Well there's a whole movement of people from different arts that are now able to communicate on the subject because they got hands on with those willing to show them, so there's a context and agreed goal. Although there's still problems discussing the detail of how they are training as IHTBF ultimately. For example, at the seminar I went to there were various folk from Aikido, Judo, CMA, JJJ. I know of Sambo, MMA even Koryu guys now training this way. Let alone one guy who likes to test himself at Dog Brothers gatherings! I mention this to make sure no-one reads my posts still thinking I'm talking about "chi balls" and freaking energy beams!
As for the martial arts that came long before aikido...it is generally understood that from yin and yang you get ki/chi, and from that you get fajin (Chinese)-- 發 勁. As explained to me by one of my shihan: The japanese kanji of 發 uses a variant 発. A variant is an alternate form of a character usually of regional origin or japanese (adaptation). So, 發勁 is written in japanese kanji as 発勁 and is defined in japanese as: 発勁 (hakkei) はっけい (hakkei) - (MA) release internal power And this release can take on many different forms. I do not add this to explain my ability to do such, but merely the understanding and training that I seek to follow. If anyone has additional input, I am more than ready to try to understand their viewpoints on this topic as well.
At least in the CMA world,since you're using the Chinese term "fajin",it's generally understood by those involved in such things that you get fajin from mechanics and no Yin/Yang leads to ch'i leads to fajin explanations are required-although one could use such explanations there's no real reason as they hardly clarify anything.What does it mean "from yin and yang you get ki/chi, and from that you get fajin" ? Substitute "split fingered fastball" for "fajin" -it's just as accurate,and just as non-explanatory.
Just a reminder. Could anybody posting kanji characters please post the English equivalent as well. Thank you for your co-operation 4.2 Language: MAP is an English speaking forum. Please take the time to post in plain, legible English.
From bing bong I get bang, and bang leads to boom which you can only get with flibble/flabble. Seems to have about as much meaning.
If you practice in a vacuum that might be the case. But if you're practising a Japanese martial art it might not be a bad idea to learn what some of these words and concepts are all about.
-- Huh? A split fingered fastball is what exactly, and directed to where exactly? Head, throat, grorin, achillies, zyphoid process, medulla? If it is a bartenders mix, then I'll have two. Expanitory is needed here, forgive me for my deficiencies. In the case of ki, a term that has been in use for thousands of years, and one quite different from fajin, I purpose these terms as further thought to differentiate between what some may think of as or define as an applied factual force and mechanics (gee, I did that with some ki), vs. wow, I am beginning to understand that which some others have previously described, and perhaps what O sensei was doing with his aikido, and what some other MA masters are doing happen to coincide with a definition of ki that has been introduced into human culture many, many years ago. And from this understanding and application we can now begin to look at and come to realize that specific meaning and purposeful application to many a varied situation, and hope to attain at least 5% of what others were doing throughout history and its recorded descriptions of ki, without the associations of those who do not understand and offer many different surmization of what was taking place in those situations without any attempt to address those definitions prescribed by those who have already recorded in analects that which was already taking place. Whew! I don't expect this posting to make sense to many out there on MAP, but as a "doc," I'm certain it will add to your considerations, and at the very least provide a different and unique perspective. I await your reply.
Hey,you brought up fajin.Where was IT directed to? My point was that saying from Yin/Yang one gets ch'i,and from that you get fajin doesn't explain anything,and that one could substitute a myriad of things for the word "fajin".Would it have been better if I had substituted "the body's excretory processes"? Anyhoo,you don't "get fajin" from ch'i.Fajin's an expression of ch'i.So were George Foreman's punches against Frazier. "a definition of ki that has been introduced into human culture many, many years ago." Which definition? You need to clarify this. Y'know,while there are some rather odd things that can go on in the martial realm most of it is and has been applied force and mechanics along w/intangibles such as sensitivity,visual cues,"reading" the opponent,confusing the opponent in various ways,etc. At least most of what I've experienced/learned as well as the feats of past exponents can be understood/explained/replicated by such. So does one need to "address those definitions" of ch'i when things can be understood in an easy to understand non mystical way? Or does it just sound better to say Yang,Ban-hou had superlative ch'i manifestation rather than he had great functional mechanics and intangibles? Perchance the latter is simply too mundane for your tastes? I think plenty of us are able to actualize more than 5% of what those in the past did,including yourself.Even in intangibles.At least if you're speaking of the martial sphere. So what were these others doing "throughout history and its recorded definitions" of ch'i? Give examples,please.don't forget to include the applicable "recorded definition" for each individual thing whch was being done. @ aikiewolfie-I agree it's not a bad idea at all to learn what certain terms/concepts are about.They need to and can be used to aid in understanding. Izumizu,I think you're pulling my leg on one thing.You really do know what a split fingered fastball is,don't you?
Umm, actually I had to look it up. I thought it was a MA striking technique that I had not heard of. Looked it up after I sent the reply, tho. I introduced fajin here to imply a difference between what some were or may have been thinking of as ki vs. the "expression" of the power generated. I think that historically, the kanji and definition itself (I won't repost these since it has been done already in this thread), and the mentioning of it throughout the history of many MA is significant to warrant the examination of it and discussion we are having on this thread. Also, I think that if my training needs to be modified to try and develop this skill, I would do so in a heartbeat, but I guess that training of ki/fajin would be a whole different thread. One need only look at Osensei and what he was doing that was so different from what his students who trained under him were doing, or are doing for those of his students that still practice / teach. Why is there such a difference in what he was doing versus what his students and those that followed do (both in relation to ki and technique), why are there so many offshoots of aikido orginizations that practice all doing aikido differently from what he did; so many styles. With so many differences are we training how he trained? How are we developing the ki in aikido? Are we just to keep practicing in the hopes that someday we will be able to do what he did? Or close to it? Why did he not explain what it was he was doing to his many students, and how he did it, share his knowledge? I think it is something that we have to figure out on our own, but if we are just training without that purpose, or training incorrectly, we will never come to understand what martial arts in addition to aikido are refering to when talking about ki or fajin. Additionally, if fajin is an expression of ki, then ki must be present and "flowing" without interuption in order for fajin to be expressed, that is what I mean by from ki you get fajin. Kind of like from wind and the vibration of wind acting on vocal cords and use of our muscles we produce sound. Take away the wind, and I don't think there would be sound.
Sagawa, was reported to be the most accomplished Aiki jutsu other than Takeda himself. That includes being better than Osensei. He was also Osensei senior and was never confronted even after the harsh things he said about Osensei. His closed door school is still located in Ibaraki near Tsukuba. He was quoted as saying that Aiki was simply a skill that could be taught to anyone. Not a mystical force. Just Physics Psychology applied to the body during a time when the word Physics hadn't been invented yet. Which was how Takeda taught him and all the other high ranking like Kodokawa. Osensei definiton of Ki was based on his spiritual teaching by his spiritual guru at the time. Sagawa called Osensei out on his misleading of others with Aikido. The difference between Osensei and those that followed was he didn't teach the skill that Aiki is. Like he and Sagawa learned. Sagawa was also quoted as saying he was told by Takeda not to teach it to everyone but a select few or even just one. Knowing what Aiki really was made them special compared others including their students. It helps to keep a hierarchy system in place. Making sure it took a long time or even never to reach the level of the teacher. That is why Osensei original students could do in 5 years that everyone can't do in 20-30 years. Some other well respected Aiki practitioners have talked about this too. Osensei original students certifcates said Aiki Jutsu and not Aikido because they were issued through Takeda. It is a glimpse to what they were taught compared to everyone else. I would say that Ki is just energy in different forms. Electricity when talking about flowing through the body and in every living thing or the outside world like magnetic fields. When people say the blood has ki. Even a small drop of blood has a charge for a short time before it dissipates. Kinetic energy when talking about MA redirecting, blocking or transferring it to other things. Like when people become frozen with a certain position or shape.
Aiki is simply physics and psychology. Totally agree 100%. This paragraph confuses me. Takeda and his followers would only teach Aiki to the very few. Including amongst their own students. They then criticise O Sensei for his beliefs and approach to teaching Aiki. Even though O Sensei's students have developed a level of skill in 5 years that would take other 20 to 30 years or more to accomplish. Frankly this just sounds very childish and McDojoish. Totally agree.
Maybe my words were a little confusing. It has been said by the higher ranked and skilled Daito practitioners of the past that Takeda told them or their teacher not to teach every student the true Aiki skill. Aiki is what made their jujutsu special and gave them an advantage. Even though I believe all highly skilled individuals have some level of Aiki regardless of art. Evidence of that could be seen in the preceding generations of practitioners. I think Sagawa`s issued stemmed from Osensei going off and doing his own thing and calling it Aikido. He was becoming quite famous and people were calling him a genius. When in those early years he was simply teaching and doing Daito Ryu. The skills Takeda was not completely teaching to everyone. That is why his first generation Aikidoka licenses are from Takeda with the title Aiki jujutsu. It also partly explains the the high level of skill that group obtained that has not been duplicated in any generation of the groups that claims lineage to Aikido. On top of that, Sagawa knew he was better than Osensei and wanted to edge him to a challenge. He was always taking public shots at him. Think about you having something that made you really special. How many people do you think would share that so everyone was the same as you? Now you are know longer special. Sagawa was quoted as saying exactly that in his book written by his student who now runs his Dojo. This was coming from the one everyone considered to be the best Daito ryu practitioner in history.
Right. So my initial understanding is confirmed then. It's a childish and selfish approach to martial arts. At that time the feudal system in Japan had ended and there was no need for teachers to be secretive with their teachings. In fact many exponents of martial arts at that time were regularly cross training. It was MMA without the spandex. In my book Sagawa was being a coward. If he wanted to challenge Ueshiba then he should have done so openly instead of poking and proding from a distance. That does not suggest to me he felt he was better than Ueshiba. It doesn't strike me as the mark of confidence. It does however smack of jealousy. Which would explain the criticism of Ueshiba and his students. Now so far as I can tell, all of Ueshiba's students have been taught to the same standard. Where the standards drops is when those students go off and do their own thing. In particular the martial standard drops where their is a greater focus on the esoteric elements common to all Asian martial arts. Concepts of Ki and universal power and life forces etc. I find the suggestion that the standard of Aikido dropped simply because Tekada wasn't issuing the certificates quite ludicrous. It's a classic propaganda type statement nobody can prove or discredit. The person who shouts the loudest wins. Personally I would suggest you steer clear of these stories. None of us knows the full truth of what exactly went on and we never will. Stories like this are nothing but divisive. Martial arts practitioners learn more when they put old divisions aside and train together. Otherwise everybody loses.
That would make him what we nowadays call a bad teacher. Not been duplicated? You sure about that? Got any actual evidence of it? What's wrong with no one being special? I'm still special if I discover something new and share it because I found it and taught people how to do it.
That is easy! Can you name a person who skill equal that of his initial students, Sagawa or Takeda? Or even someone is even able to use it in real life/life or death situations? Takeda used it, Sagawa used it and even Osensei used it. Can you name someone can do that now? You may not like hearing the practitioners are not as good as that initial group but it is true. It may not feel good knowing there is more out there that you may not ever get or know someone who has it but won't give it to you. That is the current state of affairs. Alfawolfie, I'm not sure where you read that the skill dropped off because Takeda wasn't issuing certificates. I never said that. I said the skill level dropped off because they were not teaching everything about real Aiki skill. That's also including Osensei. It has been confirmed by someone who was the best Aiki practitioner that Takeda has ever produced. It is not just propaganda from his group but others outside of his lineage confirmed his ability. If you can read Japanese then I think you should read about Sagawa before calling someone a coward. If anything Osensei was afraid of him and had good reason to be. Just like you said they were cross training back in the day. How many Aikidoka can hold his own with his Aiki skills alone? Takeda, Sagawa, and Osensei could do it. By the way, Osensei never completed his Aiki training with Takeda. Sagawa did! If you have real faith in Aiki then that should tell you something.
That's fine. You have the right to believe that! We are talking about Aiki now, so if you have some real answers about it then do please share. If not then you are in the same boat as most Aikidoka.
The question still stands unanswered. Students of a good teacher will not merely match, but exceed their teacher, that's how you know someone is a good teacher with a lot to offer. Holding back knowledge for the sake of being 'special' would be petty, selfish, and would make you a bad teacher. Someone who can use it in life or death situations? Offhand, nope, couldn't name anyone, mainly because I'm not that invested in these little games, but the people will exist. In fact just about anyone who has used their art in a fight would fall under this category. That'd be a long list. Athletes improve, knowledge progresses and develops, training improves. I find it very hard to believe that practice has not improved beyond the initial start, and would like to see actual evidence of this. Still not buying that skill levels decrease over time, given that in almost every other area of human pursuit skills progress and improve as successive generations build on knowledge. As for not feeling good because someone wants to keep their little secrets? It doesn't feel bad at all to me personally, if someone's that insecure then I really do pity them. Not to mention that they've pretty much doomed their art to degradation and eventual failure.
LilBunnyRabbit, For someone who believes they know human nature. It seems odd you can't believe people are beyond selfishness. Being good at skill doesn't necessarily mean you can't have character flaws. They are not connected. That is where you logic breaks down. That includes a good teacher. Second, if you know anything about martial arts history whether it be Japanese, Chinese or etc then you would know it was quite common for teachers to hold back information from their students usually for their own safety. Once again, you are also assuming good martial artists means good teachers. Which they do not. Being a good teacher also doesn't mean you have the goods. The common way was to pick certain students and pass on the final pieces towards the end of their life. It some cases not passing it on because of not finding a worthy student, not having enough time or just being selfish. Sports and Martial arts are two different animals despite having many similarities. Like Alfawolfie said: It doesn't mean people weren't still doing it. Thirdly, this is also where your logic breaks down. You are assuming everything is being passed on. Which if you truly understand my posts you would know it has not. So explain to me how current groups can be better than their predecessors if all the information isn't passed on? In some cases misinformation. We have evidence from those who were considered the best saying they didn't pass it on purpose except to a select few. There are discussions of cases in history where skills and information was lost all the time. That is what archaeologists and anthropologists are for. At the beginning you found it hard to believe it was happening. Then with this little tidbit just explained what has been happening to Aikido perfectly. So what was the point of your posts again? It seems like you do want to play a game.
Well if I misinterpreted your post then I stand corrected. But that's the way it came across to me. I can't read Japanese. Languages have never been my strong suit. But then again Aiki is a practical skill. As for Sagawa being a coward? If what you have said is true and he didn't come straight out and honestly and openly challenge Ueshiba, but instead chose to take pot shots from a distance then in my judgement he was a coward in that respect. He was not willing to put his reputation on the line. I believe if you want to challenge someone then you should do it openly. And I don't care how many worshippers you have or what your reputation is. I apply the same rules to everybody in life.
I don't believe people are beyond selfishness at all, but I do believe that not wanting to give all of your students the best possible benefit from your teaching makes you a bad teacher. It'd be like me making a half-assed attempt to create a network configuration for someone because I don't want them to pick up all my knowledge. It may not make me a bad person, but it'd certainly make me unprofessional and poor at my chosen calling. I'm only talking about good teaching, not good martial artists. For what it's worth though I don't see anything special about teaching martial arts that makes it different from teaching any other subject. Yes, that is what they are for, but not passing that knowledge on does not mean that students will not surpass the teacher's practice. There are other sources of knowledge. I find it disappointing if my comments are accurate, very disappointing. Originally to dispute the use of the term ki. Now to try and explore why bad teaching makes someone somehow admirable, or could be seen as a good thing.
