Not arguing...just reframing
Dan, I am confused. When you are saying muscle tissue, are you refering to smooth or striated? On connective tissue, are you refering to fascia, ligaments or tendons? When you mention relaxation are you refering to coordinated agonist and antagonist muscle concentric and ecentric contractions or are you merely refering to the eccentric phase of the contraction? In terms of hip and shoulder seperation, are you refering to the actual seperation of the articulating structures?
The use of muscle tissue, and more importantly connective tissue, to control bones that circumevent flexation-firing is a learned response.
Dan, connective tissue connects muscle tissue to the bones and through contraction (concentric phase) and relaxation (eccentric phase) of muscles the bones in our bodies are able to move at the articulations or joints in the structure. Therefore, the muscle may be the most important aspect here.
I'm not sure what you mean by a flexation response, but judging from the context you used I'm guessing you mean an autonomic response to external stimulus (i.e. fight or flight ...stress response)? Is this correct? If so, I think that a flexation response might more accurately describe a reflex response similar to when a Doctor thumps your bent leg just below the patella and you kick up. Is this more like what you were describing?
In the west, and I learned this in my sports psychlogy, phylosophy of sport, and sport in society classes, we tend to treat mind and body as a duality (two seperate entities existing simultaneously together). More accurately the mind and body are inseperable (I'm sure that no one will argue this point here).
So, any training with the mind affects the body and any training with the body affects the mind. Coordinating training so that both the body and the mind are training at the same time has a profound affect on the neurological level for the whole (mind and body) An example of this might be training Kage, Metsuki, Kokyu, Kiai and muscular patterns while swinging large pieces of white oak with a partner in a paired kata (saw this at the Meiji Jingu Enbu this past November...it was very cool to watch).
Anyway, cross training (so to speak) to hit the neural pathways of the brain and neuromuscular training (via proprioceptive training) can result in what Ellis Amdur referred to in his post. Another way to achieve this (non-martial art related) might be through years of practicing something called Progressive Muscle Relaxation. I won't add any more length to this tangent by describing it. It can easily be researched through GOOGLE.
Is it then not possible that the practices we discuss here are a form of training the mind and body at the same time to get a very specific response? Training in a different manner may illicit a similar response, but until we know what was specifically accomplished by this training, we won' know how similar or disimilar our response truly is. That doesn't necessarily mean we need to practice these rituals to find out what their effects are, as Arman pointed out even if we did study and learned to mastery, the differences in our current environments would most likely restrict our abilities to recreate the responses that these ancient warriors were able to achieve (if in fact they did achieve anything). This I believe would hold true for anyone in our society today, regardless of race, culture, or religion.
However, we can gleen certain insights through an anthropoligic and historical study of these practices. We don't need to buy into a belief system to gain an understanding of how a tool may have been used. We simply need to develop an understanding of the system, possibly a working knowledge.
Does this logic pass muster?
Last edited by wagnerphysed; 3rd January 2005 at 01:33.
Your's in health,
Brian Wagner
Daito-ryu aikijujutsu
Kashima Shinden Jikishinkage-ryu heiho