 2007, 13:12
Second of all, concerning the red text above from your post. Doesn't this violate E-Budo rules? If I am not mistaken I would say this is a theat. I don't intent or ever implyed violence to you. Though you bait me. I don't intend nor in any manner implyed or otherwise said I would harm you. Yet, you imply you will use violence on me. Should I take it seriously? Will it be you or one of your buddies who will hunt me down and harm me, is that what your also implying? You really are odd, someone I would not like to ever met. You are frightening, Dan. Lots of red flags with you. I agree now whole-heartedly with Chris.

I suggest the Moderator and others to look at your post more closely, and take some action upon your threats.

.

Jack, you need to take a pill-seriously.

I don't know Dan Harden, but I like him...of course, we've got a lot in common:we both have dojo in our barns, we both make knives-at least, I make knives, Dan makes swords-and his Daito ryu teacher was one of my seniors in Miyama ryu....

Who's your Daito ryu teacher?

This whole application of words to the somewhat esoteric almost always fosters arguments-it's perfectly okay for you to disagree with each other. It's not okay to personally attack what a person says they do with no direct experience of it. I also think it's kind of silly of you to keep harping on him to post a video on youtube-videos aren't usually adequate proof or demonstration of anything, though you can often see a few things, if they're real, that is..

More importantly, he hasn't threatened you at all-he extended the same sort of invitation that he extends to almost everyone: "Come on up and see what I do.." If you construe that as a threat, well then, you are mistaken. I suggest you go on doing "tai chi for health," and stay out of discussions on principles and their application-especially their application-especially the ones you don't seem to know too much about...

leavittk
30th December 2007, 13:26
Kevin,

I'm using the term fighter very narrowly and applying it to myself and my experiences. When I write "fighter", I mean someone that can take a hit and come back for more as well as deliver pain that makes others not want to come back for more. Yes, I do mean on the street. I’ve never been at war so I can’t speak to combat in a military sense. I worked as a bouncer and for several years just found myself in bad situations. I have no doubt luck and my guardian angel were with me most of the time (hence my username "lucky"). In the past ten years my "fighting" has strictly been in the dojo (unless you count my kids beating me) ; ).

Regards,


A. De Luna


Thanks for the providing your perspective. It is helpful to me to understand the various criteria or perspective that people are coming from when discussing this topic!

mjchip
30th December 2007, 13:27
Oh, before I go, Dan, I am not concerned with those you teach or those who support you. They very well may learn things from you. I don't judge them, infact kudos to them. It is you I have been addressing. Why use and bring others in on this. What I am mainly concerned about is you.

Second of all, concerning the red text above from your post. Doesn't this violate E-Budo rules? If I am not mistaken I would say this is a theat. I don't intent or ever implyed violence to you. Though you bait me. I don't intend nor in any manner implyed or otherwise said I would harm you. Yet, you imply you will use violence on me. Should I take it seriously? Will it be you or one of your buddies who will hunt me down and harm me, is that what your also implying? You really are odd, someone I would not like to ever met. You are frightening, Dan. Lots of red flags with you. I agree now whole-heartedly with Chris.

I suggest the Moderator and others to look at your post more closely, and take some action upon your threats.

Finny, why do you care? That concerns me too.

I am taking time off.

Jack,

The internet is a funny place where written word sometimes get misconstrued due to lack of body language, tone, etc.. I can tell you that Dan isn't threatening you. He simply invited you , as he did a few others (myself included after waiting 6 years and finally getting a personal introduction) to come up and "feel" what he's been talking about in this sometimes cloudy medium.

When he says that he's sure a bunch of experienced folks would drive and fly down to meet you he's talking about us. It would be a pleasure to see another naysayer be pleasantly surprised as they discover some "new" skills/abilities that they may apply to thier arts (whatever they may be).

When he said: "Then, nothing but movement. You may try to do anything to me you like: Aikido, Daito ryu, Judo, or, I have pairs of 6 oz gloves you can use.
Mind you, I won’t teach you a damn thing, but, I will welcome the chance to demonstrate my ideas and their relevancy to the martial arts...on you."

...he was not threatening you. He was saying that he would let you do whatever you'd like to him as his demonstrated his skills/ideas to you. This is the same thing he said to a bunch of us and the same treatment that he gave us. The only difference I sensed in his post compared to how he treats us is he stated to you "I won't teach you a damned thing."

I won't begin to guess what he mean't here but if we were talking about my school I wouldn't even invite you up nevermind send you away without "teaching" you anything because you seem to have a generally poor attitude (and my school is one that takes students from the general public). However, since Dan is such a big hearted guy I imagine he meant that he would probably let his students do the teaching (as he did for us other outsiders) to prove that not only does he have skill but he can readily teach it to others who then would also be capable of passing it on if they were so inclined.

Hope you put your misplaced fear aside and either stop being inflammatory or come up and visit and "feel" for yourself what Dan and others have been talking about here.

Cordially,

Mark Chiappetta

wagnerphysed
30th December 2007, 13:50
This is a sensitive subject. Dan could you clarify Finny's Assertion please? What is your experience in Daito-ryu? My understanding is that you are a Mixed Martial Artist who has not tied himself down by making a commitment to a Martial Tradition (in this case Daito-ryu). Is this correct?
I recall that not very long ago, you yourself posted something on this forum to this end.

While I respect your efforts to provide explore and develop the methods you have experienced in your participation in the arts you are using to develop your overall eclectic martial skills, I think you are missing the point. I know that this will be seen as a flame, but that's not what this is. I will clarify.

Your post is in the Daito-ryu forum. WHile your movements or techniques may be inspired by experiences with people you have trained with who are in the Daito-ryu, these amalgamations/creations are not Daito-ryu. In fact, as I believe Nathan tried to explain (I thought he was really clear), the technique is really only a small part of the ryu. There is so much more to a tradition than it's body of techniques. Practicing only the techniques does not give anyone claim to understanding a ryu. Nor does cross-training with people in a ryu or having conversations, reading books, and interviews.

Mixed Martial Artists only dabble in other martial arts. Let me clarify this assertion. In order to become proficient in a martial tradition, one will need to put forth a serious effort in training (read as years). In order to develop an MMA, there is no time to spend plumbing the depths of a tradition. There is no desire to plumb the depths either, (I think I have read this between the lines in your posts. Am I reading this correctly?) there is only a desire to take what is needed or deemed to be worthwhile. There is also the time needed to research traditions, techniques, and other aspects of training that are required (much like , but different, to what a person studying a martial tradition would do). With these acquisitions, the MMA practitioner then combines techniques into his/her own style. This combining is the training that MMA would focus much of there time and energy on. All of this takes time. A person involved with a martial tradition would be spending all of this time on learning their tradition, instead of spreading that time across multiple traditions and research.

On rare occasions, there are individuals who have picked up traditions very quickly, Ueshiba comes to mind. However, these individuals have invested an incredible amount of time in other arts prior to their involvement in the tradition they seem to magically pick up. This time spent gives them the background knowledge needed, the mind/sight training if you will, to pick out the reality of a technique or principle. In some cases, this is in part due to a gift the person has, i.e. Bruce Lee. Very few of these individuals have been able to pass their ability on to their students. I have a theory on this as well, but that doesn't really fit with this post.

So, how does all of this apply? What your doing is not Daito-ryu. It's not Aiki as it applies to Daito-ryu. Your experience in Daito-ryu is limited at best ((in time(seminars versus training in a school), or in practice (training only in the techniques of the school and not in other aspects), or both)). So why are you posting regarding your research in MMA techniques here in the Daito-ryu forum?

Mark Murray
30th December 2007, 14:16
Your post is in the Daito-ryu forum.


Actually, no, it's not.

And I quote,


http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5559

SUBJECT CRITERIA

In order to encourage discussion, styles and traditions that are gendai {post-Meiji} and/or not recognized formally as koryu will be accepted as topics for discussion (otherwise we wouldn't have much to talk about, to be honest!). This includes arts using the names "aikibudo", "aikijutsu", "aikibujutsu", etc.




Mixed Martial Artists only dabble in other martial arts. Let me clarify this assertion. In order to become proficient in a martial tradition, one will need to put forth a serious effort in training (read as years). In order to develop an MMA, there is no time to spend plumbing the depths of a tradition.


Not speaking for Dan in this instance, but rather speaking from my own view of many, many teachers, both past and present. People like Ueshiba, Shioda, Tomiki, Tohei, Draeger, Mochizuki, Oyama, etc. These teachers, and a whole lot more like them, are held up as being fine examples. And every single one of them were mixed martial artists. They all plumbed depths of tradition. Please don't confuse MMA with "Sport". Most people like to label the newer sport fighters as MMA'ers. They are MMA in the same sense that a McDojo Karate school is traditional karate.



On rare occasions, there are individuals who have picked up traditions very quickly, Ueshiba comes to mind. However, these individuals have invested an incredible amount of time in other arts prior to their involvement in the tradition they seem to magically pick up. This time spent gives them the background knowledge needed, the mind/sight training if you will, to pick out the reality of a technique or principle. In some cases, this is in part due to a gift the person has, i.e. Bruce Lee. Very few of these individuals have been able to pass their ability on to their students.


Rare? I don't see that at all. As I listed above, there are numerous examples of these kinds of people. You can find them throughout all of Budo history. Quite a few people I know in the Aikido world have various backgrounds in the martial arts: Tae Kwon Do, Judo, Jodo, Kenjutsu, Arnis, Karate, etc. They are mixed martial artists in the true sense. They have studied other arts and what they have learned has made them better overall. And they're passing on their abilities just fine. Mochizuki's school is one of the best examples of an MMA school passing on abilities.

Anyway, I don't agree with your assessment of this forum or MMA.

Mark

Jeff Cook
30th December 2007, 14:20
I'm curious Brian. What kind of "traditions" did Ueshiba pick up? What kind of traditions did Takeda teach him? Back "in the day" when jujitsu arts were formulated and taught, I seriously doubt anyone was interested in "traditions" - they were interested in becoming proficient in a very short time without a whole lot of fluff and pomp attached to it (wow, kinda sounds like MMA doesn't it? ;) ).

By Ueshiba's own hand, we read that Takeda taught him individual waza at a very expensive price. I have read nothing about Takeda teaching him "traditions" (I may be missing that part - if so, please fill me in). I suspect that Ueshiba created his own traditions for his students to follow.

Jeff Cook

Dan Harden
30th December 2007, 16:03
Brian
I don’t do Daito ryu. I don’t do Chinese martial arts. You’re wrong about never training in a traditional art though. I have and I currently am, amongst other things I choose to do. But through it all I never stopped training the way I did in my youth, with all manner of people. I can walk quite comfortably in both worlds. I do what I do and I stand on my own two feet, but I am by no means unique in that now am I? Just now I’m discussing body conditioning that prepares the body for traditional martial arts AND any form of grappling. I’m not talking about “an” art. So, where I have trained and where I do train is sort of a waste of time discussing. That said. the body conditioning I and others do and are showing, is the key to training the body to do …lets just call it “stuff.” And It was taught to us from traditional arts. Anyone who knows this stuff, and everyone who has trained it will tell you pretty much the same thing. You can’t “discover” or make this stuff up. This training is so counter to what I thought I knew I’d never have stumbled on to it. You can however build on it, and choose to use it in a manner of your choosing. The reason I choose to show it to mostly traditional artists is that they are the ones who
a. Need it most
b. Have it in their arts in the first place.

Everyone wants to keep discussing me but no one has addressed my questions.
I contend that this stuff is known and just not taught openly in the traditional arts. If it were not so:
1. How did the guys teaching this stuff, from varied backgrounds, all end up talking bout similar things and feeling similar in many ways? I contend that these men only know what they were taught as well.
2. Men from varied backgrounds have gone to train with two or all three. Many of whom are teachers and some are seniors in these arts. How can it be that experienced men of such varied backgrounds all state. “I want it.” This feels like so and so from my_______art.
3. Why could these men find the methods of these tanren trainers so valuable to their training?
How, could that happen in any other way, than it was taught to them from traditional arts, and once shown, experienced men saw it for what it was- the key to their traditional arts.
How can this even be possible? Mass histeria? Poor judgement on the part of so many of you?
Or is it...simply...true.

As for tradition
What is Daito ryu Aiki, what is Aikido Aiki, what is or are the jins in Taiji, what is the way power was meant to be generated in Xing-I, what is the way power was meant to be generated in Karate. Guys can fight it out and remain convinced of the singularity of their arts power forever. Seems to me you have a very narrow ratio of folks in the arts who have much of anything worth talking about in the first place. And the others are hiding it from students.

Men will remain forever convinced you have to follow some twenty year path of some art of another to learn how to fight. Its nonsense. How is that. Because what so many have clearly demonstrated is that at the end of twenty years? They stink up the place. What they learend and were indoctrinated into is an art form, part of a tradition. Few seem to demonstrate they they got anything truly exceptional and the ratio remains small as the numbers keep declining.
In the end, I think we will discover that the power generation that is key is incredibly similar. Further, that it is held back from most as a method of protectionism. It won’t change the rest of what is in these arts that “identifies them; technique, strategy, waza, etc., instead it will make them as powerful as they once were…in the hands of more people doing them. Who knows a few of them may be world class innovators and masters in the making were they given better tools.
Cheers
Dan

Dan Harden
30th December 2007, 17:14
I'm curious Brian. What kind of "traditions" did Ueshiba pick up? What kind of traditions did Takeda teach him? Back "in the day" when jujitsu arts were formulated and taught, I seriously doubt anyone was interested in "traditions" - they were interested in becoming proficient in a very short time without a whole lot of fluff and pomp attached to it (wow, kinda sounds like MMA doesn't it? ;) ).

By Ueshiba's own hand, we read that Takeda taught him individual waza at a very expensive price. I have read nothing about Takeda teaching him "traditions" (I may be missing that part - if so, please fill me in). I suspect that Ueshiba created his own traditions for his students to follow.

Jeff Cook

That’s an old but absolutely true observation, Jeff. I have a friend who is the staunchest, traditionalist you ever want to meet. If it doesn't have a provenance or heritage, he wants no part of it. I have taken him apart so many times I lost count, but unless it is part of an established "thing" he won't touch it. He will tell you its the softest, most powerful thing he ever encountered, and then go do something lesser because..
cue up the fiddler on the roof...TRADITION!!
I asked him to explain Musashi.
We've had so many conversations about traditional masters some of whom founded schools out of nothing because "God told them" or a tengu taught em, what have you. Nothing as a Koryu at one time or another it was just one guys vision. How did he have to prove it? Fighting. This all old rehash but its interesting maybe for the younger guys. The funny thing is is that in their day, when they were new, how many of these traditionalist would have followed these arts? Arts that were, in there day-MMA.
How many of these masters were they to come alive again today, would look at their "traditions" they invented with pride? Or not even recognize them or...walk out the door.
I walk both worlds as I love the traditional but also the modern combatives. I still think the real power to move the body will never be found in modern combatives. The traditional arts have kept that. So I we have to pay respect to them for that. In fact there is much I can say but I won't out of respect. The art format is getting to be a bit dicey as more folks get educated about the realities of fighting. There remains enough guys who love the traditional stuff to keep them going, but the real worry -and it is talked about- is just who...can keep them "alive."
Cheers

R_Garrelts
30th December 2007, 17:48
Ah, never mind.

wagnerphysed
30th December 2007, 17:50
I stand corrected about your choice of forums. However, my comment about rare....Mark, the number of names mentioned in your post is small compared to the number of people who have actually taken up the study of the various martial traditions. As for confusion of MMA, I'm not. Take Mr. Draeger, the fact of the matter is, that he did plumb the depths of the traditions he studied intently and he passed those traditions on to his students. He was in a position and time to study the multiple arts he was involved in and he did not, to my knowledge, combine those arts into his own ha, (however, I could be wrong and I will check).

Jeff, Ueshiba was taught the entire Daito-ryu curriculum as it existed at the time of Ueshiba's participation (about 20 years). He was a Kyoju Dairi (sic?) and held a Soden ( I think this is the correct name for the scroll he was given) which at the time would have been equivalent to a Menkyo Kaiden. So, he was taught the tradition. As Mr. Okomoto has done, Ueshiba took his knowledge and his practices and developed his own tradition. The important thing to remember about these individuals is the level within the tradition that they reached prior to creating their own.

Dan, I see why you would think that I said you didn't study traditional martial arts. My comment is confusing. To clarify, I am aware of your involvement in traditional arts. I'm pretty sure I know what it is you study and whom you study under. But as you say, this is not the point of this post. However, I am glad that you clarified the whole Daito-ryu issue
I don’t do Daito ryu. I don’t do Chinese martial arts. My concern was that some responses to the post were (not yours) presented you as an authority, or may have given you undue validation, as a Daito-ryu member/practitioner.

As for the answers to your questions, which are very reasonable, I can't really provide any response not knowing who it is you are talking about. However, let me go back to a point made over and over again in many places. Everything you need to learn/know is provided in the Koryu system (only speaking for Daito-ryu and Jikishinkageryu).
Don't blame the technique if it doesn't work! It is not explicitly taught and that is why after 20 years so many people may stink up a place. But what is embedded in these Koryu traditions is implicitly taught. So it will come down to the student's ability to learn and the teacher's ability to teach.

Learning is a series of chaotic adjustments to the stimulus of the environment. As a student becomes more familiar with the environment, they begin to extract principles and knowledge that leads to further adjustment and learning. Through this process, chaos is refined into knowledge and ability. The limits here are, the teacher's ability to create the environment and the student's ability to learn or the student's learning style (and also the teacher's ability or desire to adapt the environment to a different learning style).

Does this answer at least one of your questions?

wagnerphysed
30th December 2007, 17:59
Part of respecting a martial tradition or Koryu is keeping it intact, alive and transmitting it to others. This is the responsibility of those involved in the arts and is the price you pay when you take from these arts...it's a family thing. Most respectful people wouldn't take support from their families and then turn around and ignore them in their times of need or for that matter disavow the family. I realize, in this day and age, that I may, in fact, be wrong about this. More than likely, this is the problem that exists between your line of reason and mine.

Dan Harden
30th December 2007, 18:20
Aaron
You big goof. Stop...pushing..the buttons.:D

We have to meet some day. It's been a long time eh?
And...I made knives before I started making swords. Kukris remain my favorite.
Happy holidays guy
Dan

elder999
30th December 2007, 18:27
Aaron
You big goof. Stop...pushing..the buttons.:D

We have to meet some day. It's been a long time eh?
And...I made knives before I started making swords. Kukris remain my favorite.
Happy holidays guy
Dan


Buttons??? It wasn't me! I think it has something to do with my wretched wireless connection......that and my big fingers on a laptop keyboard..

I am a big goof, though..:laugh:

Meeting could happen, someday.....looks like I'm "retiring."

I've made three swords in my entire life-one good, one frustrating fantasy piece, and one real POS..

This thread has been an interesting discussion that I'd like to see keep going-without the ridiculous sniping-I have nothing against sniping, personally, but when it reaches the level of "You're wrong because I say so," then it's pretty ridiculous, and embarassing to witness.

My holidays aren't so happy, but thanks, and back at ya.:)

Mark Jakabcsin
30th December 2007, 21:30
Part of respecting a martial tradition or Koryu is keeping it intact, alive and transmitting it to others. This is the responsibility of those involved in the arts and is the price you pay when you take from these arts...it's a family thing. Most respectful people wouldn't take support from their families and then turn around and ignore them in their times of need or for that matter disavow the family. I realize, in this day and age, that I may, in fact, be wrong about this. More than likely, this is the problem that exists between your line of reason and mine.

The implication here is people of today do not have the respect and reverence for koryu arts that generations of old had and that somehow this is a bad modern twist of our time. Is this really an accurate assessment or a romantic remembrance of a past that never was? Have people really changed or do we have a natural tendency to remember the 'good old days' through tinted glasses?

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't most of the well known martial artists of the past study in multiple arts often receiving licenses in more than one art? If there was so much respect where people did not take support from their families then why are there so MANY koryu arts through history? How did each of these traditions start? I.E. How did the first master obtain his knowledge? Did each of these masters start his koryu art with 'new' information that he developed or was there a good, perhaps great deal, of borrowing?

I am not claiming to know the answer to any of these questions and am curious to hear from those that have done the research as the thinking represented above always seems at odds with some basic facts, at least to me.

Take care and Happy New Year to all,

Mark J.

wagnerphysed
30th December 2007, 23:15
Hey Mark, that's not what I'm saying! I'm not pushing the
Samurai Fantasy. I am, however, saying that there is a certain amount of responsibility to the ryu when a student has taken his/her knowledge from that ryu.

I am also very aware of teachers and ryus that are less than ideal and are on a spectrum of questionable ethics. There are also situations where students really need to seperate themselves from very good teachers as well as the bad. I really don't want to get caught up in all of the variables and combinations that exist.

I'm a High School teacher by profession and I am working on my administrative certificate and considering moving on to my PhD in that area. I've been doing a great deal of research into organizational culture and education as a whole. What I've turned up is a very real tendency within society towards a focus on material belongings and satisfaction with a surface understanding of many areas within society. I'm not preaching the Family Values Sermon here. Although I did use the phrase family, my meaning is more along the lines of a responsibility to a group that has earned and deserves it through their conduct and actions.

Dan Harden
30th December 2007, 23:35
It is well and good you outlined some variables, Brian. There are many good men on all sides in these arts, and some men do things that are regretable to others and some men hold their integrity throughout. It can indeed get complicated. I've seen it happen. There are many koryu that are indeed like family, and like family-stuff happens and you are wise not to talk about it in public. There is more that is good, and uplifting, and wonderful than there is bad in these arts. And on the whole they are great to be a part of.
Cheers and happy new year
Dan

Dan Harden
31st December 2007, 00:34
I've made three swords in my entire life-one good, one frustrating fantasy piece, and one real POS..
Well forging swords can be rather unforgiving itn'd it? Twisting, curving, equalling stresses. Try lcontroling hamon patterns and water quenching them! Argh!


This thread has been an interesting discussion that I'd like to see keep going-without the ridiculous sniping-I have nothing against sniping, personally, but when it reaches the level of "You're wrong because I say so," then it's pretty ridiculous, and embarassing to witness.

My holidays aren't so happy, but thanks, and back at ya.:)
Sorry to hear that bud
Back on topic for the general discussion
All this debate, anger, frustration and disbelief on the net, has led to many others researching and digging behind the scenes. And THAT has led to one good thing...friends have been made. Many earnest people in a myriad of arts are gaining a deeper understanding of what they have determined is at the core of their own. For some it's more than they thought was possible for them to gain in these arts. For others who already had a deep understanding of their arts, it's proving to be a way to solidify and deepen their path to power and sensitivity. Again, all...all, seem to remain in their art under teachers or those who are teachers are adding it in.

Even in as little time as one year, things are changing. There are teachers of these arts doing seminars and having guys feel their power and skills, some of them their own students, who have gone out to feel the result of THIS training in others. From what I have seen and heard thus far, if the teachers don't start to really teach it, or if they don't know it, their students are going to go elsewhere to get it. Hell, they already are. The goal in this traininng is to make you a better you in anything you choose to do, with people who will really help you to do so. As a method, it works.

So, to the point –is there a way to train the body where rising energy just –is. Where weight transfer and down weighting just is- by choice. Wrist grabs, shoulder grabs, hips, knees, what have you, not withstanding? Was there, is there, a way to train the body where you can zero out incoming force leaving them open to being manipulated. Can you connect it so that it feels like hard rubber and will transmit force while you bend twist, turn etc. As the Karateka here stated one of his teachers would ground out a push on his extended fist. So can we have someone push on our hand as we bend the elbow, and squat and move around at odd angles -say 90 deg to the pusher -all while transmitting force through the body? Can we think of ways that is useful in grappling? Ways it could send a punch- through you? How about the idea that there are ways to train it alone? Just what are teachers doing that is making a magnetic sticky feel when you try to grab them or throw them? What makes you planted or rise or throw sideways? What can happen in your body to nullify its effect on you all while you grab- them? How could you train that-to enhance it, sitting, or walking down the street, to train any of it outside the dojo whenever you wanted and it had real results?
Cheers
Dan

Woody
31st December 2007, 01:44
So can we have someone push on our hand as we bend the elbow, and squat and move around at odd angles -say 90 deg to the pusher -all while transmitting force through the body?
There's a nice tidbit. Thanks Dan.:)

Can we think of ways that is useful in grappling? Ways it could send a punch- through you? How about the idea that there are ways to train it alone? Just what are teachers doing that is making a magnetic sticky feel when you try to grab them or throw them? What makes you planted or rise or throw sideways? What can happen in your body to nullify its effect on you all while you grab- them? How could you train that-to enhance it, sitting, or walking down the street, to train any of it outside the dojo whenever you wanted and it had real results?
Cheers
Dan
Those are the questions I want answers to.:D

K. Cantwell
31st December 2007, 05:55
It is not explicitly taught and that is why after 20 years so many people may stink up a place. But what is embedded in these Koryu traditions is implicitly taught.

I guess I would ask how much of the embedded programming has been lost or modified over the years. Is what we are doing today really comparable to what our forebears were doing?

Look, the idea that that is would take such an inordinate amount of time to train somebody to man the gates is simply incongruent with realistic operational demands.

So, what are we training for now? If it is to be efficient "fighters," well...we lack the requisite complementary milieu that may have originally made koryu methods efficient. (Training for three hours on Sunday, then teaching my Spanish II class on Monday doesn't yield the same result as my supposed 500-year old doppelganger.) I train in both koryu jo and naginata and what I take with me outside the dojo is total extrapolation. I only get to work on those inherent (ryu-specifc) skills inside the dojo. Kurai, to me, seems more important than the technique. I would think general body training would follow in this direction.

So, I think the "implicit" is a matter of the lack of urgency of this stuff. Nothing implicit about barbarians at the gates and the need to pound them. The "implicit", I think, is a matter of peacetime reflection and the need to redirect a large portion of the population that has been inculcated as warriors. Such post-indoctrination situations (as we know) need careful handling.

I've had plenty of time to struggle with and try and figure out the nuances and subtleties of the arts I study because it is a personal indulgence without external pressure. (Other than, of course, my teachers pushing me.) It gives me pleasure more than affords me personal security.

If we then try and give combative meaning to what we are doing, we naturally look to the immediate pedagogical environment, not realizing that we lack the ancillary, but necessary, support structure. (A militant society, or at least an immediate environment that replicates such a structure.)

I'm just wondering if sometimes we get blinded by the luxury we have to study these combative arts in a non-combative society and therefore our vision gets skewed.


Part of respecting a martial tradition or Koryu is keeping it intact, alive and transmitting it to others.

Absolutley. However, this is entirely due to the anachronistic nature of what we do. If you have people that are actually looking to be effective with this stuff, we usually call them delusional. (Nobody fights with sword or naginata anymore as a matter of course). I think, though, that what Mr. Harden is saying is that with proper body training you can make these arts "effective" and still be true to the tradition.

The original pedagogical intent was to train warriors to defend the political and social nexus of the ryu. We don't train "warriors" (or men from the warrior class) anymore. We take doctors, teachers, lawyers, bankers, guys on the dole, etc. and expose them to a dozen (or more) hours a week of training in these arts. The only standard is the human body. If you could train that immaterial of specific technique and then simply "morph" your body to your particular school, it would be quite a boon.

I think it comes down to (as usual on this forum) what you want to get out of your training.

If your desire is to become the best embodiment of what your ryu has to offer in the 21st. C. then Mr. Harden's training may be superflous. (Though such training probably shouldn't be, or perhaps not "embeded" in the quilt of the ryu.) If you wish to be the best "fighter" you can be to defend you ryu should the need arise, then you would need to be the best personal "fighter" you could be and the training may be helpful. (Unless your ryu has kept up this kind of training.) Since your lord's castle is unlikely to come under attack in the near future, we have the luxury of argument and rhetorical banter.

Kevin Cantwell

K. Cantwell
31st December 2007, 06:30
Just reread my post and I'd like to clarify that I'm not saying that koryu doesn't train you to kill the enemy. Quite the contrary. I'm simply trying to say (in a rather shambolic fashion) that if Mr. Harden's (non-proprietary...just using the possessive for convenience) methods give you a shot at killing more of them, what's the demonstrable harm? Of course, it is to the transmission, but that argument, I think, is a different one than Mr. Harden ( et al.) is making. (Plus, you can keep this stuff separate. I've been taught a few things outside the transmission that would lengthen my odds of staying alive.)

Kevin Cantwell

Tim Mailloux
31st December 2007, 13:28
Plus, you can keep this stuff separate.

Kevin,
While I agree with most of what you wrote in your last two posts, I do disagree with the statement above if you are referring to the body conditioning skills that Dan has been discussing. I have only begun to dabble with these body conditioning skills (thanks to Dan), but it is my understanding that once you learn these skills and “burn them in” as Dan puts it, that you cannot just turn them off. They become part of you, almost as if your body has been re-programmed.

wagnerphysed
31st December 2007, 13:46
I think that my knowledge of Koryu is very limited...Daito-ryu and Kashimashindenjikishinkageryu are the only Koryus I have been involved with and I have only trained with single teacher in each (not counting sempei). I am therefore either limited or blessed by my experiences with these teachers. In my mind it is the latter and not the former. Others may look at me and feel differently...doesn't really matter to me though. So what I offer here is definately up for debate...but I won't be a part of it due to my bias.

Koryu teaches implicitly. Our
forebearers, devloped these schools based on their experiences (training and application) and epiphanies. Many of the great ones developed their traditions based on previous traditions they were a part of...Kageryu---Shinkageryu---Jikishinkageryu & Yagyushinkageryu are examples. These traditions however, trained much more than simple technique andso some include the
heiho term that denotes the idea of strategy. In my thinking, when we combine the explicit teaching of technique with the implicit teaching of meaning of technique and strategy, we end up learning more than we understand we do. It is up to the student to go beyond the training and unlock the implicit. However, this should be done within the construct of the ryu if we are to maintain an understanding of the truth of what we are unlocking.

Maybe what Dan is working on is an epiphany he has come upon in his studies...whatever...my only concern is that it is not called Daito-ryu or associated with Daito-ryu...yes, I am biased and maybe a little prejudice.

Back to Koryu...More than likley what everyone is training in a koryu has changed. My teacher has often talked about how great it would have been to be able to see video of what was being done originally. It is also clear from viewing video that does exist that even in the past few generations, techniques and practices have changed ever so slightly. However, the intent of training, the heiho, has remained the same (at least in the past few generations but more than likely throughout the existence of the ryu.

What I am trying to say here is that the implicit teachings of the ryu are intact despite the changes in practices. However, the student still needs to unlock it. Here, I rely heavily on my teachers to guide me in the right direction, creating the ideal environment, so that I can unlock the implicit. In your art or other arts I don't know if this is possible. I only know about what I am involved with. Anyone can debate that I am delusional with what I am presenting. However, many are having the same experience as I am.

The reason for quick learning in an art has do with the student's background in military (martial) pursuits (i.e. what they have studied before and how well they have learned), the amount of time they dedicate to their studies (in the case of a professional warrior, this is/was their job), and the effectiveness of their teachers. Where do you fall in these areas?

Learning and teaching is a process that many people take for granted. Any teachers reading this post probably know what I am talking about. Good luck to everyone who has been involved in this post.
Happy New Year!
Peace!

K. Cantwell
31st December 2007, 13:57
Hello Tim,


While I agree with most of what you wrote in your last two posts, I do disagree with the statement above if you are referring to the body conditioning skills that Dan has been discussing. I have only begun to dabble with these body conditioning skills (thanks to Dan), but it is my understanding that once you learn these skills and “burn them in” as Dan puts it, that you cannot just turn them off. They become part of you, almost as if your body has been re-programmed.

Yea...my "this stuff" was somewhat vague.

I was trying to reference the idea that people responsible for passing on the koryu know what is within their particular stream and what is outside it. If a teacher has something from "outside", so to speak, (gleaned from their own personal experience) that he/she thinks will be helpful to the student, it can be taught with the caveat that "This is outside the transmission." It may make you better personally, but it should be made clear that it is not part of what must be handed down as part of the ryu.

If the fear was that the body conditioning training would "contaminate" the stream (something that must be defended against to preserve the ryu), my thought was that it could be treated as something separate from the official transmission. It sounds like from what you are saying that it is not that simple.


Kevin Cantwell

K. Cantwell
31st December 2007, 14:20
Hello Brian,


However, this should be done within the construct of the ryu if we are to maintain an understanding of the truth of what we are unlocking.


It's funny, though, that modern pedagogy has moved away from this concept and embraced a more generalist approach. I've been teaching high school Spanish for 15-years now and focus seems to be on illuminating general principles through multiple connections across standard curricular lines.

I'm not taking about the nonsense that passes for co-teaching or cross-curricular activities, but rather the deep purpose behind those ideas: Get students to make connections for themselves by exposing them to the principle in many different settings and possible experiences. This is, of course, the idea of kata and the curriculum of a ryu is designed for this purpose.

But what if the "truth" of a Buko-ryu kata could be illuminated through looking at a Tendo-ryu kata? Of course, the "truth" is there in the kata itself and that and a good teacher are all you need. Sometimes as a teacher, though, I do bemoan the traditional methods a bit in that the path of inquiry is so narrow and self-referential. Perhaps it is the bias of being a teacher and not being able to split out the specific pedagogical milieu. Early on in my training I brought some of the traditional pedagogy into my classroom and I failed miserably (as one would expect...reluctant teenagers are far different from motivated adults.)

So, I guess what I am saying is that the koryu pedagogy is what it is because it has simply been that way for a long time, but I'm not quite sure, from a professional standpoint, that it is the most effective way to teach. It becomes effective because people are motivated and accept it. We want to be in the dojo. As a general pedagogy, though, I find it somewhat lacking.

I would wager you don't teach your high school classes the same way your teachers teach your Daito-ryu classes. It's a totally different pedagogy designed for quite different purposes. (I learned this the hard way...good thing I had tenure at the time. :) )

Kevin Cantwell

wagnerphysed
31st December 2007, 14:59
Kevin, I understand what you are saying. My point is is that no matter what you do to enhance your curriculum, the basic concept remains spanish. That is the construct under which you teach. If you explore other areas in teaching spanish and all of a sudden you come up with Portuguese then you have a real problem. This is what I am trying to say about this body conditioning.

We haven't even explored the idea of a true attack versus a stall or the dynamic change that occurs as an attack develops and how the ryu reprograms the student to deal with these issues. However, it is all in there (the Koryu; here I am speaking about my two schools). As I'm sure you are aware, this is all limited by the student's learning style and the pace at which a student learns (and the teacher's ability also factors in here).

Again, you can't say your are teaching Spanish if what you are teaching is Portuguese! It's not Daito-ryu Aiki, it is Dan Harden's Body Conditioning-ha. He can name it how he sees fit, giving credit to it sources or influences as long as he doesn't name it Daito-ryu Aiki because it's not.

Now, I must get on with my own training and studies and stop all this talking about it!

Cheers!
Have a Safe and Happy New Years!

TimothyKleinert
31st December 2007, 15:15
I would like to point out that Okabayashi Shogen---head of Hakuho-ryu (formerly Hakuho-kai Daito-ryu), a once prominent Takuma-kai shihan who trained with both Hisa Takuma and Tokimune Takeda---felt something was missing from most Daito-ryu training. His ultimate solution wasn't found in kata, but in re-evaluating how he moved (http://hakuhoryu.whiteoakdojo.com/history.htm). He felt that the way most people moved today was not the same as the way bushi in the past were trained to move. It was not until he made this realization that he felt his technique truly became effective.

So Dan et al's assertion that we need to re-learn how to operate the body is shared by at least one prominent Daito-ryu teacher. In all fairness, though, the methods developed by Okabayashi have a slightly different emphasis than the stuff Dan is talking about. But Hakuho-ryu "kihon waza" still incorporate various breathing exercises and solo drills.

wagnerphysed
31st December 2007, 21:01
From Okabayashi Shogen...the link you provided...
After many years of training I finally came to understand that, although the techniques have been transmitted down to us in form, executing them effectively requires the use of the body movements of the masters who originally created them.

I would interpret this to mean study the arts they studied to develop the movement they used. i.e. Sumo, Kashimashindenjikishinkageryu, Itto ryu, Hozoin ryu, and of course Daito-ryu.

On the other hand, I see nothing in the letter you posted the link to to infer that Takeda Tokimune wasn't in possession of the movement that Okobayashi was in search of. Rather, that somehow he, Okabayashi Shogen, was unable to unlock it from the instruction he was given. If you put stock in the content of interviews, this would hold true with what was said of Takeda Tokimune's method of teaching...teach the true techniques ((i.e. essence of the ryu (maybe?)) to only one student...and he awarded that student with a Menkyo Kaiden. Personally, I don't feel anything missing from my studies. I say this knowing that I have played with it with people who don't study martial arts, people who study other martial arts, etc. I've been able to make the majority of what I have been taught and have learned work. Things that don't work initially I go back and train more...they work, but it was my application that failed.

I highly recommend to those of you studying Daito-ryu that feel something is missing from your training to go back to the roots. Not Chinese or other arts, but the arts studied by the one person we know for sure who actually transmitted Daito-ryu, Takeda Sokaku. For those of you who don't know what these where (formally) look back to the beginning of this post.

You can do whatever you want. It's a free world, to some degree anyway. You can study what Dan has put together. You can take your cues from Okabayashi Shogen, who has probably kept his studies within the construct of Daito-ryu. You can try different schools of the same ryu until you find what works for you. You could also include in your studies the root arts of those masters that studied Daito-ryu.

P.S. Sumo is an underlying current with many of these individuals. By the way, Dan, have you tried your method against any Rikishi?

Nathan Scott
31st December 2007, 21:28
I have been contacted by Toby Threadgill, who no longer has an account here, and asked me to submit the following post on his behalf:


Hello,

I recently received several e-mails from readers on e-budo concerning a discussion about solo body training. These readers assumed me to be involved in some way with the tanren training espoused by Mr Dan Harden. What led them to that conclusion, I cannot fathom. A reference was made by Mr Harden to some individuals holding “menkyo” who are apparently “training” with him. Since I hold menkyo kaiden in Takamura Shindo Yoshin ryu, I suppose some people incorrectly assumed I was one of these. I am not. For the record, I've never had the pleasure of meeting Dan Harden and only know of him from his postings on the Internet. I have no idea exactly what he is espousing as “tanren training”. It might be unique, it might be rather ubiquitous. I have no idea.

I must say the greater subject and tone of this discussion rather mystifies me. First of all, I’m not sure what the big deal is? Solo body training is quite common in many schools of classical budo, especially the taijutsu schools. To claim that such training does not exist or is not emphasized in proper context in classical Nihon budo, misrepresents the facts as I know them. In TSYR and many streams of Yoshin ryu such exercises are not only common but are included as formal exercises and are listed prominently in our mokuroku. These exercises serve three purposes. First, they function as stand alone body conditioning exercises. Secondly they function as a method to isolate and impart superior muscular dynamics. Thirdly they function as identifiers, tools to help the student identify where these same conditioning methods and principles of movement are included in the paired kata. Mr Harden seems rather unaware of this last facet as he’s categorically claimed these methods are not included nor can they be learned in paired kata . I can’t comment on his personal experience in Daito ryu but as far as TSYR and Yoshin ryu goes, he is simply misinformed and unaware of the depth of knowledge contained in our paired kata.

Look, we all know that some teachers of budo are mediocre. That goes without saying. We also know that there are other instructors who manifest undesirable personality traits that include individual insecurities, arrogance and selfishness. To imply that a significant number of instructors of classical Nihon budo are incompetent or maliciously withholding knowledge is hard for me to fathom. It just does not reflect my experience. Perhaps the phenomenon of maliciously withholding knowledge was common at a time in the past when cultural realities and conventions were quite different than today, but to claim that such a thing is common practice now simply does not wash in my book. FWIW, this past June I had dinner with several prominent shihan of classical budo in Japan and the information flowed out of these guys like water out of a tap. No withholding there.

And lets not confuse classical Japanese pedagogy with something like the inappropriate withholding of information from ones students. The classical Japanese teaching model assumes a very deliberate and progressive learning process. To learn one aspect of an art out of synchronization with the others results in an unbalanced student. All aspects of training must progress in unison both physically, mentally, emotionally and technically. Western students frequently demonstrate a lamentable lack of patience with such a learning process, a characteristic I suppose is related to our cultural penchant for instant gratification. I looked around long ago and decided to pursue a path that focused on classical budo. I desired something more intellectually stimulating than bashing my brains out in Muay Thai boxing. The teacher I found was an interesting but uncompromising taskmaster who put me through the grinder both physically, mentally and emotionally. I never experienced this sort of integrated demand in my modern martial arts studies. I was never held back or denied knowledge but neither was I simply given the keys to all I desired. Knowledge came in measured amounts commensurate with my demonstrated level of dedication, maturity, physical ability, emotional stability and capacity to discern the seriousness of what it was I was learning. I came to understand that knowledge in classical budo is a sacred trust and carries with it a deep acknowledgment of individual responsibility. If such a demand seems unreasonable to some people, so be it.

While I acknowledge that there is a kernel of truth to many of the things presented by Mr Harden I would ask the readers of this discussion to carefully evaluate a couple of troublesome impressions presented here. The first is the idea that the greater benefits of solo training are unique and not available in the study of paired kata. The second is the suggestion of an organized and overt conspiracy by many instructors of classical budo to inappropriately withhold important knowledge from their students. I politely take exception to these characterizations because I know them to be false.

I am in no way implying that the benefits Mr Harden is alluding to in his “tanren training” are spurious. I’m sure they are beneficial and I wish Mr Harden and his students all the best in their quest for knowledge. What ever training model you find that works for you, is worth pursuing. But lets not denigrate or dismiss other models in general just because you have not been given the keys to understanding them, or for whatever reason haven’t mastered them yourself. It’s old and corny but there are many ways to the top of the mountain and no one knows them all.

Respectfully,

Toby Threadgill / Kaicho
Takamura ha Shindo Yoshin ryu

The above sounds really familiar to me. But I've repeated myself enough on such points...

Nathan Scott
31st December 2007, 21:56
As long as I'm hitting the "Submit Reply" button, allow me to make a few other points:

1) The "hitoemi" principle Okabayashi Sensei propagates is not only in the Daito-ryu kata and techniques I've seen, but in ALL the Aikido techniques and kata. I found early on that this straight line method of moving felt weak from what I was previously accustomed to, and realized there must be a reason for the forms to be configured in such a way. Adjusting to coordinated same-side body movements (alignment and leverage) was what I naturally adapted to - from studying the kata and techniques. FWIW.

2) I think we can define "cross training" and "mixed martial arts" differently. I propose that cross training refers to training in other arts *as a student*, from the beginning of the curriculum/initiation (white belt). Mixed martial arts is: a) sampling various elements of an arts curriculum *as an outsider* (to include informal training, or, beginning training in an art at elevated levels of the curriculum or initiation); b) training as a student in modern "all-in-one" arts, based on assembling a comprehensive curriculum based on elements of all or many martial arts. While I cross train, and have had positive experiences, doing so is difficult on many levels, and should not be jumped into without careful consideration (IMO).

3) The term "In-yo-ho" continues to be used in this thread, which in such a combination, is an abbreviation of the Daito-ryu term "Aiki in-yo-ho" (or "aiki on'yo-ho). I've never found this combination of words in any other art except for Daito-ryu. How about using a simple English term, such as "method of duality" to avoid confusion?

BTW, at this point I'm only scanning through the posts in this forum as my time permits, so if something really heinous comes up that ya'll can't sort on on your own, drop me a PM.

Regards,

Cady Goldfield
31st December 2007, 22:11
"Method of duality"???? Gadzooks, Nathan! :eek: That's not a "simple English term," it's academese! :p Think we might find something with fewer syllables?

In-yo-ho is a nice, straightforward, descriptive term that happens to be Japanese words for a concept that is farther-reaching than just Daito-ryu or even just Japanese arts. You can use Chinese or Korean "yin-yang" or "um-yang" (with whatever their equivalents are for "ho"), if you really want to, but this is a Japanese-arts site, so Japanese terminology works just fine here. No need to attach it to Daito-ryu -- which doesn't "exclusively own" the words or concept of "In-Yo-Ho."

Dan Harden
1st January 2008, 01:34
Why keep bringing up Daito ryu? or any Koryu? All it does is push everyones buttons. Let it go already and talk about body work.



1) The "hitoemi" principle Okabayashi Sensei propagates is not only in the Daito-ryu kata and techniques I've seen, but in ALL the Aikido techniques and kata. I found early on that this straight line method of moving felt weak from what I was previously accustomed to, and realized there must be a reason for the forms to be configured in such a way. Adjusting to coordinated same-side body movements (alignment and leverage) was what I naturally adapted to - from studying the kata and techniques. FWIW.
And it was a bad choice. As Tim noted I don't agree with what they do. Hitoemi is, in and of itself a way to make a linear cursery power that to some may feel powerful, but it isn't real power to me. It can deliever more weighted skeletal power than normal strength so it fooled guys who discovered and trainedit. But in the end, it still isn't the way to move for increased power. Further it feed into how many arts throw you so it increases your chances of being thrown. In fact the basis for throwing and capturing people in many arts is exactly to do that very thing. Weight them on one side. There are many Kata with an intent to do that very thing. Aiding them in that endevour isn't anything I'm going to be doing any time soon. The way out? Is to train the body to access power differently. Something which is completely unnatural and isn't going to be "figured out" unless you're some genious. And the method I use was shown to me by a fellow who trained with Sagawa, it pretty much nullifies many throws, especially those in certain arts. Which oddly enough was what Sagawa was noted for. I perfected it in water which will knock you right off your own feet if the forcesare not zero'd out as you move the water.


b]3)[/b] The term "In-yo-ho" continues to be used in this thread, which in such a combination, is an abbreviation of the Daito-ryu term "Aiki in-yo-ho" (or "aiki on'yo-ho). I've never found this combination of words in any other art except for Daito-ryu. How about using a simple English term, such as "method of duality" to avoid confusion?

Well once again there is a multiplcity of meaning here for contridictory forces used in the body to create a held central equilibrium. As a term for handling a balance of forces in the body it is in many arts. and can be simple or complex. Why you keep bringing up Daito ryu is beyond me. In-yo-ho was also a breath method used. It has been published, though handled in an understandably cursery fashion. I am sure men reading here know this already. Anyway, it doesn't need to be done with the breath but it is a much better training device used that way to connect things in the body. I don't think you will identify what you need to connect without it. It was and is a source of manipulative power with specific directions in mind. Later, once the connections are established you don't need to use the breath, its more of a mind thing. Since its published, if you know where to look, and no longer a secret, do you know what it connects and how? Again, later from someone else I saw a way to enhance that training device to include moving something else, which I could do relatively fast according to him. So oddly enough a Daito ryu method, joined a Chinese one seemlessly.



2) I think we can define "cross training" and "mixed martial arts" differently. I propose that cross training refers to training in other arts *as a student*, from the beginning of the curriculum/initiation (white belt). Mixed martial arts is: a) sampling various elements of an arts curriculum *as an outsider* (to include informal training, or, beginning training in an art at elevated levels of the curriculum or initiation); b) training as a student in modern "all-in-one" arts, based on assembling a comprehensive curriculum based on elements of all or many martial arts. While I cross train, and have had positive experiences, doing so is difficult on many levels, and should not be jumped into without careful consideration (IMO).
For what? For preservation Yes. For effectiveness? No, it isn't. It depends on your goals.
If you were trying to learn Kashima shin ryu and Shinto muso ryu and Itto ryu all at the same time then preserve them cleanly..well then ..good luck with that.;)

But if you are training to adopt various principles from taijutsu without a concern for single art preservation then its a different story all together. Once someone is layed out flat on their backs from a right cross. or swept then finished with an arm bar, pretty much anyone can say that was a success. If you train body conditioning it is artless.
It's all about goals. It's not a good VS better?
Body conditioning, Tanren, I really don't care what you want to call it or not call it. It does what it does, and experienced men are choosign to train it for one reason only... It works.
I am sure they are as unmoved by the detractors -who simply do not understand it- as I am.
For my money, doing the wrist/ lapel/ or shoulder grab stuff with effects like stickiness and not being able to let go, rising up on your feet and being captured, being drawn-in and thrown, with various parts of your body, planting both of their feet so they can't move and then launching them, is fun and distracting. And while it is a valid display of body skills, it doesn’t really hold any interest for me. I find getting kuzushi on them when they try to throw you...ties in with more worthwhile results for me. My research went the way of things like having folks have one hell of a time trying to lock us, or throw us, and our bodies having a much easier time throwing them, as well as the ability to generate power from short distance strikes and the use in grappling. Those, are just great skills to have. You and I discussed this througout the 90's when I was researching my own uses. I saved all those emails.

Solo tanren is in arts like Daito ryu, Yagyu, various Karate styles, and in the ICMA. They are there for a reason. Some men are still convinced the uses are art specific as Toby alluded to. They are wrong. And some smart guys are finding that out. In the end, they are going to outclass those who keep denying it. they will simply out perform them in a body art. The results of what it does to the body are not ryu dependant. Seeing and feeling your body change makes it self-evident to anyone who does the work.

Kata
After Toby's nice interlude that has almost nothing to do with my point, I say again for the reading impaired. Everyone I have met so far who is training this with me and others is...STAYING IN THEIR ARTS!!!

Everyone has to do kata to learn an art. There is no other way. I do them every week among other things.
If A. does only Kata and B. does kata AND this type of work- in the end they will have both have learned the art and be representatives of their own arts to one degree or another.
I’ll put my money on B. Everyday, and twice on Sunday.
Anyone who thinks there art has everything in it for them. Have fun.
Do you do cardio? Do you exercise or weight train? Why? Body conditioning.
This is body conditioning. Tailor made for the martial arts, by martial artists.
Cheers
Dan.

Finny
1st January 2008, 03:17
Solo tanren is in arts like Daito ryu, Yagyu, various Karate styles, and in the ICMA. They are there for a reason. Some men are still convinced the uses are art specific as Toby alluded to. They are wrong. And some smart guys are finding that out.



I think perhaps the point Nathan was making was - how do you know?

Have you visited Yan Long Chang and seen his Dai Shi Xinyiliuhequan and the shen fa involved in that? If not, how can you definitively say the body method he uses is the same as the one you or Mr. Akuzawa use?

Have you compared the Dantien gong Yan Sifu is known for with the Chansijin Chen taiji is noted for?

I'm not arguing the usefulness or validity of what you're saying - just you do make some VERY sweeping statements that seem to me to be at odds with everything I've heard about ICMA

Every discussion of ICMA I've ever seen has only really concluded in agreement on ONE thing - the shen fa used by the various ICMA are decidedly different, are developed in exceedingly different ways, and are applied differently - not only in different ICMA styles, but even in different branches of the same style.

How is it that you know that is not the case?

Dan Harden
1st January 2008, 04:13
Every discussion of ICMA I've ever seen has only really concluded in agreement on ONE thing - the shen fa used by the various ICMA are decidedly different, are developed in exceedingly different ways, and are applied differently - not only in different ICMA styles, but even in different branches of the same style.

How is it that you know that is not the case?

You missed the point. First I am not saying they are the same. First I am saying that solo training is key, a point many clearly disagree on, and secondly the results they are burning into the bodies of people who train them do not have to be art/katak/form specific. We do that by choice and for the most part keep it closed. Sharing notes, and experimenting is proving that out to guys who are training together. There have been some very pleasant surprises in methods. Hopefully it will continue.
Cheers
Dan

Finny
1st January 2008, 04:28
Fair enough - thanks for clarifying.

wagnerphysed
1st January 2008, 05:00
never mind!

Happy New Year All!

Dan Harden
1st January 2008, 05:16
Like wise to one and all
I'm getting tired of the debate, since I usually agree with much of what everyone has to say here.
From following the readership of this thread we have. Kodokai, Roppokai, Mainline, Hakkuho, Takumakai, Aikikai, Yoshinkan, Jiyushinkai, Katori, Jikishinkage, Toyama, Hozoin, Shintomusoryu, Araki ryu, Yanagi ryu, Yoshin ryu, MMA, BJJ, Taiji, Xing-I, Gojo, Uechi ryu, and many more
May everyone have a wonderful New Year in what ever art they choose to do. There is more that binds us, then divides.
Make a choice and be nice to folks.
Even when it hurts to do.
Cheers
Dan

TimothyKleinert
1st January 2008, 17:27
Hitoemi is, in and of itself a way to make a linear cursery power that to some may feel powerful, but it isn't real power to me...

Dan, that's a bit of an unfair and misleading representation of hitoemi, isn't it? Hitoemi is just an outward expression of certain body mechanics, right? It can be executed with or without internal power.

It's like a karate-ka's punch. Does pulling back the arm REALLY add much power? It also helps telegraph the punch. Ahhh, but when you start to learn to connect the body, you realize that moving the arms in opposite directions helps maintain the connection between the arms.

Hitoemi, when executed with internal connection, just represents one expression of movement. Kuroda Tetsuzan's swordwork (what little I've seen of it) utilizes hitoemi. So does alot of Taiji, sword and empty hand.

Of course if hitoemi is executed without internal power there's going to be weaknesses, but what type of external movement is going to be free of that?

Furthermore, emphasizing hitoemi trains the body to handle forces differently. *If taught with the correct emphasis,* it also has certain advantages for training the pelvic girdle, similarly to side-to-side silk-reeling.

Dan Harden
1st January 2008, 18:31
Tim
I don't want to expand or expound on a negative, I was simply stating that though hitoemi is really throughout Japanese budo-it has inherent weaknesses that can be trained to both exploit, or eliminate. Linear movement is deeply imbedded in Japanese Budo, particularly with weapons. And there are Koryu weapons arts that do not use it, and some of them are among the older ones. As for linear movement in jujutsu, maybe we can extrapolate a chicken before the egg scenario from it. First they discovered it was an easier way to deliver power and support resistive load in extension and retraction-particularly with weapons. Then of course still other smart johnies realized the weaknesses inherent in it and developed jujutsu ryuha with methods designed to exploit it. Chief among those were methods to off balance the one-side weighted body to its open sides. Also to plant weight where the body can't effectively transfer it, due to their training. So they are double weighted.
The way around it-pun intended-is to retain the linear movement but with a supported central axis and to learn how to support it off of power coming around the central axis point-the spine. This is difficult and takes quite a bit of training but the results are substantial. When someone tries to weight you they find themselves being carried off balance without the use of “technique.” You don't in a sense turn like other men turn, and they don't see the movement in you nor how you carry their weight from them the way you do either. And no it isn’t an external twisting movement or even a movement that can be easily detected. Because it’s part of you and the way you trained yourself to move, it just always- is. So continually maintaining the spine and retaining the balance point, gains you their balance point when you join, by them trying to throw you. Your intent becomes their movement or change. Hence, what some consider a “matched energy” past their will occurs. Spiraling movement -within certain arts known for it- occur externally or internally. Both spiral, but both are not the same. One can spiral with a muscular twisting of the body, another happens within the body not utilizing muscle. The former just changes its openings along a line, the other closes them. Oddly the correct movements are intertwined with other things that serve to support the body. The conditioned support becomes very substantial for someone to have to deal with.
When I get men to feel it and do it-in themselves it makes my saying, “I dropped my center in the woods- can you help me find it?” they get to a point where they become extremely difficult to throw or lock. There is no path to their center. It is hidden. You center is in effect never “held” and your openings-since they are ever moving on the inside are then closed. Hence, you leave no openings.

Cheers
Dan

ZachZinn
1st January 2008, 23:57
Hey I have some (hopefully relevant) questions:

Does something along the lines of pushing hands count as "duo tanren"?

If so, why is the solo stuff better for training these skills than the partnered stuff?


I don't have an opinion, just asking for the sake of asking.