PDA

View Full Version : Ki (as in “The Force”)



Mario Gunter
28th May 2008, 08:22
Ki (as in “The Force”)

It is relatively easy, so to speak, to explain how Aikido techniques work.
And it is also easy I suppose, to explain the philosophy that lies behind those techniques.
But even if someone would use his Ki power to walk through walls, people would still misunderstand what Ki is and how it works.
On top of it all, you have active Aikido practitioners who still don’t get it, or when they do, they “confine” their Ki ability into their Dojo walls.
Meaning:
When you start controlling your Ki (which is the greatest start of all) you should improvise with it in your daily life and not keep it just for the “throw around people” routine.

A Martial Art that makes no prime use of Ki within its techniques looks like controlled violence.
A Martial Art (any Martial Art) that is based on Ki power looks like magic and I would like to explain why.
As I often say, Ki power is invisible to the eye but its effect is unbelievable to the eye!
People look at it and say “that just can’t be happening” or at least say so until they join in…
Now imagine how it feels to the one applying it, or better don’t, because it is beyond words and imagination. So, let’s leave it at that.

People who are interested in Ki power matters and everything that goes with it (and it’s a lot!) are often more confused and lost than the ones that aren’t interested in anything all together.
So, what do we do now?

If experience, ability and solid proof can’t make it, what else can?
Maybe a fairytale can! So here you have it.

A long time ago in a galaxy far,
far away…

I don’t know if we should thank George Lucas for his Star Wars or just go ahead and… sue him.
His concept of the Jedi Knights order, the peace warriors code, the training and use of the Force, is soooooooo much Aikido like!
The master-apprentice relation, the ability of insight, the light saber… ok that’s enough let’s sue this guy…
Maybe this fantasy is closer to any reality, at least any reality that can be explained and stop being misunderstood.

In this fantastic dialogue (that stands in the way just about every other day) after having explained for about two hours what Aikido is, comes the bomb question:
-So, you are into Zen and Karate (at this point making gestures and funny noises) and you eat only Sushi?
-No… (desperate) we are training ourselves into something that resembles more to the Jedi Knights.
-Oh! Do you “have” Dark Sith Lords too? (wicked smile)
-If you push it… you never know!

So, by fairytale or not, what is Ki after all, and how can we approach it?


…you must unlearn what you have learned…
Life creates it, makes it grow
Its energy surrounds us and binds us
You must feel the Force around you
Here, between you, me, the tree, the rock, everywhere
Yoda
(from the motion picture The Empire Strikes Back)

P Goldsbury
28th May 2008, 11:10
Hello Mr Gunter,

I removed this thread the first time it appeared because your post, posted on other web forums also, seemed to me to be a form of commercial advertising for your book.

I will leave it here for one week and see the reaction.

Best wishes,

Eric Pearson
8th June 2008, 08:15
I think someone should have the right to talk about something they are passionate enough to write a book on.

There are many Star Wars budo connections.

Jedi is a twist on words of Jidai - meaning samurai films

The garb of the Jedi is a close copy of many samurai clothing.

Words such as Obi even crept into the characters names.

Vaders helmet slope is based on the samurai design.

Sword culture and dismissal of the firearm is a carry over as well.

Qui Gon JIn's meditation in the midst of battle was a lovely display of Zen in the martial arts.



Now on to the topic at hand. Ki and the Force


I think a great many Aikidoka in the world see these as similar models. Personally I think it foolish and dangerous to approximate the two.

Ki is movement. While it can be mystical, it is also very mundane. A push is an expression of ki. The weather is an expression of ki. Health is an expression of ki.


While the Force might be similar to sci fi theology students, one can argue the movies represent the Force as MAGIC. There are some Aikido schools in the world, I believe, that follow this magic paradigm. These are the schools with ki powers, knocking over people from across the room. They have knock out moves with waves of their hands, and they focus on tricks as a testament to the magical properties of Ki. In reality the flawed model of KI as magic assists these dojos in promoting a hypnotism culture where technique draws ever away from reality and more in the world of eccentric human behavior.


Just a thought. If you are unclear about what I am talking about I am including a link to a illusion magic site where we were discussing this phenomena in the martial arts. The attached videos on the link are really worth watching as a martial artist. Some of them are quite trippy.

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=224876&forum=14




May the Force Be With You,


Eric Pearson

cxt
8th June 2008, 19:04
Reminds me of people looking at the the Star Wars movies thu an post modern lens and trying to apply them as "hidden" contempory political statement.

As one wag put it "I can't decide if Palpatine was Bush or Saddam...I think he was Bush...but maybe......."

Sheesh.

Has anyone read my thesis on how Buffy the Vampire Slayer is actually a reflection of the deeper codes of Bushido?
If you notice many of the supporting cast have no special powers or skills, yet they risk their lives to protect their much better trained and powerful friend...a clear reflection of characters in many Samurai films of the good natured and well meaning honorable youth whom often dies as a plot device.

Plus it serves as a vaulable moral lesson on people being able to do important things despite having no skills...good lesson for kids in that to never give up or fail to try just because your not a superhero.

Sheesh AGAIN. ;)

You talk fast enough you can make almost anything "sound" plausable....and chances are.....you BS well enough..."somebody" is going to buy it.

yoj
8th June 2008, 20:53
It's well known that Lucas' Star Wars is a retelling of Kurosawa's The Hidden Fortress. so of course there are similarities.

so?

cxt
9th June 2008, 14:09
yoj

Its hard to to tell exactly where ideas come from, some years ago I read an interview with Kurosawa's/one of his good friends and he told a story of someone telling Kurosawa that he should sue Clint Eastwood for "stealing" his Yojimbo character...right down to the plotline, specific events and such visuals as the hiding his hands inside his poncho.

Kurosawa repiled that he really couldn't sue Eastwood as he had "stolen"/gotten the idea from Dashell Hamment (sp) :)

Ron Tisdale
11th June 2008, 20:08
I personally dislike threads like these because they discredit valid investigation into the classical body skills that "ki" and terms like it referred to. I think it's a complete sidetrack of the real strengths.

But maybe that's a good thing...

Best,
Ron

P Goldsbury
12th June 2008, 13:55
Hello Ron,

Yes. I would probably agree with you in general. However, E-Budo does not have a monopoly of discussions about 気 that teeter between the sublime and the ridiculous.

The reason why I trashed the thread the first time was that it smacked too much of advertising for the poster's book. So we had a private correspondence, as a result of which I removed the references to the book in the first post.

So the thread stands, for what it is worth... I myself am not expecting any major revelations, but this is because I am skeptical that Internet discussions lead to these.

Best,

tony leith
12th June 2008, 16:50
Apologies to Prof Goldsbury and everybody else for butting in on your forum, but this is a topic I have devoted some thought to in the context of my own art (I'm a third dan in Shorinji Kempo)

As an aside re the movies, I would have thought the Force (TM) has more of an affinity with Dharma than 'ki', given its cosmological significance, but who knows..

I suspect 'ki' is a concept which loses a lot of nuance in translation, both linguistically and culturally. Shorinji Kempo as an art pretty much lacks any claims to esoteric or mystical elements, but I have senior SK sensei talk about 'ki' in terms which make it pretty clear that they are referring to something more than an extended metaphor.

I suppose I can see some relationship with the conceptual underpinnings of weak points in the body, which in SK at least are pretty much identical with those presented in traditional oriental medicine (eg chi meridians and keimyaku hikio). As a Western rationalist I struggle to accomodate the concept of energy fields in the body (electromagnetic activity in the body can be measured and quantified, but nobody has yet come up with a 'ki' meter). Nevertheless as an applied body of knowledge this stuff works (NB I'm not talking about the 'look, no hands' mystical guff, but precise application of physical contact or understanding of physical dynamics).

What does aikido practice suggest about 'ki'?

Respectfully

Tony Leith

Ron Tisdale
12th June 2008, 18:30
Hi Tony,


What does aikido practice suggest about 'ki'?

Everything from the sublime to the rediculous :D

But seriously, I don't think that it's so much what **aikido** suggests...but rather what most asian Martial Arts have used as a basic physical strength (based on specific ways of moving). More info on posts on aikiweb...look for Dan Hardin, Mike Sigman, Rob John, and some others if you are interested. There are in fact serrious conversations out there that have led people to get together and share some of what is known. I have personally found it usefull...but what do *I* know? Not much...

Best,
Ron

kimiwane
13th June 2008, 19:33
...I don't think that it's so much what **aikido** suggests...but rather what most asian Martial Arts have used as a basic physical strength (based on specific ways of moving).

Ron, that's true, but if you look back at what's been available in English over the past fifty years on this subject, none of them go to the depth of information that's leaking out now. If you compare Tohei's "Aikido in Daily Life" with some of the current discussions, without knowing "who" Tohei is, you might say Tohei doesn't have a clue. I first got into it with Mike Sigman on this board because he told Rob John that I "didn't have a clue" when my comments were straight from a book by Liang Shou-Yu--whom Mike has called his "teacher".

Just because deeper and greater detail "can" be discussed, that does not invalidate the discussions of universal energy that are also true.

However, for depth of detail, I've recently been re-reading B.K. Frantzis' book, "The Power of Internal Martial Arts," which does make a lot more sense after the last couple of years reading the threads and people you've mentioned above.

Best to you.

David

cxt
13th June 2008, 22:05
I only know Mike Sigman thu my interactions with him on this and other forums...and those interactions have been less than pleasant....which is probably as much my fault as his...but beyond that I am always skeptical of the notion that there are in effect hidden cabals of "masters" that have "secret" means of doing things that are kept from all but a handful of people......regardless of how many students they have had over the years...and regardless of just whom those students might have been.....how long they were with them.....blood relatives........etc.

I've personally seen (and felt!!!!!!) people that could do amazing things...but beyond that of a high order talent backed by a life-time of exceptionally intensive training?....I'm not sure.

Its actually my honest hope that somebody really will find an overlooked methodology that yeilds incredible results......just not holding my breath....except as far as my breathing exercises go. :)

kimiwane
14th June 2008, 02:39
I only know Mike Sigman thu my interactions with him on this and other forums...and those interactions have been less than pleasant....which is probably as much my fault as his...

Who hasn't had some such interaction with Mike? I certainly have and I will take a certain amount of the blame for it. Mike isn't the only person I've had unpleasant interactions with on these boards, after all.


...I am always skeptical of the notion that there are in effect hidden cabals of "masters" that have "secret" means of doing things that are kept from all but a handful of people......regardless of how many students they have had over the years...and regardless of just whom those students might have been.....how long they were with them.....blood relatives........etc.

Well, there you bring up several levels of things of consideration. For one thing, it isn't always a matter of secrets being "kept from" people, but of their ability to absorb the knowledge and their tenacity at digging the secrets out and integrating them into their own skills.

I recently found my copy of T.T. Liang's book, "Tai Chi Ch'uan for Health and Self-Defense." Liang describes the transmission of Yang family style tai chi. He says Yang Lu Cha'an learned tai chi from the Chen family in the Chen village and developed his Yang style from that. Yang was a powerful martial artist who took on all comers and became known as "Yang the unsurpassable," but he couldn't get his own sons to master the art to the highest level possible. He tried, but he made them miserable because they just didn't have the personal motivation in their lives to delve that deeply into the art. Also, Yang had learned the art as a part of his full life as a free man and he didn't allow his sons that same kind of freedom of personality with which he had mastered the art. And maybe because Yang forced his sons to train so hard, they developed something of a natural repulsion for tai chi. In any case, though both sons learned a lot, they did not reach the highest levels.

When Yang Lu Cha'an died, his top student, Chen Hsiu Feng, stood at Yang's grave and said, "Yang's tai chi is no longer in the hands of his descendants." Meaning that the highest mastery of Yang's art was with him, and not with the family. Yang's sons were infuriated, but they knew that they couldn't beat Chen, so the practiced hard for three years, then went to face Chen.

Chen was mild toward them and said, "I see you two have trained very hard since that time, so you may claim the title of head disciples of Yang. Here: sit in this chair and let it be the head disciple's chair." And so saying, he placed his flat palm on the seat of a heavy chair beside him and lifted it with his flat palm, moving it across to his other side and setting it on the floor.

The Yang brothers were startled. They knew they had no such mastery of tai chi. Sticking is one of the eight powers of tai chi and Chen was able to lift a heavy chair with his flat palm. But his attitude saved them some face and they no longer felt a need to fight him. They did go back and train harder than ever in tai chi but Liang does not say that they developed the kind of powers Chen had gained.

Still, this is an example of how even blood relatives may fail to grasp some very deep elements even of their own father's art. Needless to say, even very talented people who are not the sons of the founder could also fall short. But some very few could reach the very deepest level through some combination of personal capacity, direct transmission from a master AND extremely dedicated practice of the principles until those principles are one with their being.

On the other hand, could even such a talented person learn these powers from someone who had never mastered them, himself?

The sad fact is that most people teaching martial arts are not of the level of Chen Hsiu Feng and even with extreme dedication and sacrifice, no one can reach Chen's level of ability through training with such teachers. Most aikido teachers today never studied very closely with anyone who studied very closely with Ueshiba or his very close students. So there is bound to be something missing in their aikido and they will never be able to know or transmit the art on the level that Ueshiba knew it.

Now, does Mike Sigman have the missing element of aikido?

I'm not sure that he does. I do believe that he is very highly developed in tai chi, however, and that he is more powerful than most anyone you will ever meet in aikido, including most Japanese masters. But that does not mean he has the missing elements of aikido or that he really even understands aikido as an art.

Mike has described a "test" to determine whether someone is qualified to teach internal powers: the would-be teacher should be able to place his hand on your chest and, with very little observable movement and no observable "effort," he should be able to knock you back several feet--almost power-at-touch, and tremendous power, at that.

George Ledyard, who weighs around 300 pounds, says that Mike Sigman put his hand on him and, just as described, with very little observable movement and no apparent effort, "blew" George back several feet. He said he was sure that if Mike were to focus that kind of power (as Mike could doubtless do), Mike could kill him with that power.


I've personally seen (and felt!!!!!!) people that could do amazing things...but beyond that of a high order talent backed by a life-time of exceptionally intensive training?....I'm not sure.

The thing is, unless you are practicing exactly the right things, even exceptionally intensive training will not give those same results. It will doubtless develop great power, but not power of the kind and to the level that Mike and Dan Harden and Rob John describe.

Mike goes into considerable detail on how this power is generated in the body and it is consistent with everything I've read about chi gung and tai chi. "Alignment of the body, relaxation of the muscles, clarity of the mind," etc., but there is also a lot more to it than that and it is developed to an extremely subtle state, fully integrated with one's life. When I re-read Frantzis' "Power of Internal Martial Arts," I recognized that it, too, was consistent with everything Mike has been saying. But none of that violates or invalidates the traditional descriptions of ki as universal power that moves through all living things, etc.


Its actually my honest hope that somebody really will find an overlooked methodology that yeilds incredible results......just not holding my breath....except as far as my breathing exercises go. :)

I am convinced that there is no completely overlooked method, waiting to be discovered by "someone." The method is and always has been there. It has always been the same. It is described in various places and certain individuals throughout history have been able to demonstrate the results to be obtained by that method. The people who can and will dig that out are just very rare and usually quite eccentric.

Best wishes.

David

cxt
14th June 2008, 03:40
David

Then its best that you and I just agree to disagee.....I find that one of the things that is oft said when anyone disagree with such things is some version of "I know things you don't."

"abilty of people to absob the knowledge"

Good point, but if that is the case then we are right back to "not eveybody can do it" and honestly are not most skills kinda dependent on being able to "absorb" the lessons?

IMO any skills that can't be taught to a mans own sons, with direct 24/7 contact to him and are at least 1/2 of his genetic make-up, as you mention in the Taji story, are not "skills" in the most common use of term...what they are would best IMO, be viewed as "abilties" which like having hazel eyes or blonde hair is something you either have or you don't.....it really can't be taught.....not in the usual meaning of the term.

Maybe Mike can do these things maybe not........but what Mike can PERSONALLY do is of little practical value to me or anyone else if he can't reliably teach OTHER people to be able to do these things as well.
Which again, maybe he can and maybe he can't........don't know, but I don't hear of too many people being able to toss a 300 lbs man around with no use of observable power.

The keyword of course is "reliably."

Dan Harden
14th June 2008, 04:21
Hi Chris
The Idea of whether or not Mike can teach it is long gone by. He has. So has Ark, So have I.I have had many students who can do these things. A couple of whom can move a large man around with no discernable power at all. I happen to train with some very large MMA guys who happen to be students of mine as well as go out a play. Mores the point is whether or not they can throw me. They regularly bounce off. A more readily usable alternate to that power to move someone is in striking. They are fight enders and give a whole new meaning to heaby hands. I'm not allowed to hit people any more-I break them.:(
None of this is new, its just probably new to most MAers.
FWIW Between MIke Ark and I we have had hundreds now come from all over to feel these things. No one has called it B.S. or even of marginal use. Everyone wants it and is willing to travel to train to get it.
I don't like the term "mysterious power" or any such drivel. It is teachable and explainable in person. Further, to get people doing it just requires time-in. I keep hearing this or that teacher knows and does it. So far there is a growing contingent of men out there who felt us three, some tai chi guys and then a host of supposed Japanese master level Aiki teachers.
More and more are left looking at these aiki big shots and saying "Where’s the beef?"
It is important to know who has these skills to any real usable levels in one degree or another. It is more important to know who can teach it. I just think the idea of whether it is real or not is now -among the more informed- gone by.

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

cxt
14th June 2008, 17:19
Dan

Look, I have no reason to hack you or anyone else off....you have always seemed like a stand up guy in your posts....so I mean no offense......but its probably a good idea if we just agree to disagree on this issue.

Claims of this sort have been around for many, many, many, many years and almost NOBODY is ever shown to be able to do it........much less an active struggling opponent that is actual fighting back.
A very few experts have been able to do things like this.....but even their long term students have not been able to reach that level.

With all due respect I consider it highly unlikely that anyone has found a consistant method for teaching people to do this.

Many people have run full scale, double blind tests of this ability---they have all failed, a Uechi ryu group did a wide scle "empty force" test some years ago with a group that made similer claims---they failed.

Like I said, I have no reason to belive that "some" people can do really amazing things----there have been to many reports of masters that tower over others, and I have personally "felt" such from a couple of people thu the years.

However, as history shows, very few people ever reached the level of these masters, as the above Taji story shows even ones own sons--with 1/2 the masters genetic base, 24/7 accsess and his direct, personal instruction were not capable of his feats.
Seldom did any master in any art produce a student that was as good as he was.......and when such arose it was only one of MANY students.
How many of Musashi's students were his equal? How many of Ueshibas?, How many of Toehi's? How many of Takeda's? How many of Miyagi's?

This says to me that such things are its more akin to having red hair than a teachable skill in the normal use of the term.........some people, with high order talent, with a life-time of intensive training, under experts are capable of doing amazing things.....and a very few of them can exceed even that level.

Like I said, I honestly hope you guys are on to something. :)

cxt
14th June 2008, 17:25
Oops.....paragraph 5 should read "I have no reason to NOT to belive that some people can do really amazing things."

Dan Harden
14th June 2008, 19:49
Hi Chris
There are..oh..about a couple hundred people who have felt Mike Ark or Me. Many of who have trained with all three. I don't think you will be able to find a sginle person. Not even one person Chris, who will telly you that what were are saying is bogus. As for applicablity and martial veracity. You might want to pop on over to aiki web and ask. there are maybe 100 people there who will tell you some interesting stories from face to face encounters with real power.
Personally, I will not stand for nonsense and empty waza from anyone. As many have found out, I don't care who they are what rank they hold. If they are full of it. I'll say so and step up to demontrate why and risk not being invited back. There is enough crap in the arts as it is.
We can agree to disagree, Chris not a problem. But I'm right and the fact that you don't know what we are talking about doesn't change the fact that ....yes we do.:cool:
Cheers anyway
Dan

cxt
14th June 2008, 20:24
Dan

That may well be, and like I said its probably a good idea of we just agree to disagree on this issue.

It seems/reads to me that something "other" than normal aikido techniques/power are being implied here.
I have been on the receiving end of a number of internal styles techniuqes---never seen anybody that could toss around a "300 lbs man" with no power or effort ....as is being implied here....esp a "300 lbs" man that knew what he was doing.

Again, that some people can--I do not question, what I question is the likelyhood of being able to teach that level of ability to many people-----as the history of the martial arts rather heavily proves such abilites are NOT the norm.

cxt
14th June 2008, 20:44
Dan

Sorry...timed me out.

Like I said, you always seemed like a decent guy to me and I don't think you were talking down to me at the end of your post....at least I would prefer to think you were not :)

So I'm just going to say "cheers" as well.

Have a good weekend. :)

Lawrence Fisher
15th June 2008, 11:28
Just as a little note, I have read through most of this thread, and personally I think that discussion of something like ki requires an understanding of too many other Japanese concepts such as in, yo and ri. In a display of kata a judoka who controls themselves and displays the right amount of stillness and movement displays ki, in their psychological and physical attitude and feeling. The exponents of aikido place a great emphasis on the principle of ki, but to find the ai the reverse, ri, or reason, must be equally working if agreement of spirit and action is to succeed and the aikido look masterful. There are many party tricks that maximise on good taijutsu that sell this as mystical. I tend to think of things from a physical and biological scientific understanding. There is also misdirect, deception or straight forward kazumi which can make uke move dramatically if timing is good. Yet all of this requires an uke who will present themselves with a good attack or a determined state of mind, or a lot of background training by their instructor.

After practicing some tai chi I can see how relaxed hips, roll back and single weighted posture can improve anybodies budo, particularly that of an aikidoka. To generate power from the feet and hips and channel this through the arms means that anybody can move a body of weight that is in contact with the hands. Just look at the way you push a car. You don't stand there and push it with the strength in your arms, but rather sink your weight, get your hips in line, make a springy strength with your arms and push with your legs. Now if we refine this we find good tai chi, you could even say that you find good projection of ki.

In my personal oppinion there is nothing mystical about the interaction of people and the shapes they produce through budo. People try to look for it and more often than not they find what they think they are looking for. However, I personally think that it would be more benefitial to understand where the weight is and follow that line of investigation.

I hope this makes sense.

Lawrence Fisher
15th June 2008, 11:55
(continued from the above post)

The Shushigaku school introduced a theory in Japanese thought. In particular, it analysed reality in terms of the dynamic between ‘configuration’ or ‘principle’ (ri) and ‘material energy’ or ‘vital force’ (ki). According to Shushigaku, ri gives the universe its structure and, since ri is also in the mind, it is the foundation of knowledge. By ‘investigating the nature of things’ we come to know ri, both in ourselves and in the things we study. Ki, on the other hand, was considered the basic stuff that is ordered by ri.

To me ki is the successful interchange between in (yin) and yo (yang), effectively the line between the two parts. To begin to comprehend this, we first have to deepen our understanding of what is meant by in and yo. This is my understanding - as far as I can put it in words.

Yo, the active principle is the first thing to manifest in the cosmos it is the pouring forth of energy that can be characterised by a straight line. It is force, in particular a thrusting, driving or primal force. In, the passive principle is the second thing to manifest in the cosmos (as a natural result of yo) it is the receiver of energy that accepts the force of Yo, and gives it a form, as a result harnesses the force and brings it to a useful completion.

One can clearly see the masculine and feminine principles within these concepts, and it is worth considering that physics has so far found that matter consists entirely of counterbalanced forces. To take this further, anything which acts as a stimulus is Yo to the thing that it stimulates. If I go and drop a rock on someones head, then I am yo, they are In. But both In and yo contain the seeds of each other. Take the teacher-student relationship. The teacher is clearly Yo to the student, so the student is largely In to the teacher. But teachers learn from their students also, so we have the seed of yo within something that is In.

We could all examine the interchange of In & Yo to help find the seed of In within the Yo of Uke's attack. Or we could view this as finding the seed of Yo in the In of tori's avoidance/acceptance of the attack. In a single technique uke is Yo as he attacks, tori is In as he avoids and changes to Yo as he strikes. uke becomes In as he falls over - (this is not a very successful way to be In) in order to counter the technique uke must become In in a more controlled and successful way and transform again to Yo, thereby forcing tori to be In, so that he must fall over or counter the counter.

There are many tangents to follow, since anything can be classified by these concepts, and they are always relative and always changing. We are all In and Yo to each other in different ways at different times. It is very important to recognise the time to be In and the time to be Yo. The trouble is that In & Yo are such big concepts. They are the archetypal two sides of the coin that we see in everything. They become complex when you consider them in particular things, but are simple in and of themselves. However, the successful interchange of these principles is, in my view, a performance with ki.

I hope this makes sense.

kimiwane
15th June 2008, 21:45
... the above Taji story shows even ones own sons--with 1/2 the masters genetic base, 24/7 accsess and his direct, personal instruction were not capable of his feats.

I think the main thing in that story is that Yang Lu Cha'an had the personal motivation to "dig it out" and make it one with himself. He did that as a part of his own self-directed life. But he didn't let his sons have that same self-direction: he drove them, rather cruelly, in fact, to try to cram the skills into them. But they say you should never "push" chi: you should "lead" it. Pushing it leads to bad results, bad health, maybe breakdowns. One of Yang's sons tried to hang himself out of despair at being forced to practice constantly. So maybe the real problem was that Yang was either not a great teacher or not a great dad. We should all think of that here on Father's Day.

The students Dan describe all have the self-motivation to go to the people who are said to have these skills and find out whether they really have them. And those who find the skills real are generally able to learn them and develop them, themselves.


Seldom did any master in any art produce a student that was as good as he was.......and when such arose it was only one of MANY students.

And that reinforces the idea that even a lifetime of intense training may not bring high level results if you're training under someone who never learned the high level material. Some of it will develop naturally, but even that must be cultivated and refined into the right channels to reach even very high levels. So mere intense training is not nearly enough.

And last, it really isn't some method that anyone "discovers". It's the method that's been there all along. There won't be a new one to replace it.

David

kimiwane
15th June 2008, 21:48
I have been on the receiving end of a number of internal styles techniuqes---never seen anybody that could toss around a "300 lbs man" with no power or effort ....as is being implied here....esp a "300 lbs" man that knew what he was doing.

Chris, you know who George Ledyard is, don't you? Surely, if anyone on these boards knows what he's doing when it comes to aikido, it's George Ledyard.

Ask him if it's real or phony.

David

cxt
15th June 2008, 22:48
Kimi


"training under someone whom never learned the high level material"

Interesting POV......but that is essentially overlooking the ramifications of your story........which is that even people that DO, unquestionably, have the "high level skills" seem not to be able to consistantly and reliably pass them on.

As the entire of history of the MA shows......if they could, then Ueshiba's and Musashi's and Chens, Yangs, etc would be everywhere...since they are NOT, then the only logical conclusion is that for whatever reason---given many 100's of years of time and god alone knows how many students over those many 100's of years--that such levels of skill simply are not what we would call "teachable" in the normal sense of the word.

If it were that simple nearly EVERYBODY that went to the Chen village would leave as good as the Old Master himself.

Its not just your standard MA's either---you know how many former Boxing Champions have coached another guy to the title?
You have any idea how many people attended Micheal Jordens basketball training camps over the decades? How many people Jorden worked with one-on-one--and these guys were already experts mind you----and how many of them have reached his level?
And its a sure bet that there a 1000's more people working training and practing to get good at basketball than any single martial art.....and they STILL can't get there.

People in other sports simply deal with eventually reaching their individual level of skill---and it always sucks to hit such a wall.....but what most other sports DON'T do is push things off on some shadowy conspericy of ignorance or outright malice that keep the "true teaching" of basketball from them.

Yes I know whom George Ledyard is.......and ask him is what is "phony?"

Part of the problem here is that we have perhaps a dozen different ideas all at once---I never said ANTHING was "phony"......I expressed a doubt--based on the very history of martial art itself...a hisotry YOU provided an excellent example of BTW---that its rare for even masters of exceptional skill to be able to reliably pass those skills on to their students.

How you got "phony" from that I have no clue.

stan baker
17th June 2008, 13:34
One is not using no power to toss anybody it is about real internal power, there are a few people out there with that, George is okay but not one of those few.

stan

Dan Harden
17th June 2008, 14:17
Hi Chris
First of all -I'm not talking about some unseen Jedi force, or any other such nonsense. I am discussing a way to train the mind and body to function together in a very real and practical method. I not only see where you are coming from-I respect it. I have little regard for B.S. myself. None actually. I think you made the statement that you didn't believe a 300 lb guy could get moved around with relative ease. I think David offered you an example to explore as he knows what you are saying is patently false. There are caveats. The example David referred to was not fighting just testing. George is exploring this type f training himself as he is a sharp researcher.
I am telling you in no uncertain terms that I not only move large men around-I let them try to throw me and I let them feel my strikes and kicks and also how I stop theirs. The power this training brings to the arts is not new, it is very old. Unfortunately many teachers do not know these skills and either by intent or honest and sincere ignorance of the subject they pass on arts filled with waza and technique junkies
You can pontificate on the limits of what you have personally seen of the martial arts with all its relative merit. We will ALL agree with you that -WE- have all seen a bunch of crap. Personally I have seen so much crap it’s hard to discuss anything. I don't dislike the martial arts. I dislike what people have done to them. All you are saying is that -you- haven’t seen it so you doubt it. Cool. Nothing wrong with that. That’s what I would say, too.

As I have pointed out to you. There are three of us amateurs showing these things in public. The power we are showing has been in the arts for hundreds if not thousands of years. It is the cornerstone of the Asian arts; from India to China to Japan. It is most certainly real, hands on applicable, and highly efficient in combatives. It makes you a better you no matter what you do. Of the hundreds who have come-I've not met, seen, nor heard from anyone who having felt it, who doesn't recognize its worth and want it. I encourage folks to feel it, and then go meet the highest level aiki teachers in the world, and then feel the Chinese Masters (not their students who are all over the place in power levels) and then compare and make a value judgment for themselves.

I think you will find that none of us are afraid of, or shying away from anyone’s judgment or assessment of the simple skills that what we are showing. One thing for sure is that with us, folks at least as show what we are doing and how to train it for themselves without having to get involved in an entire arts waza for twenty years in hopes of getting shown it-if it is even there at all to learn.

Cheers
Dan

kimiwane
17th June 2008, 15:39
I think you will find that none of us are afraid of, or shying away from anyone’s judgment or assessment of the simple skills that what we are showing. One thing for sure is that with us, folks at least as show what we are doing and how to train it for themselves without having to get involved in an entire arts waza for twenty years in hopes of getting shown it-if it is even there at all to learn.

Dan,

I think this is one thing that confuses people and which has taken me a long time to sort out in my own mind, even though it has been explicitly stated a number of times in different ways, but I will say it again for Chris' sake and I hope you will correct me if I am off the target in my assessment.

For Chris:

What Dan, Mike and Akuzawa are teaching is the specific skills that underlie all the waza of all the arts. Since these skills are not "hidden" within various arts, they are much easier to teach and learn. See the thread "Baseline Skillset" (I think it's called) on aikiweb (I think).

Imagine if the only way you had to "know" the human skeleton had to come through practicing karate. You might get a pretty general idea of how the bones work, where they are and how they are put together, but it would still be very indirect, like feeling your way in the dark. Then imagine that a doctor showed you an actual human skeleton, with all the bones visible and named, showing also how the bones are connected and how certain alignments of the bones are strong, while others, exposed to force, will allow the bones to separate and the system to break down.

If you try to learn all the ways of channeling power by applying your pre-existing knowledge of power to the methods you are shown in karate, aikido, tai chi, etc., it's like trying to know the skeleton of the body (and much more) through practicing karate (or the other arts).

What Dan, Mike and Akuzawa are doing is isolating precise skills from various arts such as aikijujutsu, tai chi, hsing i and Japanese koryu sword arts and showing people how to develop those skills without making them feel their way into the skills by years of repetition of the arts that use those skills.

So what are the skills in question?

First are body alignments--getting the bones lined up in the correct supporting structures. Then there are matters of the fascia and how it is used to support and inform the body structure (not how to flex and tense it like muscles). Then there is the matter of how to "open" and "close" the body cavities and the spaces between the spinal vertebrae and every joint of the body, how to use the breathing both to coordinate the mind/body relationship and also to power the opening/closing of the body cavities and joints. You can get a very good idea of the generalities of this subject by reading B.K. Frantzis' book, "The Power of Internal Martial Arts." From what I've understood in the last few years of exposure to this topic, Frantzis' book is entirely consistent with what Dan, Mike and Ark (Akuzawa) are describing. And that is very, very old. It's nothing new, nothing unique except that now it's being taught as a subject independent of any particular art. And that's the difference. If you have to go through 30 years of tai chi to dig it out (and maybe not manage to find it even then), how do you know if you're going the right way? In the case of Yang Lu Chan's sons, he was showing them entirely through "the art," which had to be exactly replicated in toto, independent of the underlying skills. In fact, both his sons did eventually become high level masters, but it still seems that some of his skills have been lost to antiquity.

But if someone can show you in a matter of hours certain skills that boost power dramatically and which you can go back and apply to your tai chi, karate, aikido or whatever, right away, then you can quickly know whether you are going somewhere or just marching in place.

The people who have gone to Dan, Mike and Ark all report that they gain these boosts in power.

As to my comment about asking George Ledyard if Mike's power blast was "phony," I was not implying that you said that. I just meant to ask George Ledyard, who knows a lot about aikido, if Mike was able to blast him, a 300 pound man, several feet back with a light hand movement. Maybe he will give you some more detail on his thoughts about that since that time.

And the final thing is that what's being taught in this paradigm is not a mystical ether power, but a refined and highly tuned coordination of physical and mental/spiritual powers in a focused physical application that allows the absolute maximum of effectiveness of any movement. And that's what Jigoro Kano called "maximum efficient use of energy." Think if a light hand movement can blast a 300 lb. man back several feet, what could a real "effort" produce?

Discussions of this matter have often been less refined and focused than the skills they would describe, but this is how I have come to understand the subject after many such discussions with many of the main people involved over some years. I'm still hoping to arrange some hands-on time, myself.

Best to all.

David

cxt
17th June 2008, 16:52
David/Kimi

Again, one of the problems here is that a lack of defined terms......we for example seem to be talking past each other.

You seem to me---and as always I could be wrong :)--to be trying to convience me of something that I'm NOT questioning.

I not questioning the skills, nor the methodology behind them, nor that some people can do such things........we could have a novella length discussion on those areas.....but that is NOT what is on the table.

The only thing I'm questioning right now is if the abilty to toss a "300 lbs man" or "large man" around with "no decernable effort" is teachable in the normal sense of the word.
I'm not sure that it is.

If it were, then almost eveybody could do such things-----and the reality is that such skills are noteworthy precisely because most people can't/don't do them reliably and consistanly.

As your story shows, Yang couldn't teach his level to his OWN CHILDREN...and as we know Ueshiba does not seem to have taught people this his level...and of all of Takeda's students how many are considered to have been as good?

I'm fully convienced that such a high level of skill is simple not teachable in the normal sense of the word.

Again, we seem to be talking past each other here.

I wouldn't question that people that train with Dan etc might very well improve their own skills and abilty to apply power (depending on exactly how you define that word "power")
I just question that if many of them are going to be able to reach Dans etc level.

See the differnce?

Mark Murray
17th June 2008, 19:34
The only thing I'm questioning right now is if the abilty to toss a "300 lbs man" or "large man" around with "no decernable effort" is teachable in the normal sense of the word.

I'm not sure that it is.


Hi Chris,

I understand your questioning. In fact, that line of thought really didn't cross my mind when I initially met Dan. I think I was just too blown away (mentally and physically) to think about that aspect. It was Ron Tisdale that brought it up first. I believe he made a post over on AikiWeb after meeting Dan for the first time. I can't reproduce Ron's words, but I can offer you my take on it.

I've trained with Dan and Mike. I have to leave Mike out of this because I've only trained with Mike and not any of his students -- if he has such a thing. But, I have trained with Dan's students. And I've trained with people just like myself, starting out in this internal body skills, who are training with Dan and his students.

I can was able to see and feel different levels from Dan's students. And I got to work with someone brand new, like me, about a year or so ago. Then I got to work with that same person a few months ago. The difference was astonishing. I can't move this person in a simple pushout exercise (stand with arms out, palm to palm. Then try to just walk forward and move the other person). There is most certainly a progression going on, from just learning to advanced.

Add to that, Akuzawa and Rob John. I haven't met Akuzawa, but I'm told he's very skillful. I have met Rob John and he was certainly well above me in skill level. At the time, he only had about 4 years in training.

Until you actually get to experience things, I can understand reluctance to believe. But, you can ask Ron or any of the people who study with Dan how he has been able to pass along this knowledge. Beyond that, I would, without hesitation, train with quite a few of Dan's students. Not only are they skillful, but they're also very good at teaching this skillset.




If it were, then almost eveybody could do such things-----and the reality is that such skills are noteworthy precisely because most people can't/don't do them reliably and consistanly.


There are a number of factors here. I won't get into my theory that the Japanese who knew this stuff didn't teach non-Japanese. But, the other side of things is that the training isn't for the lazy. It takes a lot of effort and sometimes I think you need a bit of obsessive/compulsive behaviour.



As your story shows, Yang couldn't teach his level to his OWN CHILDREN...and as we know Ueshiba does not seem to have taught people this his level...and of all of Takeda's students how many are considered to have been as good?

I'm fully convienced that such a high level of skill is simple not teachable in the normal sense of the word.

Again, we seem to be talking past each other here.

I wouldn't question that people that train with Dan etc might very well improve their own skills and abilty to apply power (depending on exactly how you define that word "power")
I just question that if many of them are going to be able to reach Dans etc level.

See the differnce?

I do. But having the experience with Dan and some of his students, I'd have to say that, yes, they will reach his level. And some will surpass him because they'll have more time to train and there are higher level people to train with.

Imagine someone like me starting to train at 41 and someone starting to train at 18. There's no contest there. In 20 years, it'll be 61 and 38. In 40, if i'm lucky it'll be 81 and 58. There's still a good many years of training left for the younger person while I'm either gone or really close.

Mark

cxt
17th June 2008, 19:58
Mark

I don't know what else to say, either Dan/others can reliably, consistanly teach people to his level--where nearly everyone he teaches walks away his equal or they don't.

My postion is that it has little or nothing to do with having japanese "not teaching this stuff to non-japanese" as you put it....after all Ueshiba and Takeda didn't teach many people their there level either.

And its not an insult to martial arts to say this......nobody in any other sport does...nobody blames not being as good Tiger Woods on Tigers dad keeping the "true teaching" of golf from them.
Nobody blames Michael Jorden for "keeping things from them" because they are not a good as he is.

The hard cheese truth is that MANY factors are in play here....and people can only be coached as far as their talents, dedication, willingness, etc can take them....that far and no further.

History is on the side of my side of the argument here.

Not saying that the teachers does not count---they do, they count big......just saying that IMO other factors count just as much and arguably more.

Remember I not talking about "improvment" etc I'm talking about "level" of skills.

cxt
17th June 2008, 20:03
Mark

Damn thing keeps timing me out.

Maybe his student will "surpasse" him.......we can talk again in 10 or 15 years or so when were are sure.....not when we are guessing.

If that is you can find a pre-ponderence of Dan's students willing to go on the record that they are better then he was......publically proclaim that are better than their teacher ever was.

Which is a whole OTHER problem that might well be at play on this issue.

cxt
17th June 2008, 20:16
Dan

AGAIN, you seem to under the impression that I am saying something I'm not---judgeing by the PM's and posts people are making your not alone.

Instead of railing against people reading stuff into what I posted-----making inferences I really did't imply......allow me to restate.

AGAIN, for the record I'm NOT QUESTIONING YOUR ABILITY TO "MOVE LARGE MEN AROUND"----I have, several times now, specifically stated that that I BELIVE YOU CAN.

I think we can agree that the abiltiy to "move large men around" with the attendent claim of "without decernable effort" esp an active, struggling man that presumably knows what they are doing, is NOT RELIABLY the "norm" as far as martial arts standards go.

If it were...then what your doing should be unworthy of comment, your standards would BE THE STANDARD as it were........if everyone could do it then there would no need to mention that you could.
If most everyone could and did posses this abilty---then saying so would be essentially a "yawn---so can I" kinda thing.
Its exactly because most folks can't do this that its noteworthy.

All I'm saying here is that I don't think that such skills are teachable in how they word is normally used---after all, there not in any other athletic area---there is far mroe needed than just the "teaching" as it were to reach the heights.

Teaching plays an important role---but IMO there is vastly more to it that that.

cxt
17th June 2008, 23:04
Dan

Re-reading your last post again---and its becomeing clear to me that we not communicating here---I'm not "pontificating" on most of what I have felt as being "crap"....I'm saying EXACTLY THE OPPPOSITE OF THAT, most of what I have felt has been pretty good--IMO.

Its precisly because I have felt what IMO is pretty good internal stuff that I fully belive that you can do what you say you can....I've seen and felt other people do it... I have no reason to think you can't.

What I'm trying to do--and failing :( is take another look from another POV as to if such skills are widely, consitantly, and reilably teachable in the normal use of the term and if not--why?

I'm trying to express an opinion that quality of instuction counts---its just that IMO there a host of other--equally important factors at work when we get to talking about high level skills and legendary martial arts figures and what they could do...and more importantly...what they could teach.

What I'm trying to say is that if a student of yours somehow was unable to fully duplicate your skill and and effectiveness----should they shoulder some of the responsibilty or is their ability wholly a function of you?

People used to say that "its a bad craftmans that blames his tools"---IMO teaching can only take you so far.....after that it comes down to talent, drive, disciple, coachablity, etc.

kimiwane
18th June 2008, 05:39
The hard cheese truth is that MANY factors are in play here....and people can only be coached as far as their talents, dedication, willingness, etc can take them....that far and no further.

Still, a given person with "ordinary" intense training will go much further through similarly intense training in the internal methods.

David

kimiwane
18th June 2008, 05:42
I think we can agree that the abiltiy to "move large men around" with the attendent claim of "without decernable effort" esp an active, struggling man that presumably knows what they are doing, is NOT RELIABLY the "norm" as far as martial arts standards go.

It USED to be the norm. Post war, that has changed.


If it were...then what your doing should be unworthy of comment, your standards would BE THE STANDARD as it were........

It is the old standard. In the old days, the pool had no shallow end.

Best to you.

David

cxt
18th June 2008, 14:08
David

I don't know what to tell you David..now your answering posts I made to other people--and since they were made to OTHERS--they were in CONTEXT of the conversation I was having with THEM....now they are not...so I don't really know how to respond.

But I will say this, you state:

"Still a person with "ordinary" intense training will go much further thorugh similarly intense training in the internal methods"

See, that reads to me like another chapter in the on-going "which is superior? external or internal methods" debate.

And your assertion that internal method are essentially superior is pretty much another "pecker contest" that I have little interst in pursuing...I may or may not agree, but I am deeply uncomfortable about proclaiming superority of one style or that method...its not only somewhat arrogant....its probabaly not supportabe in concrete terms.

Like any other methodology--claims of overt superority are rather blunted by the exsistance of MANY methods that seem to work well for their users.

Besides, when it comes to the Chinese arts--many of them argueable contain aspects of both....at least their students often claim such.

Bismarck55
15th September 2008, 17:45
In my opinion, The perception of ki as "the Force" (or telekinesis, the most common way the Force seems to manifest Itself visibly) Is a huge problem and the reason most people (justifiably) won't take you seriously when you start talking about ki. Don't get me wrong, I believe ki is real, I just don't believe in ki as the force. I think every effort should be made to disassociate Ki from "the Force". I very recently started training in Shin shin toitsu Aikido and thus far it has been a very enlightening experience. I feel like ki training was the missing piece of the puzzle in my previous Aikido practice. not that my prior sensei was teaching incorrectly, far from it, he was a great teacher. However I was struggling somewhat to understand certain Waza that now make sense within the context of ki training.

Bismarck55
15th September 2008, 20:17
In my opinion,

It seems to me that no one has really addressed Chris' concern that the "skills" being talked about are actually "talents". at least I think thats what Chris was getting at right? Chris also seemed to imply or at least hypothesize that "these skills are not teachable in an ordinary way" correct? It would seem to me that the "problem" in a sense is not that it is not ordinarily teachable but that it is not ordinarily learnable, perhaps in the same way that, to my way of thinking, martial arts in general are not ordinarily learnable. Consider this, in school, a history class for example, what we have learned is measured by what we know, what is known and what is learned is inseparable. but in the martial arts it is not the same. I can "know" how to do any given technique but that does not mean that I have "learned" it or am capable of applying said technique properly. So a teacher can show me how to do a technique, but thereafter it is my responsibility to practice the technique and attempt to refine my own performance with every repetition. Now, a sensei can correct my form or give me advice and thereby speed the process, but this works only if I am actually willing to heed the teachers advice. If I do not truly believe what I am told I will not act upon it, nor will anyone else act upon something that they do not believe. My point is that we all have very deep seated biases that inhibit us from reaching our potential. If we as human beings were free of such things then Musashi would have spawned a legion of swordsmen who were not only his equals but would have actually surpassed him. Now lets suppose for a moment that you had never seen anything fly, whether it was an insect, plane, bird or whatever. if you suddenly saw something flying you would certainly think it was magical or mystical in nature, or that it must be a trick of some sort. So it is with ki. many people think that ki is utter nonsense (and that is putting it gently) or people on the other side of the fence think that it some mystical power that can be used to KO people from across a room or whatever,(and maybe it's possible they can but I don't believe so at this point) and either by malicious design or with honest ignorance they convince others that this is true. Our scientific culture tremendously predisposes us to the viewpoint that ki is something of a scam, a quick and easy way to martial power that only the gullible would buy into. Basically, if one can find someone to teach oneself who is not self-deceived or a charlatan, and one can put aside their biases and ego one can reliably be taught to utilize one's ki. and again, this is just my own flawed view on things .