Calm down it's only a discussion. I've given my opinion and you have given yours. And that is fine. We're all entitled to an opinion. But I'm not convinced we're talking about the same thing. Especially when you post the things like the following snippet. I'm not saying your wrong. I'm just saying that's not the way I see it. "Ki needs the mind to move the energy". You're still separating them into neat and tidy little packages filed away in their own pigeon holes.
This subject was done to death over in Aikiweb Actually there was a seminar in DC where a lot of these concepts where covered, the review is here for those interested -> http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11923 There's another interesting thread on Aikiweb discussing the fundamental skills that seem to be missing from most of the arts here: http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11629 There's a lot of crap from the naysayers but good info if you choose to wade through it
Not to be harsh...but I think it's exactly this kind of acceptance of the "vague" definitions of Ki that have the Aiki arts shooting themselves in the foot. If more people could actually "do" these skills we'd hear less arguing about the dfinition of this stuff and more shoptalk on the best ways to train these skills
Here's my thoughts as a practitioner and instructor of both koryu and gendai arts. Looking at the generic syllabus most commonly found in aikido schools, the waza [physical] isn't that different from koryu thus; from a mechanical point of view, application is merely an understanding of how to manipulate one's adversary using principles of ma (distance) awaze (blending) atemi (striking) kuzushi (taking balance). Using those key functions, you can easily substitute the word [aikido] for several arts (both koryu and gendai) and those arts work absolutely fine... no mention of "ki" anywhere. The difference between old school arts and (in this instance) Aikido is the mindset - IE Intent. Aikido carries the ideology of conflict resolution without violence whilst, still being very heavily influenced by old school methodology. Koryu however, has a far more simple intention - kill your opponent as quickly as possible. In terms of "aikijutsu" ... It should be noted that there's only one legitimate system to officially coin the phrase "aikijujutsu" and that belongs to Dai-to Ryu. Aikijujutsu is NOT a name of a particular martial art [that would be the ryu-ha name IE Dai-to Ryu]. It is important to note that Dai-to Ryu was developed around the meiji jidai thus it (like aikido) is a gendai or modern system and not, as many people think, a koryu. In my opinion aikido is just another method of jujutsu.
Ki= FIGHTING spirit. Down 8times get up9. (I have a sneaking suspision that you know this already :Angel: ) Regards koyo
Hahahaha, now you get me to stick my foot in my mouth In all seriousness though the Qi/Ki paradigm encompasses a whole bunch of different "definable" skills, as well as a certain psychological/philisophical viewpoint which makes sense only if you have these skills. Taking the physical side only though, you can split them roughly into two different factors (although these factors overlap to a large extent), a) Connecting the body into one unit through various conditioning exercises that affect the tendons/joints and strengthen them in a certain manner. This conditioning has to fundamentally change your "mode" of movement so that you cease to rely on local main muscle groups for control. This is the goal of most "connecting" exercises like Sumo Stamping (shiko), Chinese CMA based Jibengong exercises, Funekogi Undou in Aikido, etc etc. These exercises then also develop control over different control centers in the body (known as ht3 ub3r TAND3n ). b) The "breath" or "pressure" based stuff that you develop through breathing. Chinese can and will use "heng" and "ha" sounds to specifically induce physical opening and closings in the body through use of the breath, this is the same as the "A" and "Un" sounds in Japanese. Both of them are the derivative of the "Om" sound from India. Anyways basically its the solo exercises that're the meat of the system, everything else is just peripheral. The solo exercises instill certain physical principles/ a foundation into your body, and eventually your body can't help but move but according to those principles which result in technique. The physical skills give rise to a certain "paradigm", or philisophical viewpoint. But unless you have the bodyskills, things like "Aiki", "Aikido is about love", "Accepting your opponent" (aite wo ukeireru) are generally meaningless, and often misinterpreted as factors of timing, gross movement etc. Rather those concepts are a result of having the bodyskills and not something you "attempt" to do, if that makes any sense. So taking Koryu101's defintion here I'd have to disagree. The Maai, Awase (not awaze dude ), atemi, are all secondary concepts. The development of the bodyskill is primary. Kuzushi is a result of the application of the bodyskill, and not something that you have to seek to do. Course, that's just myself talking, but Sagawa of Daitoryu (who probably trumped Ueshiba in terms of skill) also emphasizes this concept clearly in his book "Clear Power." "The true execution of Aiki requires an enormous amount of solo training to condition the body (Tanren). It is not easy to attain." My own guess is that these skills mainly came from weapons work, and since overt, correct developmental weapons work isn't being emphasized anymore a lot of these skills are being lost. (An exxaggeration would be that you could swing a bokken 10,000 times in the incorrect manner and just get a good aerobic workout, deulding yourself into thinking you're practicing your zanshin etc, or swing it 20 times in the correct manner and be dead exhausted from doing it properly )
In martial arts there are two kamae. Katachi Kamae and Kokoro Kamae. Body posture which I feel is better described as body attitude and the attitude of the mind (fighting spirit). These two must not be separate mind body training is called that rather than mind AND body training as though they were ment to be separate. Ken suburi demonstrates this as you have said , any "physical " cuts without the attendant mental attitude are of no value at all. Any training that does not contain spirit ,technique and body as one unit is of little value. regards koyo HI Bear Ki definition= fighting spirit, strong intention. Ki demonstration must show ki ken tai ichi.No one can be pinned or thrown by ki alone.
good posts, I might have to beg borrow and steal one. (upyas') The three fold knot cannot be broken. Mind, body, spirit as one. zks
Upyu (about some aspect of ki) and Koryu101 (for mind or state of being training), Great ways to say in other terms and wordings what I tried to explain and was not able to clearly express! thank you so much!
You're welcome. For me personally "ki" is nothing mystical, as Mr. Coyle stated.. "fighting spirit" sums it all up for me; unfortunately there are many who wish to associate 'ki' with all manor of attachments and whatnot which often clouds (even hides) hard practice.
No problem Koyo. I see from aikiweb you're hosting a weapon's seminar, why do you feel that weapons are so important in aikido ? PS Koyo.. empty some of your PM's, your up to your limit thus preventing further usage. Thanks
Not that you asked Mr. Rebel Wado, but if you did, he would say that it is difficult to learn weapon principles without actually training with weapons. The way I look at it, you never know when a weapon is involved, most people that actually see a knife under stress, don't register it, they might think they are being punched or poked. That is until they feel a warm wetness and see their own blood, then they realize, if they survive it, they are being stabbed. Aikido is based mostly on sword principles, so I understand it. I'm sure there is something to say that Aikidoka should assume (if assuming is allowed) that there is at least one weapon involved in any confrontation and in training. ------------ Anyway, back on topic of ki. I don't remember exactly, but ki was mostly described to me as "breathing" in Aikido. I think this can be interpreted in many ways depending on the context. For instance, it could be proper breathing, it could be kokyunage, it could be related to activators or pressure points, Yin and Yang, etc. I think however, that it probably was more in reference to being alive, as in "you no breath, you no live." Be happy to be alive!!! This probably relates much to fighting spirit as Koyo described.
Which part did you find vague? I said more or less what koyo said. Granted my definition was somewhat broader that koyos but I wouldn't say it was vague. I can't access Aikiweb but thanks for the links anyway.
Traditional aikido is based upon sword principles. Such as spirit body and technique as one. Sen timing "seeing" the intent of the attacker.Attack and defence as one etc. These are often seen much clearer during weapons training. I have had many shihan instructors during my 40 plus years of training my main instructor was Chiba shihan who suggested that I sought training from Saito shihan who emphasised weapons training in what has become known as Iwama aikido. Othere areas such as zanshin (awareness before during and after execution of a technique) seam a litle more alive when facing a weapon. More advanced principles such as Mushin (no mind) are easier to explain from the perspective of the sword. Example when you draw a sword fill yourself with the intention to cut. Becomes fill yourself with spirit (the self being body and mind together) If you have filled the self with spirit then there is no room for anything else such as doubt, confusion, anger or even tactics leaving you simply "spirited" ready to move spontaneously and naturally.And as Rebel implies knowing how to use a weapon prepares you for defence against weapons. You mentioned the seminar. There shall be students/teachers from other arts attending and the "principles" which I find are common in all martial arts shall allow us to study together irrespective of our individual arts. regards koyo Saito Shihan (I was priviledge to receive mokuroku teacher licence in aiki ken and jo from Saito shihan in the late 70's)
Taking up Koyo's definition then: Going by this definition of "Ki" then of course you can't be thrown or pinned by Ki alone. But if we go by the "pressure"/"connectivity" definitions of Ki then sure you can "pin" and "throw" by "Ki" alone. The Ki definition you used is something I'd define more as "I" or 意. (Comes from a more chinese paradigm, but plenty of Japanese Koryu also stress Ishiki, so we're on the same page I think). That being said, when you say Ki-Ken-Tai-Ichi, can you describe how that works? In particular the basic principle describing the relationship between Ki (going by your definition of course) and Tai Sorry Aikiwolfie, I'm going to have to say that smells of "Vagueries Inc." At least Koyo tried to define his as intent, which is much more clear cut. If you have the body skills there are no ifs, ands, buts about certain things. There can be different ways you define things, but once you get past the terminology issues, the basic physical skills linked to the Ki stuff are easily describable.
Again, there's no mysticism in ki-ken-tai-ichi 気 剣 体 一 Unification of the spirit, sword and body - a primary tenant of Kendo.
Sure, but that's still vague. When I say vague, I don't necessarily mean that there's mysticism involved. Ki-Ken-Tai-Ichi Its like saying that Heart leads Mind, Mind leads Qi, Qi leads Body in chinese. (And thats actually a physical concept as well) So taking up the physical concept of Tai in "Ki Ken Tai Ichi", how does the "middle" tie into the legs? And how do the different middles control the sword?
