Aikido and Internal MA connected?

[Samurai Jack]

In another thread I sited several techniques that Pa Kua, Hsing-i, and Aikido appear to share, which are not just similar, but identical both in structure and application. I'm curious to see others thoughts on this, as I've trained a bit in all three.

The thing is, these aren't just common similarities. I wouldn't be surprised to see a front snap kick taught by any of the karate or Tae Kwon Do styles, or a hook punch shared between boxing and Muay Thai for example. These are practical and logical techniques that could be developed in any country, at any time, by any people, because they are efficient and practical.

Instead, the techniques I'm thinking of I had thought to be pretty unique. While they're natural for thier intended purpose, they're more sophisticated than usual. For example, "Golden Phoenix Spreads Wings" is a Pa Kua movement which to the untrained eye would have no practical application at all. It involes spreading your arms out, with elbows bent palm up while you step forward and turn. I'd never seen it before in another art until I was taught it in Aikido as Kokyu-ho, and though it's extremly unusual looking, it makes for an incredibly effective throw.

Aikido also features beng chuan, tsuan chuan, and pi chuan. In fact these are the only hand techniques formally taught in most Aikido sylabuses. Aikido calls them Tsuki, Gyate-tsuki, and Shomen-uchi. Power is generated in an identical way as far as I can tell, and the basic training method of line walking is the same also.

Foot work in Aikido is pretty linear having more in common with Gao Pa Kua or Hsing-i, but the toes are always turned out in Ko-bu unless the Aikidoist is using a Bai-bu step which we call "Tenkan".

As with Hsing-i, Aikido's empty hand techniques all translate to the armed techniques, and the preferred weapons are very similar. Hsing-i uses Spear and saber extensively, while Aikido uses Short Spear (in practice we use Jo), and Katana (Bokken). The Jo is used in the very same way as the Spear is used in Hsing-i.

Someone posted something around here a few months ago where they noted that during their trip to Bejing University they were asked to demonstrate Aikido. The University coaches exclaimed that what they were doing looked just like Pa Kua. I don't necessarily think this means that Aikido came from China, but it's very interesting how similar the philosophy and actual techniques are to some CMA.

The reason that it seems so strange that Aikido has so many similarities between these arts is that Aikido has few similarities to any other traditional Japanese art. You'd think an art supposedly developed in recent times and based on older Japanese arts would look more like them. Could it be that O-Sensei, Aikido's founder, borrowed a little from CMA? Or could it be that because he had similar goals to the internal styles that he came up with similar methods independantly?

[xingyiman]

I have never studied Aikido. I'm just wondering does it share anything similar to the Liu He (Six Harmony) coordination used in Xingyi and other Chinese internal styles for power generation??

[shrub]

It is well knwon that O-Sensei Ushiba spent time in China before returning to Japan to create Akido. The most likely art he studied in China is Bagua.

[Samurai Jack]

As far as the Liu He are concerned, it's a tough call. The terminology between the arts is different but the mechanics appear to be very similar. The preffered on-guard stance (I hesitate to call it that as most Aikido postures are transitional) is the same stance taken in Pi Chuan for San Ti. The weight is more forward in Aikido, say 70/30 as opposed to 40/60.

If you've studied an IMA for awhile, you'll notice that weight distribution can vary quite a bit between teachers, let alone styles so I'm not sure how important the weight distribution difference really is. At any rate, the Aikidoka is told to move from Tanden (Dan Tien), stay relaxed, keep elbows connected to the body and dropped at all times, move from ground up, relax, extend Ki (Qi), use the eyes to focus intentent (yi), and maintain a calm spirit (shen).

So to answer you xingyiman, I'd have to say that yes, on the surface it appears that the six harmonies are recognized in Aikido, just not called such per se.

I hadn't even thought of looking for the Liu he in Aikido until now. I'll have to explore that one further in practice. Thanks!

[Samurai Jack]

Oh, and as far as the Pa kua O-Sensei may have studied, on the surface (once again, I'm no expert), I would think it might have been Gao style as there is so much linear stuff going on with the footwork. That might explain why there's alot of Hsing-i stuff I'm noticing.

I've always maintained a healthy level of scepticisim concerning a connection between the three arts, but my actual personal experience keeps leading me in that direction.

[Felipe Bido]

Originally posted by Samurai Jack
Aikido also features beng chuan, tsuan chuan, and pi chuan. In fact these are the only hand techniques formally taught in most Aikido sylabuses. Aikido calls them Tsuki, Gyate-tsuki, and Shomen-uchi. Power is generated in an identical way as far as I can tell, and the basic training method of line walking is the same also.



Actually, they are not similar. They may look similar to the outside viewer, but the power generation and body method is not the same. But you have to feel it, to notice the difference.

[FuXnDajenariht]

How is power generated in aikido anyway? I mean, do they have "internal" strength building exercises like standing post?

[Samurai Jack]

How is power generated in aikido anyway?

As I already mentioned, the Aikidoka basically generates power from the axis of the Tanden, or center. We also adhere to the six harmonies, although we don't call it such.

I mean, do they have "internal" strength building exercises like standing post?

We close each class with Kokyu dosa (breath exercise), and throughout form work we are constantly being admonished to use our centers, and recieving corrections to physical posture and the like. There are a multitude of various exercises, but I've never heard anything like "this exercise is for ki", or "this exercise is external only". It seems like this concept of internal/external is limited to China from what I can tell.

Sifu Mike Patterson, of Hsing-i fame, says that the distinction is really one of geography. He claims that the "internal" styles are simply the styles which are indigenous to China, basically those not based on Shaolin, while the external styles are all based on imports.

Alot of historians credit Sun Lu Tang with coining the phrase Internal Martial Art in order to make a distinction between his Neija Chuan and the rest.

I'm no expert in this field though, so to answer the question, I don't know.

[Samurai Jack]

Felipe, I'm willing to take your word for it, but out of curiosity, what experience do you posses in the way of Aikido?

[Felipe Bido]

Hi Samurai Jack

I practiced Aikido for a year or so before I started training Choy Li Fut (before I changed to Xingyi). That was like 15 years ago.

[MonkeySlap Too]

I've met several Aiki masters - none of them exhibited the power generation or skills of Xing-yi.

[Samurai Jack]

MonkeySlap Too, I've met some absolutely astounding Hsing-i masters (George Xu, Vince Black, Mike Patterson, Leung Ke Hua), and they were no more or less astounding than the Aikido Shihan I've met. The power generation is similar. Who exactly were the "masters" you've met?

Felipe, if I told you I only trained Hsing-i a "year or so" before making definitive statements about your art, how seriously would you take my comments?

Anyhow, I didn't post this thread to argue with people who don't know the topic and aren't interested in exploring it. If nobody has any facts to add, I think I'll bow out for now.

[Felipe Bido]

Originally posted by Samurai Jack

Felipe, if I told you I only trained Hsing-i a "year or so" before making definitive statements about your art, how seriously would you take my comments?


I would take them seriously if you were around Hsing I people all the time.

You asked me about my experience with Aikido myself. But apart from that, I've been around aikidokas for a long time, sharing stuff.

Take my comments seriously, or don't take them. You asked for opinions, I gave you mine. Other people have agreed with what I've said, but it seems that you've made up your mind already. :)

Good luck, then


Oh...


Anyhow, I didn't post this thread to argue with people who don't know the topic and aren't interested in exploring it. If nobody has any facts to add, I think I'll bow out for now.

Ok, man.

[NeedsPractice]

1- Any external ( to the visible eye) similarities between tai chi, xing yi and bagua techniques could probably be traced to cross training and/or copying of techniques over the years. Not a big deal.

2- I have heard before the aikido has bagua influences and I could beleive it.

3- I was once told by an extremely experienced aikidoist (20-30 years expereince) that aikido only appears circular but is actually linear. ( I dont know enough to have an opinion on that but I will take his word for it)

4- From my personal experience people heavily into the japanese arts tend (aikido, diato ryu, and "koryu budo" tend to discredit any similiarity between the japanese arts and the chinese arts that predate them.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Samurai Jack
At any rate, the Aikidoka is told to move from Tanden (Dan Tien)

'Move from the dantien' can mean, I think, two different, though related, things -- movement which is coordinated around the dantien as a center, and movement which results from articulations of the dantien. I think the Aikido mandate to 'move from the Tanden' certainly addresses the former of these ideas, but does it also address the latter? Are there any exercises in Aikido that develop dantien articulation?

[Samurai Jack]

Originally posted by Christopher M
I think the Aikido mandate to 'move from the Tanden' certainly addresses the former of these ideas, but does it also address the latter? Are there any exercises in Aikido that develop dantien articulation?

Everything we do, exercises, kata, and randori centers around the concept of moving from Tanden. Kokyu-dosa, meaning "breath exercise" vagely resembles Tai Chi push hands to a degree.

The two practitioners kneel in front of eachother in order to eliminate strength advantages and use of legs, and attempt to topple eachother using Tanden alone. I am not personally at a level yet where I can consciously differentiate between movement that originates from Tanden and movement that is coordinated by the Tanden, but during Kokyu-dosa you cannot move your oponent unless you relax and use your center.

When it works, you feel your lower abdomen turning in the direction that you want to go, sort of like a bowling ball rolling down a lane. If you're relaxed it sort of feels like you're "rolling over" your partner, and everything else is just going along for the ride if that makes any sense. Our goal is to have all of our techniques operate that effortlessly.

Does this sound like anything you've experienced in your practice?

[Finny]

See this thread for the opinion of a man who has trained for a LONG time in Aikido, as well as xingyi.

I was curious about whether Ueshiba could have trained in Bagua, cos Bruce Frantzis talks about it in his book - well, you can read the replies (very thorough and convincing) yourself:

http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=11036

Cheers,

Brendan

[Doug]

As I understand it, O-Sensei went back to Japan with what was described as a different art than the one he left behind prior to leaving Japan.

Aikido was my first martial art. There were plenty of ki (chi) exercises that we as a class used to do before practicing techniques. But that is not a giveaway to actually building up chi. The Aikido I practiced was a variant of Ki Society Aikido. But there were no details given about how to think about breath in the body or where to focus or whatever. Yes, there were standard exercises where students focused on their "one points," but those were not examples of doing the detailed kinds of things done in Chinese internal systems. If someone were to practice an internal art and, then, go to Aikido, the result would be much, much different.

Other differences exist, but Aikido by itself is only as effective as the current practitioners are today. It was once described to me as a "dead art" because only the master, O-Sensei, was able to do what he did with his "new chi ability." No other student was doing what he did, and he did not pass it down to the next generation. Therefore, anyone wishing to replicate what O-Sensei did should look into Chinese internal systems. An issue of The Journal of Asian Martial Arts, which has an article on Don Draeger, has Draeger claim that any Japanese looking to learn about chi should study a Chinese system.

Doug M

[FuXnDajenariht]

ha! so he probably did practice internal strength training.

now his students are trying to emulate effortless throws from day one. but i figure his skill was more than just perfected technique. effortless throwing being the end result of the levels he reached. i wonder what aikido would look like if they regularly practiced nei-gong hardcore..... i have alot of respect for what Ueshiba tried to accomplish tho. not wanting to harm your enemy seems very "different" to most fighters.....

[FuXnDajenariht]

he was supposedly very religious tho. maybe that had sumthin to do with it....

i was reading e-budo a couple years ago. something stuck in my mind.... has anyone else heard the claim that Ueshiba is quoted as saying Aikido is 90% Atemi (i think thats word for striking but my japanese is rusty or rather non-existant) ????

[Samurai Jack]

"dead art":rolleyes:

I'm REALLY glad I've never trained at your old Dojo, Doug.

Yes, FuXnDajenariht, O-Sensei reportedly said that Aikido is 90% atemi (hitting vital points). This is actually true IME. Every movement in Aikido is a strike or a set-up for a strike to a vital area. Most people don't figure this out until they've been at it awhile (like black-belt level and up). Training for reality as I do tends to quicken the process quite a bit, as does getting belted a few good ones by Sensei on a regular basis!

[Doug]

Do you understand the "dead art" reference, Jack?

And for what reason are you glad you never trained at my old school? I do not think it was all that bad. It was just not as specific as Chinese systems are, which I find quite helpful.

The philosophy was the best for me. It changed me completely. I would have been a very different person if it were not for the example that my teacher provided when I started studying any systematic art. I am forever grateful for his teachings.

Doug M

[Samurai Jack]

Originally posted by Doug
Do you understand the "dead art" reference, Jack?

Of course I understand it. It's rubish.


Originally posted by Doug
And for what reason are you glad you never trained at my old school? I do not think it was all that bad. It was just not as specific as Chinese systems are, which I find quite helpful.

To clarify, I'm glad I never trained at the school where you aquired your misconceptions. If you think misrepresenting a style to the point that former students draw the conclusion that the art is "dead" isn't a poor way to teach that art, I question the validity of your other comments.



Originally posted by Doug
The philosophy was the best for me. It changed me completely. I would have been a very different person if it were not for the example that my teacher provided when I started studying any systematic art. I am forever grateful for his teachings.

It's nice that the man changed your life and that you're grateful. Are you planning on paying him a visit to him to tell him he's teaching a "dead art"? Maybe you can school him with some of your "built up chi". :rolleyes:

[Doug]

Originally posted by Samurai Jack
Of course I understand it. It's rubish.
Actually, if you did understand the comment, you would not be so rash in your poor conclusions. If you think about it, you will find I am right. However, you would rather let your damaged ego do the talking.

To clarify, I'm glad I never trained at the school where you aquired your misconceptions. If you think misrepresenting a style to the point that former students draw the conclusion that the art is "dead" isn't a poor way to teach that art, I question the validity of your other comments.
First, Jack, I never said who said it. You are a fool to guess who did. When you assume, you make a jackA-S-S of yourself.

Second, I have no misconceptions about the art. You, howver, do. If you think Aikido is a living art in the tradition of O-Sensei in his later years, prove it. Do exactly as he did; replicate it. One way to tell that you cannot do as he did is because of the way you are acting on this discussion board. O-Sensei would not have allowed himself to get caught in a poor argument like yours. If you cannot copy his mental development, how can you even hope to carry on his physical abilities?

Third, you are a funny person to question the validity of my comments when you have provided nothing of substance to support yours. The fact that you are hiding behind a false name on this discussion board shows more than anything whose "validity" is in question.

Fourth, you missed the point entirely. Get out of your Aiki bubble and think about it in other terms.

It's nice that the man changed your life and that you're grateful. Are you planning on paying him a visit to him to tell him he's teaching a "dead art"? Maybe you can school him with some of your "built up chi". :rolleyes:
You are pathetic. Whatever you are practicing, it is not Aikido. It has, apparently, not gotten to the core of your being, and you are being everything O-Sensei said not to be. Unfortunately, you probably will not realize his philosophy until it is too late. Your disrespect shames the memory of O-Sensei, and as an Aikido practitioner, you should be ashamed of yourself. The fact that you are so brazen shows how minimal your understanding is of your chosen art.

Doug M

[Samurai Jack]

I guess this means we aren't friends anymore.


Originally posted by Doug
Actually, if you did understand the comment, you would not be so rash in your poor conclusions. If you think about it, you will find I am right. However, you would rather let your damaged ego do the talking.


You are wrong. Dosen't matter how you insult me personally, you're still wrong.


Originally posted by Doug First, Jack, I never said who said it. You are a fool to guess who did. When you assume, you make a jackA-S-S of yourself.

I don't care who said it. Don't try to hide your social indescretion by pretending that you were quoting someone else. The proper thing to do when you fire off a critisizim is to provide some evidence, or apologize for your mistake. You obviously intended to insult me.


Originally posted by Doug Second, I have no misconceptions about the art. You, howver, do. If you think Aikido is a living art in the tradition of O-Sensei in his later years, prove it. Do exactly as he did; replicate it. One way to tell that you cannot do as he did is because of the way you are acting on this discussion board. O-Sensei would not have allowed himself to get caught in a poor argument like yours. If you cannot copy his mental development, how can you even hope to carry on his physical abilities?

You're right about one thing. In the days before the telephone and internet, people challenged eachother to their face. O-Sensei kicked plenty of a$$, as did his Uchi-deshi in many, many challenge matches. I have used my "dead art" in many real life situations, and know for a fact that it works. As I said before, why don't you go express your "gratitude" to your former Aikido teacher.


Originally posted by Doug Third, you are a funny person to question the validity of my comments when you have provided nothing of substance to support yours. The fact that you are hiding behind a false name on this discussion board shows more than anything whose "validity" is in question.

I've done everything I could to support my opinions, and make it clear that they aren't facts. Mostly I've posted questions. As far as my name goes, lighten up. Alot of people around here need a little anonymity "Doug", no need to get all excited because you're "man enough" to give us all your first name. :rolleyes:


Originally posted by Doug Fourth, you missed the point entirely. Get out of your Aiki bubble and think about it in other terms.


Okay. Maybe I missed your point. Please grace us all with your point, that we may draw sustenance from your wisdom. What did you mean by "dead art"? How can you qualify this statement: "No other student was doing what he did, and he did not pass it down to the next generation." Please enlighten me if I misinterpreted the insulting nature of your posts. Or perhaps we can just take a look at your closing comments...


Originally posted by Doug Please
You are pathetic. Whatever you are practicing, it is not Aikido. It has, apparently, not gotten to the core of your being, and you are being everything O-Sensei said not to be. Unfortunately, you probably will not realize his philosophy until it is too late. Your disrespect shames the memory of O-Sensei, and as an Aikido practitioner, you should be ashamed of yourself. The fact that you are so brazen shows how minimal your understanding is of your chosen art.

Doug M

I think your intentions have been obvious from the begining, Doug. Your final paragraph full of personal attacks speaks louder than your protests.

[Doug]

Originally posted by Samurai Jack
I guess this means we aren't friends anymore.
To not be "friends anymore" implies we were friends from the start of something else. You should know better than to assume...no, wait, you do not. My mistake.

You are wrong. Dosen't matter how you insult me personally, you're still wrong.
Wow, look at the logical progression of your argument here! "[Y]ou're still wrong." I can see how you are providing evidence for your claim. Keep at it--we need the comedy!

I don't care who said it. Don't try to hide your social indescretion by pretending that you were quoting someone else.
What? I am not hiding anything, "Samurai Jack." I have told the truth as I experienced it. Wht truth have you divulged? It certianly has nothing to do with you and your Internet disguise.

The proper thing to do when you fire off a critisizim is to provide some evidence, or apologize for your mistake. You obviously intended to insult me.
Assumption makes a Samurai JackA-S-S out of you once again! Oh, are you going to claim that is an insult again?

I was not insulting you, sir. Had you taken the time to think before you typed, you may have arrived at a different conclusion.

You are the one who needs to apologize.

You're right about one thing. In the days before the telephone and internet, people challenged eachother to their face. O-Sensei kicked plenty of a$$, as did his Uchi-deshi in many, many challenge matches.
Why not name a few of the "many, many challenge matches" for us?

And if you are insinuating something else beyond your "they used their art a lot" comment, say it plainly.

I have used my "dead art" in many real life situations, and know for a fact that it works.
I am sure you have done this over the Internet plenty of times. This is such a case where you have lost terribly.

And I am also sure that you have become the expert you claim to be with your, what, one or two years of experience?

As I said before, why don't you go express your "gratitude" to your former Aikido teacher.
Why not talk to me about this in person? I am in Hacienda Heights, CA. If you are a genuine Aiki practitioner, you can talk without losing your center or violating any of the other principles that the founder of Aikido established. If not, you are not practicing Aikido as you should.

I've done everything I could to support my opinions, and make it clear that they aren't facts. Mostly I've posted questions.
Not with me you have not. You have been a jerk all the way through.

As far as my name goes, lighten up. Alot of people around here need a little anonymity "Doug", no need to get all excited because you're "man enough" to give us all your first name. :rolleyes:
Ha, ha, ha! Why do you need to hide? What are you afraid of?

And there is "no need to get all excited" yourself about your concept of your Aiki bubble bursting. If you can do what O-Sensei did later in life, then do it. If not, own your error and admit you cannot. You took this entirely the wrong way.

Okay. Maybe I missed your point. Please grace us all with your point, that we may draw sustenance from your wisdom. What did you mean by "dead art"? How can you qualify this statement: "No other student was doing what he did, and he did not pass it down to the next generation." Please enlighten me if I misinterpreted the insulting nature of your posts.
I already made my point. Re-read the post in which I stated it quite clearly. Some day, you may understand it.

I think your intentions have been obvious from the begining, Doug. Your final paragraph full of personal attacks speaks louder than your protests.
1) I am not protesting anything. You are not equipped to be a judge of my statements because it is quite clear you are unable to grasp very simple points without going on your Aiki slamfest. I am making a point about Aikido as it was when O-Sensei died and still is UNLESS someone seeks to re-create it in similar fashion. If you cannot understand that, well, that is your problem.

As to insults, you may choose to interpret those statements that way. The first is a bit insulting, but so is your prior comment. If you show me contempt, I will not let you get away with it. As far as the other comments go, they are not insults: they are statements of fact as much as you have demonstrated here.

Come back when you can form a sufficient argument or, at least, not make blanket generalizations about things you do not understand. This would have been much different if you had just asked questions to clear things up. Instead, you want to live in your bubble. Bully for you, "Samurai."

Doug M

[Finny]

Jack, I think you should calm down, take a deep breath, and count to ten.

The assertion that Aikido is a 'dead art' is not at all 'out-there' or uncommon, in fact it is a comment that I've heard from many people, most probably with a hell of a lot more experience in Aikido than you.

It's not an insult to the art to describe it as such, and for you to get your panties in such a bunch is quite unwarranted.

The fact is, Ueshiba was a freak, much like his teacher, Takeda.

NONE of his students could do the things Ueshiba could do.

MANY, perhaps MOST were great teachers, and could pass on the techniques and philosophy that Ueshiba created.

BUT they still could not DO what Ueshiba could - if they could, why would we have half a dozen different Aikido organisations?

IF any of his students had've had his ability, it would have been as easily recognisable as Ueshiba's ability was, and everyone would've wanted to train with him.

Are you actually saying that his student/s were able to do the things Ueshiba could do? Which one/s?? Shioda? Tomiki? Ueshiba Jr.?

I think perhaps you should step down from your high horse and relax, perhaps you'll actually learn to ENJOY discussing your art in these forums.

[Samurai Jack]

Well, the trolls have chased me out. God bless ya'll.

[Kaitain(UK)]

Jack - I think you've invested too much ego into the discussion. Step back and ignore that side of the debate and just answer the points relating directly to the 'dead art' statement. It certainly interests me.

I don't think anyone is saying that there is nothing of value within the system, or that it is useless for self-defence. People were just raising opinions or hearsay for discussion - if you could step away from the personal investment in your art, I think you might find useful discussion here. I had to learn to do the same when Yang style gets a slating, same as Earle's people have had to do whenever he comes up - it's just a part of the forum that you can easily side-step and just walk away with what is useful.

[Doug]

No one is chasing you out. And no one here is a troll. Do not treat others with contempt.

You say this: "[O]n the surface it appears that the six harmonies are recognized in Aikido, just not called such per se." I said the same thing about clear distinctions between how to develop chi and what is perceived as (and not differentiated from) "just" calming exercises. Something else must be studied to bring Aikido as O-Sensei saw it to life again. In line with that, there is no clear way to arrive at O-Sensei's abilities without re-exploring how he achieved them. In other words, he did not provide his students with his methods of replicating his abilities. Had he done so, the "magic" of Aikido would be far more prevalent today. None of this is insulting or controversial. That is why so many Aikido practitioners speak of the founder with such mysticism: they cannot figure out how he was so powerful for so old a man. But he had real abilities that other people can learn and implement as well. But does Aikido teach this is a clear way? One answer is no.

Doug M

[Finny]

Kaitain said pretty much what I was trying to say.

The notion of Aikido as a 'dead' art is not as insulting as it may sound, Jack.

I personally think Aikido's a great art, with a founder who provided a great ideal to aim for.

The only point I was trying to make is that I've also heard from many VERY experienced budoka that they believed that Ueshiba's Aikido died with him, because none of his students were able to replicate the things he could do. I think the phrase I've heard most often is that none could "steal his techniques" - due to his method of teaching; that is, he would just demonstrate and then expect his students to copy, but none of them could - at least not to the same degree of skill.

If you disagree, and think that his students WERE able to continue his art, perhaps you could tell us which ones were able to replicate his level of skill - and who can do so these days.

No-ones trying to chase you out, just looking for some healthy disscussion. You don't seem to be up for that - that's ok, just dont blame us.

[Walter Joyce]

While he as also studied the three big neija arts, there is one person I have seen film of that reminded me of Usheiba, Peter Ralston. He has developed his own art, Cheng Hsin, but I have seen film clips of him and the only other person I saw that worked as effortlessly and effectively was Usheiba.

Ralston was also a student of aikido.

FWIW

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Samurai Jack
Does this sound like anything you've experienced in your practice?

Somewhat, yes. But I have not practiced enough aikido to look at it from that perspective.

I brought up the distinction between movement coordinated around the dantien and movement of the dantien because it's a distinction that's easy to miss in language; there are some specific exercises to cultivate the latter in the chinese internals, analogs of which I haven't seen in aikido; and aikidoka tend to look to me, by chinese internal standards, as having 'stiff' (or immobile) waists (which leads to a stiffness of shoulder and elbow... or vice-versa, I guess).

Given my inexperience, I wouldn't be presumptuous enough to suggest that aikido is in any sense inferior in this regard, but merely perhaps different than the chinese internals -- but I think that was the topic to begin with.

It's quite possible, of course, that I'm entirely wrong in this regard. And that would be nice. Or perhaps it wouldn't -- I think, as has been suggested, aikido may be better appreciated for its own unique contributions than for its analogs to the chinese internals.

... as for the claim that some have made here, that none since Ueshiba have achieved his type of skill in/by aikido, I think that is demonstratably false -- certainly, the likes of Tomiki and Shioda seem to be representative in this regard. It's probably true that aikido has not been as successful as many martial arts in producing practitioners that match the skill of its masters, but this seems to be true of the chinese internals as well -- so perhaps it's not a particularly meaningful observation in this specific discussion.

[Doug]

Perhaps, perhaps not.

[Samurai Jack]

Well, I've had some time to cool off. It's very nice to see such constructive questions and comments being discussed. I particularly enjoy Christopher's observation:

I think, as has been suggested, aikido may be better appreciated for its own unique contributions than for its analogs to the chinese internals.

I also think that Christopher and Walter have done a wonderful job of answering Finny's question:

If you disagree, and think that his students WERE able to continue his art, perhaps you could tell us which ones were able to replicate his level of skill - and who can do so these days.

They mentioned Peter Ralston, Tomiki and Shioda. To that short list I would like to add Saito Sensei, Chiba Sensei, and Yamada Sensei, as well as my own teacher, whose name must remain anonymous in order to protect the innocent from my imperfect and sometimes controversial attempts at communication. It is difficult enough to represent myself!

I would venture the opinion that the above mentioned teachers are expressing Aikido in their own unique ways, but at the same time showing the degree of skill necessary for their purposes. To me, the question as to whether or not they are just like O-Sensei is meaningless, and irrelevant, especially from his own enlightened perspective. In that regard, any similarities or lack thereof to any other art is also meaningless.

Someone once said something about the root of the martial arts being more important than the flowers and branches. In actuality, I think they are neither more nor less important, but at once interdependant and unique.

By way of closing, I'd like to relate the following story:

A student once approached Morihei Ueshiba and said, "O-Sensei, I should very much like to practice your Aikido, will you teach me?" Ueshiba replied, "How unique! Everyone else is practicing their own Aikido. I am at a loss as to how you will practice mine."

[Internal Boxer]

The test of any martial art is for it to be applied on fully resisting opponents. When I talk about "opponents" I do not mean their own students!

There is a place for co-operative training methods in martial arts but Training against a fully resistent opponent should be one of the core training principles. If this is absent from the training regime skill cannot be aquired.

end of.

[Walter Joyce]

in 1978 Peter Ralston won one of the first modern full contact championships in China.

I'm fairly certain he didn't defeat any of his students to achieve that honor.

[Samurai Jack]

It took me a minute to realize that Internal Boxer was calling into question the master's skill level whom I mentioned. I'm guessing his point is that if these guys didn't fight for real, they aren't the real deal.

Allow me to put that notion to rest. To start with Takeda Sensei, who was Ueshiba Sensei's teacher, was a notorious gang member who had murdered numerous people with little more than his paper fan as a weapon. He was hunted by various law enforcers and rival gangs and had many, many opportunities to use his art. Strangely, because of his reputation as a fighter, many district police were also his students...

Ueshiba O-Sensei held many challenge matches in which he publicly fought Sumo wrestlers, judo and jujutsuka, an american greco-roman wrestler, and even once fought a skilled ARMED (!) kenjutsuka. He never lost a match.

Chiba Sensei was a rough and tumble young man and retains his reputation for martial austerity to this day. He too accepted challengers from various arts, and even had a very controversial match with Wang Shu Jin, the famous internal stylist. No matter which side of the argument as to who won you go along with, both sides admit that Wang's wrist was broken, and Chiba was unhurt. (I can't figure out how Wang's camp can claim that Wang won with this outcome, but they do)

Tomiki, Shioda, and Yamada have all fought at various times in thier lives. So have I. There is no doubt in my mind that Aikido is an effective martial art.

[Doug]

Originally posted by Samurai Jack
To start with Takeda Sensei, who was Ueshiba Sensei's teacher, was a notorious gang member who had murdered numerous people with little more than his paper fan as a weapon.
Proof, have you?

Ueshiba O-Sensei held many challenge matches [...]. He never lost a match.
According to lore, yes. According to lore, he could also "see the bullets" before they hit during his time in war. He was supposedly 180 pounds of muscle and could rip a tree out of the ground.

Chiba Sensei was a rough and tumble young man and retains his reputation for martial austerity to this day. He too accepted challengers from various arts, and even had a very controversial match with Wang Shu Jin, the famous internal stylist. No matter which side of the argument as to who won you go along with, both sides admit that Wang's wrist was broken, and Chiba was unhurt. (I can't figure out how Wang's camp can claim that Wang won with this outcome, but they do)
Cite this source, please. I am interested in how you arrive at your conclusion, given your expertise in analysis on this discussion board.

There is no doubt in my mind that Aikido is an effective martial art.
Well, perhaps.

Doug M

[Rockwood]

Both Aikido and the Chinese internal styles are fully formed martial arts, and can be used effectively by an expert for self defense. So nobody needs to be getting all defensive.

Stories about the Wang Versus Chiba match abound but this is the best version I've seen. Since it came from Terry Dobson, who was a direct student of O-Sensei, it seems to me that he'd have no reason to lie.

I've met a couple students of Wang Shu Jin and they told me he never lost a challenge. I have reason to believe them.

Sincerley,

Jess O

FROM THE FURTHEST REACHES OF THE INTERNET:

"I will quote the story that Terry Dobson told me, which was corroborated at
another time by Donn Draeger. I also heard Terry tell this story again in
a group with Mitsugi Saotome present, who amidst laughter chimed in and
agreed. I didn't know that Ken Cottier was present but he was also part of
the group.

First, some context. Wang Shu Chin, for those who don't know, was
primarily a Pa Kua, Hsing I teacher, who also trained many years in I
Ch'uan. He was a massive man, fat over heavy muscle, in his prime, about
5'6" and about 260 lb, I'd guess. He also did t'ai chi, the syncretic form
created by Chen Pan Ling, which he did in a very different manner from
Chen (this form is, these days, often called the Guo Shu form, the
"national form" of Taiwan). Wang was the head of a neo-Taoist sect, which
strove to harmonize the major religions of the world.

As always, there are debates about how strong he really was, I studied with
him only two months when he was months away from death from melanoma. I
witnessed him knock over a very muscular kyoshinkai champion with a
side-step and belly blow, but that was a a controlled situation, not
free-style. Still, really impressive power, despite his illness. For me,
one of the most interesting measurements of his "power" was that when I
travelled in Taiwan, every teacher who was talking big and trying to
impress with his credentials claimed to have beaten Wang.

Anyway, Wang originally came over to Japan in the '60's, first to teach his
son-in-law, who had married his adopted daughter. Among the first to study
with him was Sato Kimbei. Sato, among koryu circles, was generally
considered a joke. He collected scrolls and licenses. Otsubo sensei, of
the Yagyu Shinkage Ryu, told in a very public forum, of Sato apporoaching
him, asking how long it would take to get a menkyo kaiden and when Otsubo
was noncommittal, trying to bargain with him. Otsubo allowed him to train
with him and w/in two months, Sato was nowhere to be found, but years
later, he was claiming licensure in the school. Anyway, Sato hooked up
with Wang for some years, and this did give him legitimate claim to being
one of the "pioneers" of Japanese t'ai chi.

Wang used to ask a former student of Sato's to demonstrate what Sato
taught, and he and his son-in-law would pick it apart, laughing and asking
him to repeat cerain moves over and over. I also happened to be present at
a workshop when the head of the Bejing wushu society, (forgot his name -
the guy who put together the 48 movement syncretic t'ai chi form) and
another practitioner, who has won the Yang t'ai chi competition several
years running and Sato came up and told them that they weren't allowed to
teach because they hadn't asked his permission, and they looked at him like
you look at a deranged street person asking to borrow your briefcase, and
walked away shaking their heads. Sato did nothing, and left with his wife
shortly after. Sato is currently claimed as a senior infuence on the
Genbukan and Tanemura - - -Oh well.

Wang started teaching in the grounds of Meiji shrine, and somewhere along
the line a group of non-Japanese around Donn Draeger started training with
him. Draeger learned some pa-kua, Wang would also show some Hsing I, but
mostly he taught t'ai chi. Among this group was Terry Dobson, who was a
live-in student of Morihei Ueshiba of aikido. Terry's direct senior was
Chiba. Wang was doing demos in Japanese martial arts demonstrations and as
Ken Cottier put it, "here you'd have all these startched Japanese in their
crisp kiekko gi and their crisp snappy movements and then out would come
this fat Chinaman in grey flannel slacks and suspenders and he'd start
doing impossible slow t'ai chi and he'd turn around and this ass as big as
the moon would waft across the stage and then he'd challenge all comers to
have a go at him and the young karate boys would be rabid and he'd let them
punch his stomach or kick him in the groin and he'd just laugh it off but
heaven help you if you tried to punch his head. He made it clear that that
was out of bounds, and if you broke the rules, then he'd become, shall we
say, active."

Terry stated to me, (I'm quoting as best as I can remember) "the uchi-deshi
at honbu, particularly Chiba, started giving me a raft of **** that I was
being disloyal to O-sensei by studying with Wang, and I asked O-sensei, and
he said, 'sure, do what you want' but they wouldn't let up so I said, "why
don't you come and check him out for yourself." So Draeger and me took
Chiba, Saotome and Tamura. Well, we walked in, and Wang scopes out Chiba
right away, like he knows who has the attitude here, takes one look, and
says, 'come here boy.' Seriously, Wang's over sixty, paid lots of dues, is
a religious leader and all, and here comes these punks, as far as he's
concerned, in their twenties, copping an attitude. So Wang lets Chiba
punch him in the stomach. Nothing. Chiba tries again. Nothing. Well,
now Chiba loses his temper, half turns away, and then tries to sucker punch
him, thinking it's timing. This time Wang sucks the fist into his belly
and then drops, he gives it back, Chiba's arm goes shooting back behind his
ear, and he's shaking his wrist in pain. Wang then let Chiba kick him in
the groin. Nothing. So Chiba loses it, grabs Wang's wrist and puts a
nikkyo or kote-gaeshi on it, some wrist lock. I don't know what Wang did,
it was too fast, but Chiba slams on the floor and Wang's doing something to
him with one hand and he's screaming in pain. Finally Wang lets him up and
says, "You've got a little chi, why don't you come back when you acquire
more?" Then he turns to Tamura and Saotome, who were standing there with
their backs against the wall, and says, "you want to try." They both shake
their heads and we all went home. They never gave me **** about Wang
again. . . . Far as I'm concerned, Chiba lost his chance at salvation right
there. He should have quit everything and sat at Wang's feet."

[Samurai Jack]

Rockwood, I've seen that piece before. My only complaint with it is that the person telling the story hasn't been identified, and claims that he heard the story from Terry Dobson and Don Draeger, both very prolific writers who've never put this story in to print. So where did it come from? Perhaps you can shed some light since you site it.

In order to hear the other side of the coin, this excerpt comes from an interview of Chiba Sensei by Arthur Lockyear who wrote the piece for Fighting Arts International (issue #70).

" (A.L.)As we are talking about challenges would you mind telling me about your confrontation with Mr. Wang, the Tai Chi Master from China?
(Chiba)Who told you about this...Mr. Cottier perhaps?
(A.L.)Perhaps I'd better not tell...
(Laughter)
(Chiba)O.K. then. I was in a big demonstration of Martial Arts in Tokyo in the early 1960's, and Tai Chi Chuan was being shown by Mr. Wang. He was from Taiwan and he was very big indeed. He became quite famous later in Japan. Well, at the end of his display he had a number of Karateka line up in front of him, and each of them punched him in the belly. It had no effect on him. I was not impressed. I would have done something else (Sensei demonstrated a groin kick and face punch whilst saying this).
So, anyway two of my private students were also studying Tai Chi under Mr. Wang, and they were very impressed with him. They invited me to come along and see him. Eventually I accepted and went to watch his class. At the dojo my students introduced us, and he politely asked me to show some Aikido. Even though his words were warm it was still a challenge! Well, we faced each other, and Master Wang made something like Sumo posture with his hands outstretched. I stood and waited for an opening. This went on for some minutes until he moved forward to push me. So I met him, made Tai Sabaki (body evasion) and took his wrist with Kote Gaeshi, (wrist crush/reversal)...his wrist made a loud snapping noise as I applied it. Even though I applied Kote Gaeshi strongly and injured him, he did not go down. Master Wang snatched his wrist from me, and challenged me immediately. So this time he pushed me with both hands in the belly, and threw me quite a distance across the room. I landed, but I also did not go down. It was an amazing throw. My students then came between us, and that was that."

[Samurai Jack]

Ah Doug, can we not lay the animosity between us to rest? Perhaps it's just your writing style, but you often come off sounding antagonistic towards me. I'd like to give you the benifit of the doubt here and extend another apology for getting short with you last month. Perhaps we can move on.

As far as having proof of the stories passed on orally and in written format, you know I cannot provide this. Filming of such events was not a common practice in pre and post WWII Japan for several reasons. I'd like to point out that the many fantasic stories sighted concerning internal martial artists of the past are also unverifiable, but this dosen't keep people from repeating them on this forum.

Unlike many of the old-time Chinese internal artists, many of the Aikido masters I've mentioned are still alive, and are still demonstrating the level of skill attributed to them. Thankfully, they are willing to tell us what it was like to train with O-Sensei, and since these men are of impeccable character, I'm willing to take thier words for it.

[BAI HE]

Terry Dobson was there and had no reason to lie.
Chiba got squashed.

"I will quote the story that Terry Dobson told me, which was corroborated at another time by Donn Draeger. I also heard Terry tell this story again in a group with Mitsugi Saotome present, who amidst laughter chimed in and agreed. I didn't know that Ken Cottier was present but he was also part of the group.

First, some context. Wang Shu Chin, for those who don't know, was primarily a Pa Kua, Hsing I teacher, who also trained many years in I Ch'uan. He was a massive man, fat over heavy muscle, in his prime, about 5'6" and about 260 lb, I'd guess. He also did t'ai chi, the syncretic form created by Chen Pan Ling, which he did in a very different manner from Chen (this form is, these days, often called the Guo Shu form, the "national form" of Taiwan). Wang was the head of a neo-Taoist sect, which strove to harmonize the major religions of the world.

As always, there are debates about how strong he really was, I studied with him only two months when he was months away from death from melanoma. I witnessed him knock over a very muscular kyoshinkai champion with a side-step and belly blow, but that was a a controlled situation, not free-style. Still, really impressive power, despite his illness. For me, one of the most interesting measurements of his "power" was that when I travelled in Taiwan, every teacher who was talking big and trying to impress with his credentials claimed to have beaten Wang.

Anyway, Wang originally came over to Japan in the '60's, first to teach his son-in-law, who had married his adopted daughter. Among the first to study with him was Sato Kimbei. Sato, among koryu circles, was generally considered a joke. He collected scrolls and licenses. Otsubo sensei, of the Yagyu Shinkage Ryu, told in a very public forum, of Sato apporoaching him, asking how long it would take to get a menkyo kaiden and when Otsubo was noncommittal, trying to bargain with him. Otsubo allowed him to train with him and w/in two months, Sato was nowhere to be found, but years later, he was claiming licensure in the school. Anyway, Sato hooked up with Wang for some years, and this did give him legitimate claim to being one of the "pioneers" of Japanese t'ai chi.

Wang used to ask a former student of Sato's to demonstrate what Sato taught, and he and his son-in-law would pick it apart, laughing and asking him to repeat cerain moves over and over. I also happened to be present at a workshop when the head of the Bejing wushu society, (forgot his name - the guy who put together the 48 movement syncretic t'ai chi form) and another practitioner, who has won the Yang t'ai chi competition several years running and Sato came up and told them that they weren't allowed to teach because they hadn't asked his permission, and they looked at him like you look at a deranged street person asking to borrow your briefcase, and walked away shaking their heads. Sato did nothing, and left with his wife shortly after. Sato is currently claimed as a senior infuence on the Genbukan and Tanemura - - -Oh well.

Wang started teaching in the grounds of Meiji shrine, and somewhere along the line a group of non-Japanese around Donn Draeger started training with him. Draeger learned some pa-kua, Wang would also show some Hsing I, but mostly he taught t'ai chi. Among this group was Terry Dobson, who was a live-in student of Morihei Ueshiba of aikido. Terry's direct senior was Chiba. Wang was doing demos in Japanese martial arts demonstrations and as Ken Cottier put it, "here you'd have all these startched Japanese in their crisp kiekko gi and their crisp snappy movements and then out would come this fat Chinaman in grey flannel slacks and suspenders and he'd start doing impossible slow t'ai chi and he'd turn around and this ass as big as the moon would waft across the stage and then he'd challenge all comers to have a go at him and the young karate boys would be rabid and he'd let them punch his stomach or kick him in the groin and he'd just laugh it off but heaven help you if you tried to punch his head. He made it clear that that was out of bounds, and if you broke the rules, then he'd become, shall we
say, active."

Terry stated to me, (I'm quoting as best as I can remember) "the uchi-deshi at honbu, particularly Chiba, started giving me a raft of **** that I was being disloyal to O-sensei by studying with Wang, and I asked O-sensei, and he said, 'sure, do what you want' but they wouldn't let up so I said, "why don't you come and check him out for yourself." So Draeger and me took Chiba, Saotome and Tamura. Well, we walked in, and Wang scopes out Chiba right away, like he knows who has the attitude here, takes one look, and says, 'come here boy.' Seriously, Wang's over sixty, paid lots of dues, is a religious leader and all, and here comes these punks, as far as he's concerned, in their twenties, copping an attitude. So Wang lets Chiba punch him in the stomach. Nothing. Chiba tries again. Nothing. Well, now Chiba loses his temper, half turns away, and then tries to sucker punch him, thinking it's timing. This time Wang sucks the fist into his belly and then drops, he gives it back, Chiba's arm goes shooting back behind his ear, and he's shaking his wrist in pain. Wang then let Chiba kick him in the groin. Nothing. So Chiba loses it, grabs Wang's wrist and puts a nikkyo or kote-gaeshi on it, some wrist lock. I don't know what Wang did, it was too fast, but Chiba slams on the floor and Wang's doing something to him with one hand and he's screaming in pain. Finally Wang lets him up and
says, "You've got a little chi, why don't you come back when you acquire more?" Then he turns to Tamura and Saotome, who were standing there with their backs against the wall, and says, "you want to try." They both shake their heads and we all went home. They never gave me **** about Wang again. . . . Far as I'm concerned, Chiba lost his chance at salvation right there. He should have quit everything and sat at Wang's feet."

[Samurai Jack]

Originally posted by BAI HE

Terry stated to me, (I'm quoting as best as I can remember)

When you posted the above quote, are you saying that you're the one who wrote this?

[BAI HE]

No. I forgot to bold the article.

[Samurai Jack]

Fair enough. Where did you find the article, and who wrote it?

[BAI HE]

I don't recall. I'll look for it though.
This was by an american Aikidoka though.

BTW - No shame in losing to Wang Shu Jin, he was
a very bad, bad man.

He KO'd a prime Kumar, Hung Yisheng (in a friendly manner)
and hurt Jon Bluming on two different occasions.

[Samurai Jack]

Well, no offense, but unless you can provide a verifiable source I'll stick with those versions which come from the people who were actually there. Strangely, though Terry Dobson was supposedly the one who related the story to our mysterious author, he himself didn't choose to "quit everything and (sit) at Wang's feet." Instead Dobson Sensei chose to continue studying Aikido with O-Sensei and his Sempai Chiba Sensei, and never wrote anything about this incident, nor anything critical of his experiences with Aikido as an art.

As an aside, I recognize that there would be no face lost if Chiba lost to Wang either as Wang was many years Chiba Sensei's senior. After fifty years in the martial arts, I doubt Chiba Sensei feels the need to prove himself to a bunch of newbie Americans. If he had lost, I think he would have said so.

[BAI HE]

For my thoughts, the story smacks of truth. Two of Chiba's classmates related the story. Why would they do this?

The sheer absurdity of Wang taking a sumo pose and pushing Chiba in the belly should tell you something.

The only strange thing is that Chiba took a sucker shot at Wang and Wang didn't really hurt him. It did take place in Japan tho'.

[BAI HE]

"I will quote the story that Terry Dobson told me, which was corroborated at another time by Donn Draeger. I also heard Terry tell this story again in a group with Mitsugi Saotome present, who amidst laughter chimed in and agreed. I didn't know that Ken Cottier was present but he was also part of the group."


I no longer travel in Aiki circles. Maybe you can contact
one of these folks listed. (Except for Draeger for the obvious reasons)

[Samurai Jack]

Originally posted by BAI HE
For my thoughts, the story smacks of truth. Two of Chiba's classmates related the story. Why would they do this?

Ah, but since your source is unrevealed, we cannot verify whether or not the classmates actually related the story. As it's you who doubt Chiba Sensei's story, I'd think you would be the one who'd want to contact him personally. :D


Originally posted by BAI HE
The sheer absurdity of Wang taking a sumo pose and pushing Chiba in the belly should tell you something.

Not absurd at all. Every shot I've ever seen of Wang taking a punch for a demonstration showed him standing in what could be described as a sumo pose:

http://www.marnixwells.info/Images/Wang_lineage/Punch%20_paunch.jpg

http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:SoC8sZdwNDwJ:sambo.kwoon.info/album/data

He's also very open when demonstrating form:

http://www.kwoon.info/forum/album_page.php?pic_id=268

http://www.taijiquan.info/img/zhuang-v.gif

Here’s a photo of B.K. Frantzis throwing someone with the sort of projection technique common to IMA:

http://www.energyarts.com/shared/library/videogallery/fajing.jpg

Isn’t one of the applications of Pa Kua’s “lotus palm” or “monkey offer’s peach” a strike to the abdomen with both open hands? I’m pretty sure it’s a very common technique.


Originally posted by BAI HE
The only strange thing is that Chiba took a sucker shot at Wang and Wang didn't really hurt him. It did take place in Japan tho'.

Once more, because we cannot verify your source, we cannot verify this claim. I find it highly suspicious that Chiba would “sucker punch” someone since he was trying to demonstrate his art. Aikido doesn’t really have a “sucker punch” in it’s repertoire, so it wouldn’t have really proved anything if he had succeeded. Secondly, how exactly does one “sucker punch” one of the greatest Kung Fu masters of the twentieth century while he is fighting a challenge match? Shouldn’t he be expecting a punch?

[BAI HE]

"Not absurd at all. Every shot I've ever seen of Wang taking a punch for a demonstration showed him standing in what could be described as a sumo pose:"

Demonstration of taking a blow. Although, considering that Wang's primary teacher was Chang Chao Tung and the manner in which he taught, everything must have felt like a "tap" compared.

As far as "testing Gung'? There are demonstratons of this power.
As far as JMA is concerned? Too much loss of face involved, so you don't see much of this "testing". Maybe Judo-Kai though.

Again, the onus is on you. I am no longer part and parcel of the Aiki-JMA thing. Disprove the version that I submitted. Is that too hard? This wouldn't be the first, or last time Chiba Sensei was cat in a questionable light.

As far as his "Tai Sabaki" crap on Wang? No art specializes more thoroughly on protecting the centerline and destroying the opponenent's centerline than Xing-Yi. So while Chiba is applying Kote Gaeshi, what's Wang's other hand doing? Chiba speaks as if this was a Demo...? That's what Chiba does, Wang? He cracked people like cocaine and never said a word about any of it.
It just didn,t matter. Win, lose or draw? He never talked about that stuff, it just came with the territory.

The guys who did talk about it? Westerners. RW Smith, BK Frantzis, Donn Draeger and Jon Bluming.


Wang was a once in a lifetime Martial artist, even if Chiba gets his wrist? What about the rest of him? Do you really think Chiba Sensei could beat any of Bluming, Frantzis or Draeger in their primes?

Try comparing Wang to O-Sensei (save the fact that Wang fought people that weren't his students) That is where Wang belongs, if in fact O- Sensei was that good at all. I'd be a hell of a lot more afraid of Sokaku Takeda than Ueshiba.

Furthermore, all the Aiki stuff I played againjst my BGZ/XY teacher?
He either countered (wrecking me) or simply "let go" or twisted out of. I'm not asking you to believe me, because whatever art you are studying? It's usually the "best". It just gave me a different perspective.

If you wan't to get a better opinion, I suggest you look up "STRAWDOG" on www.emptyflower.com or "Meynard" at www.Shenwu.com

He has more experience in both the CIMA's and JMA/Aiki arts than I can lay claim to and has studied with about the best there is
stateside in these arts.

[BAI HE]

http://www.energyarts.com/shared/library/videogallery/fajing.jpg

Basic Fa-Jing release. No lotus palm.

[BAI HE]

http://www.taijiquan.info/img/zhuang-v.gif

Standing postures. Wu Ji.

[BAI HE]

http://www.kwoon.info/forum/album_page.php?pic_id=268

Zhuang Zuan. Stake standing variation.

[BAI HE]

http://www.marnixwells.info/Images/Wang_lineage/Punch%20_paunch.jpg

US boxing coach Joe Brown testing Wang's skill. This was a demo.

[Samurai Jack]

Originally posted by BAI HE

Again, the onus is on you. I am no longer part and parcel of the Aiki-JMA thing. Disprove the version that I submitted. Is that too hard?


I think I've done an admirable job of proving that your version is suspicious. If you disagree, please feel free to reveal the source of your "version". How hard can it be? You supposedly found it somewhere. Who authored your story? I'm asking direct questions here that should be easy to answer.

I've provided verifiable sources, and photographs supporting my position, which is merely that according to the available evidence Chiba Sensei fought Wang to a draw. I really can't see what more can be done to prove my point. If you want to continue disputing the facts I've provided, you can start providing some facts of your own. That's all I'm asking.

[Joseph_alb]

Im a little curious about something....

Forget about it being xingyi and aikido, just think martial arts, ok.
Wang was around 60 at the time? between 40 to 50 years of experience in MA's. Chiba was in his 20's...i dunno you do the math. I find it a little far fetched that a martial artist in his 20's would have a draw...or any kind of advantage...over someone that experienced, regardless of MA's used.

Am i the only one who sees this?

[Samurai Jack]

Originally posted by Joseph_alb
I find it a little far fetched that a martial artist in his 20's would have a draw...or any kind of advantage...over someone that experienced, regardless of MA's used.


Yeah, that's a good point. On the other hand, how many 60 year olds do you see owning young guys in street-fights, MMA matches, heck even Chinese Sanda or San Shou? Personally, I have to admit that I've never EVER seen an old man beat up a strong young man. Not that this invalidates your observation, but it certainly gives food for thought.

For me, this isn't about whether or not Chiba beat Wang or vice versa. Whether or not Chiba lost, according to the unverified story Chiba acted like a jerk. Also, if we are to believe the unverified story, Chiba Sensei is a liar. This seems extremly improbable given what I know of the man. Despite his rough and tumble reputation, Chiba Sensei has demonstrated a high degree of respect for his elders over the years, and an impeccable level of openness and sincerity.

Chiba Sensei also hasn't ever shown a racist streak toward anyone.Chiba Sensei's taught students and started oraganizations in the U.S.A., South Africa, Great Britain, Canada, Japan, North and South Korea, the former U.S.S.R., France, Spain, Vietnam, the Phillipines, and Australia. I doubt this incident had anything to do with Wang being Chinese.

Conjecture isn't the same thing as fact, and the fact is someone's circulating an extremly caustic criticism against my teacher. I want to know where it came from.

[Joseph_alb]

True, 50 year olds dont fight very often, if ever. But this is my point...

Im going to asume your in your 20's Jack, or just plain young. Would you stand a chance against the Doshu, for example, or Yamada sensei? thats my point.

Its hard to know the truth about something that happened so long. Martial arts are full of historic things and we may never know exactly what happened, unfortunally.

In the end theres no sense in breaking our heads trying to figure out who won...there will always be sides to the story.

[BAI HE]

"Chiba Sensei also hasn't ever shown a racist streak toward anyone.Chiba Sensei's taught students and started oraganizations in the U.S.A., South Africa, Great Britain, Canada, Japan, North and South Korea, the former U.S.S.R., France, Spain, Vietnam, the Phillipines, and Australia. I doubt this incident had anything to do with Wang being Chinese"

Chiba is noted for being such. Don't lecture me about someone you met two years ago. If he has changed, ... good.

The version of the story I posted, is the accepted version. You provided pictures of that which you don't really understand. Should I post a bevy of still pics of an emasciated O-Sensei with his hands flailing in the air and try and claim that this is how he would actually fight?

Wang Shu Jin never spoke of his conquests. In his life his squashed far greater than Mr. Chiba. Donn Draeger in his prime would have pulled Chiba apart. I am not so sure Chiba is better than Dobson. I have no doubt that Mr. Wang would beat them both handily and more than likely simultaneously.

Again, I posted the accepted version and put you on the path , (via personal reference) to explore these matters. I can do little else.

As far as Chiba beating or even acquitting himself against Wang? Believe what you want or do a search on E-Budo....
Those guys seem to accept the story and not be bothered by it.
But you are in that phase called "Whatever art I am studying is the best".

IMO, Wang would have put the screws to "O-Sensei" as well..
But "O" didn't play with many who weren't "indoctrinated"....

[Doug]

Originally posted by Samurai Jack
On the other hand, how many 60 year olds do you see owning young guys in street-fights, MMA matches, heck even Chinese Sanda or San Shou? Personally, I have to admit that I've never EVER seen an old man beat up a strong young man. Not that this invalidates your observation, but it certainly gives food for thought.
Ha! You have not ever challenged an old master, have you? And why would that be--because they are old? All you need to do is find one--there are many--and challenge him or her. Then, the real fun will begin.

Another thing is that these masters know something that all the young people do not know, and it goes beyond fighting. The need to fight seems quite insignificant after a while.

BY the way, I have seen old men beat up young men, decades younger. It is a very real phenomenon.

For me, this isn't about whether or not Chiba beat Wang or vice versa.
Hmmm...

Conjecture isn't the same thing as fact, and the fact is someone's circulating an extremly caustic criticism against my teacher. I want to know where it came from.
Apparently, it comes from a lot of people. Robert Smith and Bruce K. Frantzis support Mr. Wang's reputation in the martial skill department. Anyone I have talked to who knew him supports these claims.

Additionally, I read an interview (I think in Kung Fu Magazine) that had pieces about Frantzis' itintial encounter with Mr. Wang when the young Bruce was still a Karate practitioner. He did hit the elder man's head with a knife hand strike, but Mr. Wang just laughed it off.

Of course, it is always easy to say, "Yeah, I bested a dead guy."

Doug M

[BAI HE]

Old?

Sure, go **** with Dan Inosanto, Willem DeThouars or George Foreman and see what happens to you.
Old? How about old man Gene LaBell choking Steven Seagal
out in six seconds flat?

Doesn't O-Sensei qualify for an old guy who "owned" people much younger than he?

You don't see too many old guys in the UFC. You also don't see too many Old guys playing in the NFL or Boxing for a living.

[NeedsPractice]

This thread has become almost comical

Sure the average 20 something man can probably beat the average 50 plus year old man..... probably
Make it a 20 something with 10-15 years training tops against a man with 20 something or more years of CONTINOUS training the odds are alot slimmer and the outcome probably alot worse for the younger man.

[Samurai Jack]

Yikes! You fellas DO seem to be getting a little hot under the collar. After all, do you really care what I think? I just want to know where the story (which is supposedly the "accepted version") came from. Who wrote that story? Where did you find it Bai He? No need to get cranky, guys. It's a simple question, really.

[BAI HE]

I ain't getting hot. Doesn't matter really.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Doug
Ha! You have not ever challenged an old master, have you? And why would that be--because they are old? All you need to do is find one--there are many--and challenge him or her. Actually, Doug, based on our off-line conversation, I'm going to have to say you are full of b.s. The only people you could refer me to were all the way on the other side of the country in New York.


Originally posted by Doug
It was once described to me as a "dead art" because only the master, O-Sensei, was able to do what he did with his "new chi ability."I guess you could say the same thing about tai chi, since there seem to be few, if any, current practitioners around who can match the "old masters".

[Samurai Jack]

I'm glad you aren't upset. So, ummm, where does that story come from?

[Rockwood]

I think the story was written by Ellis Amdur, but I'm not sure. It's been circulating forever! Check it out on rec.martial-arts news group. You can find it on google.

I have practiced with some people who learned from Wang Shu Jin, and their stories match quite well with the one in question, so to me there is a consistency. But, obviously, none of us were there so no need to get too deep into it.

However, there is a need to get deep into the connection between Aikido and the Chinese internal martial arts. Because the connections are so close it is, to me, far beyond conincidence.

I practiced Aikido in high school and college, and I loved it. Later i got into IMA and I love that as well.

To begin with, Aikido uses two primary attacks for their offense, Shomen Uchi and Tsuki. Samurai Jack, dude, you've GOT to go visit a Xing Yi teacher, you will see right away that Shomen Uchi is the PRIMARY, very first and favorite technique of Xing Yi, to them it is called Pi Quan. I mean, it is identical. After learning Xing Yi I was totally reinspired about Shomen Uchi and realized that it an incredibly diverse and multi faceted maneuver. Before I just thought it was a big chop. After years of working on it there are so many goddam dimensions to it, its unbeleiveable.

In Aikido people sometimes tend to gloss over Shomen Uchi and get to the "good stuff" of throws and such. In Xing Yi they do Shomen Uchi (Pi Quan) for years at a time, slow, fast, with long meditative pauses in between with very specific mental, physical and energetic exercises within it. Similar to the way Aikidoists will do Seven Suburi, and do thousands of Shomen Uchis with the sword. In Xing Yi they will usually do thousands of them open handed in lines. Slow and painful.

One of the things that Xing Yi teaches, is to use Pi Quan (Shomen Uchi) as a way to draw out and engage someone, often its used so that the other guy blocks and you can then seamlessly switch to a technique of some kind. The striking surface can be anywhere on the arm, hand, elbow, hitting upward, down ward, sideways (yokomen Uchi) etc.

This is the reverse of the average Aikido way of doing things, where you await Uke's attack and then throw him. In XIng Yi, Nage attacks first, draws out Uke's response and then finishes him off.

If any Aikidoists are intersted, try using Shomen Uchi as Nage and start the fight, you will be able to experiment with all kinds of stuff that way.

Now, Shomen Uchi is pretty important in Aikido. In Xing YI it is the TOTAL FOCUS of the first couple years of practice. Is it any coincidence that they both share the same moves as their PRIMARY means of engagement?

IN Xing Yi, one of the first uses for Pi Quan is to go from contact to an arm bar. In Aikido the very first technque, Ikkyo, is to go from contact into an Arm bar. The Xing Yi way would be equivalent to Shomenuchi Ikkyo Omote, driving through the guy.

I guess I was shocked to discover that the most primary offensive movements of aikido are the exact same as the most primary offensive movements of Xing YI. Can this be a conincidence? No other JMA uses shomenuchi, except maybe the sword people. No other CMA uses Pi Quan the way Xing Yi does. As amatter of fact everyone else thinks Pi Quan/Shomen uchi looks funny. Yet Aikido and Xing Yi use them EXACTLY the same.

Food for thought anyway......

Next: Tsuki versus Beng Quan
Sincerley, Jess O

[Felipe Bido]

Jess, the applications are pretty much the same (specially in the holds) what about the internal mechanics of Pi Quan and Somen Uchi?. When you had them both, did your Somen Uchi came out with Pi intention in mind?


----

Reading further I think you answered that:


One of the things that Xing Yi teaches, is to use Pi Quan (Shomen Uchi) as a way to draw out and engage someone, often its used so that the other guy blocks and you can then seamlessly switch to a technique of some kind. The striking surface can be anywhere on the arm, hand, elbow, hitting upward, down ward, sideways (yokomen Uchi) etc.

This is the reverse of the average Aikido way of doing things, where you await Uke's attack and then throw him. In XIng Yi, Nage attacks first, draws out Uke's response and then finishes him off.


Cool post

[Rockwood]

Hi Felipe,

Thanks man. When I first learned Shomenuchi it wasn't taught in detail, but I'm sure some Aikido school are way better about it. So the intention and internal aspects weren't really emphasized like they are in orthodox Xing YI.

When you watch them in action, Aikido and Xing Yi seem opposite. Xing Yi you open them up, attack and destroy. In Aikido you await an attack, then aply your technique.

But on a higher level, Aikido teaches you to "make contact" with the mind/spirt/ki/Yi as the person approaches, you "touch" them before physical contact is made. It's hard to describe but in a way, a good Aikidoist attacks first even if it doesn't look like it. So it's not passive at all ultimately.

Conversely, even though Xing Yi seems to be aggressive and attacks first, the best guys seem to be super cool and calm, they move as if no one is in front of them. If their arm doesn't hit anything, they just keep that space and advance again, theres no aggression, they just accept everything you throw at them and keep inching forward, crowding the opponent and driving them out of balance, mentally and physically. So there is a strangely passive element to Xing Yi as well.

I'm just writing this because it's another part of the Aikido/IMA connection. Neither just throw punches hoping to hit, neither make much use of feints, neither kick a whole lot, and both emphasize a similar detached mental state.

Anoy one else ever do Pi Quan/Shomenuchi?

-Jess O

[Samurai Jack]

Rockwood, my man! That's what I've been trying to say all along. Yes, there is a super abundance of similarities between the arts. It's such a shame that there isn't more cross research between the arts, since they could offer so much to eachother. I studied Hsing-i for about seven years, just long enough to figure out I was only at the tip of the iceberg before I had to stop. After doing Aikido for only two years, I'm very far ahead of the game as far as application and understanding of the material goes. I entirely must credit Hsing-i for giving me such a strong foundation to build my Aikido on even though I was only at a basic level when I quit.

As far as your other point goes, Rockwood with all due respect, Amdur Sensei hasn't "quit everything and sat at Wang's feet" either. Since nobody has provided a link, or a source for the referece, it must be discarded as hearsay. What's most intresting to me that even the author of the piece was unwilling to take credit for his work.

[BAI HE]

So it's an excerpt of a story, and now you're claiming it's hearsay...
Hmmmm. How convienient for you.
You know what's convienient for me? Saying Chiba is lying. It's
that easy right?

Would you like Ellis Amdur's e-mail? I think I can find it. He's not very hard to find at all.

[Rockwood]

Well, I'm betting Mr. Amdur has had enough of the Wang v. Chiba debate at this point, so we must sadly make due. Some believe that a young Aikidoist took out a seasoned streetfighting brute who outweighted him by 100+ lbs and decades of experience. Hey, you never know.... :)

Now on to my favoirte topic: how Aikido IS the same as IMA.

Samuraijack, I'm interested to hear that you've done Xing Yi before. Seems like you and I have had opposite paths. So I'm sure you probably know most of what I'm talking about. But I'm going to keep talking because I'm just screwing off when I should be working.

Aikido's other primary offensive move is called Tsuki. This is a punch to the gut. Usually it's done with the same foot forward as the striking hand. You step forward and drive the fist into someone's gut, the fist is not flat, its the kind of fist as if you were holding a candle or something, the "eye" of the fist is upward.

Xing Yi's second primary technique is often Beng Quan. It is identical to the Aikido Tsuki, except that it's done with the oposite hand forward than the foot that is forward. But it's often done the Aikido way, particularly in two person practice.

In Xing Yi, many practitioners swear by the Pi Quan + Beng Quan. Often they are combined, first you use Pi Quan to smash down on the face, or arms or upper body, followed immediately by and full force blow to the torso. You can do this over and over and it works pretty well for fighting. These two moves are sometimes the only ones a XIng Yi person will use in sparring as they are simple, easy to do and universal in that they work if the opponent is advancing, or retreating, or defending or attacking or what have you.

So again, Aikido's other MAIN attack is an advancing midsection punch, totally, completely idential to Xing Yi's Beng Quan. Karate uses the flat punch, boxing uses the jab, Shaolin uses more flat punches and lifting punches and hammer fists, but rarely uses this kind of punch, and its never their blow of choice.

So why do both Aikido and Xing Yi consistently use an advancing step combined with either a downward blow (Pi Quan/Shomenuchi) or a straight body shot (Beng Quan/Tsuki)? I have no idea. But it's getting suspicious to me.

Again, in Xing Yi Beng Quan is trained way more thoroughly than I've experienced it in Aikido. Usually Aikidoists just say, ok punch me and that's all you get. In Xing Yi you spend years doing the solo practice, painstakingly stepping forward with the strike, over&over&over for bloody ever. Then you hit each other with it over&over&over& over until you get a highly sensitive, highly reactive, very alive body blow that can hit repeatedly at close range with no retracting of the fist.

I believe that Aikido's Tsuki should be the same thing but that people for some reason don't spend the time they should on it. Actually most Aikidoists doubt that their Shomenuchi and Tsuki could actually do much to anyone and that they are unrealistic.

All you Xing Yi people, does combining Pi Quan with Beng Quan sound weak and ineffective to you? Or does that conjure up the image of agonizing pain, huge bruises and concussion? If it doesn't then you need to go visit some more teachers because these attacks hurt. Bad. They are fast, and change easily, they can transform instinctively and they almost always hit somewhere that hurts extra bad. They can be done from zero range or long range. They can be used to deflect and hit simultaneously. And if they miss, they just shoot out again, never having to retract. In my experience these two moves are possibly the most powerful in all of Chinese martial arts, except perhaps Ba Gua's Single Palm change which also hurts like hell.

Why do Aikidoists get such weak results from their versions of Pi Quan and Beng Quan? For one thing, they don't train them much. They focus on the techniques, and who can blame them, techniques are more fun.

But the other reason is that the inner twisting of Xing Yi means that as the Shomenuchi/Pi Quan goes out it is in a constant state of torsion, or twisting in space so when it contacts something it engages it and defelects and moves it in space even as it's full power is colliding with said object.

Too many Aikido guys just chop. It's on one plane, like a sword cut. It lacks that continuous twisting that allows one to stick on contact and almost sink into the flesh of the opponent.

A Xing Yi PiQuan or BengQuan does the same amount of damage to the foe at EVERY point of its extension. If you are zero inches it hurts you just as bad than as if you were at the full range. Well maybe it hurts a little more at full range, but the power is continuous, even if you pull it back to shoot out the other hand. You hit at any/every point of the line. And the line can change in progress. These aren't throwing punches. They go out in a very conscious, aware, awake way, not like a bullet shot from a gun, but like a heat seeking missle always tracking your most vulnerable places.

In Aikido the emphasis on striking isn't there. A Tsuki/Buengquan goes out and just stops so the other person can do the technique. This is fine for practice but it's not going to enable you to get the most you can out of Tsuki/Bengquan.

Why are Aikidoists walking around with the two "Nuculer" weapons of Xing Yi and never using them??? Some thing is missing from Aikido practice, not from the art itself. These weapons are there waiting to be activated.

Perhaps OSensei himself chose to de-emphasize these things because it would have turned Aikido into a bunch of Xing Yi crazed killers. Which happens to Xing Yi people all too often... ;) Plus no one would ever get to do the full range of Aikido throwing and standing-grappling techniques if the attacks were too good.

As far as I know Aikido does not contain Tsuan Quan, Pao Quan or Heng Quan. However, Pi Quan and Beng Quan are so painfully obvious that even the most rank beginner would see the connection immediately.

Again, it is highly suspicious that the Two Basic Attacks of Aikido and Xing Yi are identical. Coincidence? I don't think so. Just like the way White Crane influenced Karate and Okinawan Te, Aikido is a direct descendent of Xing Yi.

Comments?? :)

-Jess O

Next Aikido & Ba Gua

[Felipe Bido]

Originally posted by Rockwood
Why are Aikidoists walking around with the two "Nuculer" weapons of Xing Yi and never using them??? Some thing is missing from Aikido practice, not from the art itself. These weapons are there waiting to be activated.


*Raises hand*

Maybe more body method and that all 'internal twisting' you talked about?

LOL, nuculer.

[BAI HE]

Even funnier that an Aikidoist takes out one of the
greatest Xingyi men of all time, while Wang took a sumo
pose with his arms outstretched....
Something smells very very fishy.

Xingyi was Wang's forte, period.
So SJ if you studied XY for seven years can't you smell
the fish in Chiba's story?

Dobson said it, Draeger corroborated and Satome who was there laughed and didn't dent it.
Sorry these are the guys on the JMA side of the fence. Two were classmates of Chiba.

If Chiba intentionally tried to hurt Wang or hurt Wang, things would have escalated very, very quickly. I wouldn't want to be the one to try and break up a fight involving Wang.
Furthermore, I don't think Wang cared about face, he smashed up a lot of people and I don't think he ever really talked about it.
Chiba on the otherhand.....

Why would Ellis Amdur, a very prominent Koryu researcher and longtime JMA practitioner, publicly relate this tale if it were false?
Why would he implicate a few other famous practitioner's (including Chiba's own classmates) as well?
Doesn't add up now does it?

As far as sitting at Wang's feet? I believe Wang was on the home stretch to the great beyond at that point. I believe he went home to China shortly after that episode.

Next time I see Mr. Amdur online on the Yizong board, I will ask him directly about this.

[Finny]

FWIW, Jack, Mr. Amdur DID quit Aikido, and DID train with Wang.

See http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24703&highlight=wang

Second last post.

And Rockwood, great posts. I disagree though, that IMA and Aikido are more than coincidentally connected. The pi quan and beng quan thing seems like the perfect thing to be a coincidence to me.

It's extremely well known that Aikido's main (almost exclusive) influence was Daito Ryu. A large part of Daito Ryu's influence came from the Ono-Ha Itto Ryu Takeda Sokaku studied. THAT I believe, is where the 'beng quan' in Aikido comes from, as an imitation of a sword thrust, taken from Itto Ryu by Takeda, it's a fundamental aspect of Daito Ryu training (the tsuki) - see Ippondori or Oyawaza.

The 'pi quan' is incorporated in Daito Ryu as an imitation of a stab or slash with a kodachi - not just in the waza themselves, but also the final "throat cut" that is a Daito Ryu signature - after the kata is completed, and the victor raises an open, vertical palm - to simulate the 'coup de gras'.

Are you saying that you think Daito Ryu was influenced ("is a direct decendant of") by Xingyi?? These techniques are just as present in Daito Ryu as in Aikido - indeed that's where they came into Aikido from.

Takeda never left Japan, though. And how likely do you think it is that a Xingyi man is going to have been in Japan at that time, and taught pi quan and beng quan to him? Takeda was also a member of EXTREMELY right-wing nationalist groups in Japan - he and his students (like Yoshida Kotaro) were major players in the Genyosha, and held meetings at Ueshiba's dojo (the Genyosha that is) - do you think that sort of person is going to learn from a Chinese expat??

It seems quite clear to me (and just about everyone I've read who knows FAR more about it than I do) that Aikido is simply Ueshiba's interpretation of Daito Ryu - "pi quan", "beng quan" are simply training techniques to simulate sword attacks (long or short) from Daito Ryu.

Cheers for the input.

BTW, there's a thread on E-Budo regarding Aikido and Bagua that Mr. Amdur posted to, quite thoroughly - I think the points he makes sums up the comparison quite well - there ARE superficial similarities, but below the suface, it's apples and oranges - power generation, footwork etc - completely different.

See: http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28685

Oh and Jack - remember where I said I'd heard other experienced people describe Aikido as a 'dead' art, cos none of Ueshiba's student's could duplicate his technical brilliance?? The people I was refering to were (mainly) Mssrs Skoss and Amdur.

[Samurai Jack]

Originally posted by Rockwood

Why do Aikidoists get such weak results from their versions of Pi Quan and Beng Quan? For one thing, they don't train them much. They focus on the techniques, and who can blame them, techniques are more fun.

This is where a little cross study could greatly benifit Aikidoka, because it's one of the least emphasized areas of training in the art. There are really good teachers in Aikido who have developed the sort of unstoppable power that Hsing-i is known for, but it dosen't seem to be that common. Let me tell you it is REALLY frustrating to have Sensei plow in to you with a good tsuki over and over and be unable to turn and redirect. He just takes your center the moment his fist, arm, whatever touches you.


Originally posted by Rockwood
Why are Aikidoists walking around with the two "Nuculer" weapons of Xing Yi and never using them??? Some thing is missing from Aikido practice, not from the art itself. These weapons are there waiting to be activated.

When I started Aikido I thought the same thing about Hsing-i. Why weren't we working any of these great Chin-Na techniques that are right there in the movements? I suppose it's a matter of focus, and of course the fact that Hsing-i drill basics so much more thoroughly than Aikido. I'm actually applying some Hsing-i training methodology to my Aikido as far as drilling is concerned. My technique is improving at a predictably quicker rate as a result. This is the real reason I started to get curious about the whole thing. I think there are a few things that Aikido does that's absent in the Hsing-i curriculum that could be of benifit to practitioners as well. It's not a one way street.


Originally posted by Rockwood
As far as I know Aikido does not contain Tsuan Quan, Pao Quan or Heng Quan. However, Pi Quan and Beng Quan are so painfully obvious that even the most rank beginner would see the connection immediately.

Aikido also has Tsuan Chuan. The punch is often seen as an atemi opening up uke for a throw or chin-na. The punch starts exactly the same as Hsing-i's Tsuan Chuan, from Dantien, up along centerline, fist drilling up and stopping with the palm side facing up. I don't know what it's called in Japanese.


Originally posted by Rockwood
Again, it is highly suspicious that the Two Basic Attacks of Aikido and Xing Yi are identical. Coincidence? I don't think so. Just like the way White Crane influenced Karate and Okinawan Te, Aikido is a direct descendent of Xing Yi.



I think this seems more and more likely, the more I examine the two arts. Of course those invested in the "uniqueness and superiority" illusion are going to disagree, but they're really so much alike it's rediculous.

[Samurai Jack]

Originally posted by Bai He
Would you like Ellis Amdur's e-mail? I think I can find it. He's not very hard to find at all.

You're right! He was easy to find! He even happens to live and teach relatively close to my location in Eugene. He's a much more polite man than I thought he'd be with all of the ruckus being attributed to him. Sadly, you are wrong Bai He, he says that he didn't write that story. Feel free to contact him. His contact info (including his phone number) is available on his website.

So, ummmm, where'd that story come from? I think I know.



Originally posted by Finny
FWIW, Jack, Mr. Amdur DID quit Aikido, and DID train with Wang.


Not true either. Feel free to checkout his school's website where he teaches Aikido and traditional weaponry. Or you could also contact him directly.

http://www.ellisamdur.com/Martial_Arts.htm

Now, can we PLEASE get back on topic? I think Rockwood is generating some extremely interesting posts.

[Finny]

Unfortunately you're wrong again, Jack.

He DID quit Aikido, then start training it again some years later.

He's so easy to contact, why don't you ask him?

Like I said - try reading the threads I posted - particularly http://www.e-budo.com/vbulletin/sho...;threadid=28685


It's obvious that these techniques you are discussing come from Daito Ryu - just like everything else in Aikido.

Not saying cross training's bad or criticising you at all - just the facts - Aikido has NO historical relationship to Xingyi. Like Mr Amdur said - the odds of Ueshiba doing CMA are perhaps a little higher than him doing flamenco.

[Samurai Jack]

Finny, man, you're floundering. Mr. Amdur told me a mere three hours ago that he didn't write the article in question. The issue isn't his training history, it's the authorship of a B.S. article that paints my teacher in a bad light. So far, no one will cop to writing it, which isn't a big surprise.

Go to his website, get his phone number, call him up, see for yourself. Once again, the solution is simple.

Can we get back on topic now?

[Finny]

hehehe Im floundering, because Mr. Amdur said he didn't write an article I never even suggested he wrote??

OK

Whatever - the topic was NOT actually your sensei and the article, but IMA and Aikido, which is what I was posting about.

But of course, you seem to only read what you want to hear - ie. Jess' posts, not mine.

That's ok - I'll quit my "trolling" before "all the trolls chase you away" hehehe

"I'm glad you aren't upset"

Like you said - back to the topic (s)

-Xingyi 'like' techniques found in Aikido are directly taken from Daito Ryu

-Wang stomped your sensei - face it, it's nothing to be ashamed of - he stomped everyone.

Simple enough for you??

BTW, when you were talking to Mr. Amdur about the article, besides asking him if he authored it, did you happen to ask his opinion regarding the veracity (that's truth, mate) of it??

Didn't think so.

[Samurai Jack]

It's obvious that many of Aikido's techniques are going to look like Daito Ryu techniques. Daito Ryu is Aikido's foundational system. What is less obvious is the origin of the many differences between the two, wich is where the IMA connection comes in.

As far as your other comments are concerned, I think I see where you're heading Finny, and I'm not going to follow you there. When you have some facts to back your opinions, rather than more rude posturing, I'll be happy to dialog with you.

[Finny]

Rude posturing? I'm sorry you see it that way - you do seem to get awful defensive the minute anyone disagrees with you though.

Care to show any facts of your own?? You haven't so far - other than the interview with Chiba sensei.

The differences between Aikido and Daito Ryu are more influenced by Ueshiba's Omoto-Kyo affiliations and the hippie era philosophy that was pervasive towards the end of his life. Exactly what differences are you refering to? (facts anyone??)

Like I said - there are some similarities between Aikido and IMA, but they are superficial, and stem from Daito Ryu, not IMA themselves.

If you can show anything beyond a superficial external relationship between Aikido and IMA with your 'facts', you will revolutionise the MA world - a remarkable achievement for someone who's trained in Aikido for a few years.

Ueshiba's son specifically said that his father NEVER mentioned anything to do with Chinese MA.

Ueshiba's Aikido was well and truly synthesised BEFORE he went to China.

All of the superficial similarities between Aikido and IMA can be explained by observing Daito Ryu techniques.

If you can find anything else in Aikido, which looks at all like it is influenced by IMA, that IS NOT also found in Daito Ryu, then tell us, please.

EDIT - the only point I was trying to make, Jack with my "other comments", was that EVERYONE besides your sensei believes that Wang would never have been bested by Chiba, let alone have his wrist damaged. That was something NO ONE had done before. Wang beat everyone he went up against - badly. he was a giant of a man, and a truly expert martial artist.

The only 'facts' you provided to support the notion of him attacking someone with "arms outstretched, like a sumo wrestler", were some pictures of him doing standing post training, and some others of him standing there, (hands at his sides, BTW) taking punches in the guts as a demonstration.

[Doug]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
Actually, Doug, based on our off-line conversation, I'm going to have to say you are full of b.s. The only people you could refer me to were all the way on the other side of the country in New York.
Poor baby.

Actually, sir, it is not my responsibility to contact people for you to supposedly challenge.

I would like you to demonstrate your ability to assess whether someone is "full of b.s." since you make this claim on the discussion board. The source I provided was done as a favor. Do not cry because I choose to have nothing to do with you.

It is not my problem that you cannot conduct a simple search on your own. Then again, your opinion shows how intelligent you really are.

It is apparent that you just want to fight for no reason. Don't you have anything better to do than make yourself look really, really bad?

By the way, friend, keep private conversations private ("off-line" means off the Internet, not off the public forum, genius). You cannot even contribute to the discussion--you have to pathetically try to attack someone's character.

I guess you could say the same thing about tai chi, since there seem to be few, if any, current practitioners around who can match the "old masters".
You can only come to this conclusion if you are a newbie. Given your attitude, you have identified yourself and your "b.s." quite clearly.

Unless you have something constructive to say rather than make assumptions or ad hoc claims, back off the discussion.

Doug M

[Finny]

Perhaps you could give him Chen Xiaowang's contact details Doug??

BTW Jack, have you asked Chiba sensei what he thinks about a possible influence on Aikido of Xingyi???

If he told you 'no way' would you accept it??

I guess that's why I might seem a little rude to you - because it can get a little annoying when I present to you the qualified opinions of experts - people like Ellis Amdur, who has been training in Aikido about as long as you have been alive - and you, with all of a year's Aikido training, dismiss it as groundless.

As with the "Aikido's a dead art" comment - I'm not offering my own opinion here. I don't know enough to. What I AM doing is relaying the opinions of people who probably forget more about Aikido in a day than you or I will ever know.

For you to dismiss them, quite rudely I might add, seems a little unreasonable to me.

As for the Chiba/Wang incident, to be honest I have no idea either way. Opinion, yes, but no facts, so I form no conclusions - and I don't really care to. I respect your defense of your sensei, and apologise for any offense you've taken to my posts.

Now, back to the topic - any similarities between Aikido and IMA that cannot be explained by the Daito Ryu influence???

[Walter Joyce]

Originally posted by Finny
Now, back to the topic - any similarities between Aikido and IMA that cannot be explained by the Daito Ryu influence???

Yes, I'm fairly certain the practitioners of both arts breathe while they practice.

This is most certainly conclusive evidence of the aikido/neijia connection.

:rolleyes:

[BAI HE]

Was it Mr. Skoss? I know it was
a rather well known Aikidoka.

I will contact Mr. Armdur when I get a chance.

[Rockwood]

Sorry for invoking Mr. Amdur, my mistake. IN any case it sounds like the question has been thoroughly examined and opinions are set in stone, concerning the notorious "match" between Chiba and Wang. If only more people had the guts that Chiba Sensei did. It's pitiful that fear of losing and "face" dominate martial arts, leaving all the traditional schools at a loss for it. Everyone is so scared to lose that they refuse to test themselves. Fear dominates traditional styles, which is a shame. The only way to get better is to test limits and lose in the process.

Anyways, back to the discussion.

Daito Ryu does seem to be an important part of the equation. Also Mr. Amdur's articles point out that Aikido doesn't have any of the circle walking of Ba Gua or intricate internal mechanics of Xing Yi.


It's been pointed out that Daito Ryu does have techniques similar to Pi Quan/Shomenuchi and Beng Quan/Tsuki. As I am unfamiliar with Daito Ryu and Jujitsu in general, I'll take your word for it. Does anyone know of a Daito Ryu school in the Bay Area where I could go check out their style?

Also, I was unaware of Tsuan Quan-like Aikido attack. Interesting.


Mr. Amdur points out that Xing Yi and Ba Gua don't do a lot of "you grab my wrist" stuff. It's true, and I think that is in Aikido from Jujitsu. So to me this doesn't discount the possibility of influence.

Also the lack of form and internal energy components aren't the end of the argument either. If Ueshiba as a high ranking military official in China during WWII wanted to, he could have had access to Chinese martial artists, even one's who were... unenthusastic could have been persuaded to demonstrate under duress. This would allow Japanese military officers to examine and take any techniques that they took a liking too. But they would not be able to access the traditional, in depth training methodology, they would only get the techniques.

This is all speculation. But it's certainly within reason that Ueshiba may have picked up something during his years in China during the war.

Amdur poiunts out that O-Sensei's techniques were codified before the war. I'm not much of a researcher so I don't know for sure. But I do know that O-Sensei is said to have changed dramatically after the war, but who knows if his travels on the mainland had anything to do with it.

To me the most crucial evidence of connection between Aikido and IMA is in the techniques and fighting methods they share.

I don't know enough history to prove anything from that direction. I only know some of the moves on both sides. And they way they fit together is extraordinary, and I've never seen anything like it between the other arts I've experienced.

Perhaps Daito Ryu contains these XIng Yi techniques I've described. I don't know for sure. So that's another possibliity.

-JessO

[Rockwood]

Since I don't know Daito Ryu, I can't address that connection.

All I know is the the two most common Aikido attacks are identical to Xing Yi's two most beloved attacks.

Now, I'd like to mention Aikido and Ba Gua.

The most basic Aikido foot work drill is called "Tai No Hen Ko".

You take a step forward, hooking inward with the foot, and swing the other leg around, turning 180.

This is identical to the primary Ba Gua foot work drills, "Ko Bu Bai Bu" Ko Bu is an inward hooking step, Ba Bu is an outwark twisting step.

Ko Bu and Bai Bu is how Ba Gua fighters control, trap, sweep, step past and around their opponent. It's also used to get position.

Tai No Hen Ko is used in Aikido to escape, evade and get around their opponent.

Ko Bu Bai Bu is repeated endlessly and tirelessly drilled by Ba Gua practitioners. Aikidoists spend a portion of almost every class on the seemingly simple and boring Tai No Hen Ko. This emphasis is shared between the styles.

Ko Bu Bai Bu is the absolute ESSENCE of Ba Gua. If Pi & Beng and the half step are the core of Xing Yi, Ko Bu Bai Bu is the secret deadly weapon of Ba Gua. I've never seen it taught in this way with this emphasis out side of Ba Gua and Aikido.

Ba Gua contains many many techniques that are totally identical to Aikido. That could be coincidence, except for the fact that both depend on the Ko Bu Bai Bu/Tai No Hen Ko stepping pattern to be effective.

Ba Gua uses Ko Bu Bai Bu to specialize in throws that are identical to Ikkyo, Irimi Nage, Shihonage, Kaiten Nage, Kokyu Ho, Shihonage, Juji Nage, the list is endless. I can't think of a single throw that aikido has that Ba Gua doesn't and all share the characteristic stepping usage.

The only difference that I can think of at the moment is that Ba Gua, although it does have these moves among it's Chin Na , doesn't emphasize Nikkyo, Sankyo and Yonkyo. I beleive this is do to the Jujitsu influence on Aikido. In my experience most Ba Gua people only use CHin Na for a split second before shifting to something like a shearing strike, leg sweep or throw. Controlling techniques are deemphasized in favore of debilitating ones.

To me the essence of Ba Gua is in it's use of the simple Ko Bu Bai Bu and whole body power to create an endless multitude of spontaneuos technique. In theory, one wouldn't need Circle Walking or even Palm Changes in order to "do" Ba Gua. It is a conceptual martial art, and the forms are fluff on the surface of a very profound way of moving.

Ueshiba had a very similar way of moving, and his Aikido is characterized by the big committed forward stepping attacks that are identical to Xing Yi's, the in/out sweeping, circular steps of Ba Gua and the full, alive, ki-filled, extended body posture that is common to both Xing Yi and Ba Gua.

From this I postulate that Aikido is related to Xing Yi and Ba Gua. Not Tai Ji tho. Tai Ji is a whole nother deal.

Thanks to everyone for putting their two cents in on this.

-JessO

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Doug
Actually, sir, it is not my responsibility to contact people for you to supposedly challenge.I believe it was you who originally brought up the subject of "challenging" a tai chi guy (and have done it a second time in this thread). Because of this, you seemed like the logical person to contact for this. Of course you wanted nothing to do with crossing hands with me, but, instead, referred me to some tai chi people clear across the country.

I did find it interesting that you invited someone from Oregon to talk to you "in person", but weren't interested in meeting up with someone from your own backyard.


Originally posted by Doug
You can only come to this conclusion if you are a newbie. Given your attitude, you have identified yourself and your "b.s." quite clearly.
OK, since you are the expert, maybe you can explain to everyone how you have reached the conclusion that tai chi is more alive and effective than is aikido.

[Doug]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
I believe it was you who originally brought up the subject of "challenging" a tai chi guy (and have done it a second time in this thread).
The notion of "challenging" was already in your mind and was not inspired by me. Do not blame me on your need to experience violence.

In fact, you are an idiot. You are posting messages on a forum filled with internal martial artists. If you are so bent on finding someone to fight, why not issue your challenge here? Go ahead: challenge this discussion board. But, no, you find it easier to blame me for your incompetence.

Because of this, you seemed like the logical person to contact for this.
Because you cannot conduct a search on your own? If you feel so responsible for "a tradition of challenging other martial arts," why can't you do it on your own? You think you can blame me for not finging a Tai Chi fighter? Get a real argument the next time you post.

Of course you wanted nothing to do with crossing hands with me, but, instead, referred me to some tai chi people clear across the country.
Get your facts right. You wanted to challenge a Tai Chi fighter, and your address to me was made under the assumption that I would be a representative of Tai Chi fighting abilities. Because you were looking for that kind of person, I turned you down. But what makes you think I would ever be afraid of you? You challenged and continue to challenge Tai Chi's fighting ability, not me in particular. Before you jump to conclusions about "crossing hands," think before you type.

I did find it interesting that you invited someone from Oregon to talk to you "in person", but weren't interested in meeting up with someone from your own backyard.
Refer to the above statement, friend. I do not know you nor care to waste my time on your need to prove absolutely nothing to yourself. Do not even try to coax me into a confrontation. If you want to fight, punch yourself in your gut.

OK, since you are the expert, maybe you can explain to everyone how you have reached the conclusion that tai chi is more alive and effective than is aikido.
Apparently, you have not been reading the posts in this thread. So you cannot read as well as conduct your own investigations. You have created a very nice picture of yourself.

And do not waste this thread's space with your personal, stupid problems.

Doug M

[Samurai Jack]

Very nice posts, Jess. Here's my two cents:


Originally posted by Rockwood
Daito Ryu does seem to be an important part of the equation. Also Mr. Amdur's articles point out that Aikido doesn't have any of the circle walking of Ba Gua or intricate internal mechanics of Xing Yi.

The supposedly "missing" circle walking component is actually glaringly obvious to anyone who actually does Pa Kua. The toes of the Aikidoka are always turned either in or out in Ko Bu or Bai Bu, even when steping on a linear line. I studied Gao style Pa Kua right along with Hsing-i, and while I've also been exposed to Cheng's style, I've got to say that Gao's line drills are still circular in application. In other words, depending on the relationship to the opponent, the practitioner can change direction almost instantly just by keeping the hips open and turning the foot to face the direction you want to go. Aikido's stepping patterns are identical to Gao's style except for one crucial and extremly important difference. In Aikido the steps are forward weighted, while in Ba Gua the steps are back weighted.



Originally posted by Rockwood
Ba Gua contains many many techniques that are totally identical to Aikido. That could be coincidence, except for the fact that both depend on the Ko Bu Bai Bu/Tai No Hen Ko stepping pattern to be effective.

I no longer think it's coincidence. The movements of Pa Kua are so unique they aren't even seen in it's sister arts. Also there are many movements not present in the origional Daito Ryu, movements that would be entirely impractical for a sword weilding Samurai to use in combat. For example, Kokyu-ho is the very same movement as Phoenix spreads wings:

http://www.northbayaikido.org/images/ostatue.gif

http://www.lip.pt/~carvalho/osensei5.jpg

http://www.lijing.org/Bagua_Zhang/a_Bagua_B.gif

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://bgz.host.sk/chapt9_5.jpg&imgrefurl=http://bgz.host.sk/bgzchpt9.htm&h=285&w=250&sz=46&tbnid=tNEpl5mg0lkJ:&tbnh=109&tbnw=96&start=46&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dbaguazhang%2Bphotos%26start%3D40%26hl %3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DN

These are the only photos I could find demonstrating the Pa Kua technique I'm talking about. I'd like to point out that the first one is not a very good photo since her elbows are too far out to the side which disconnects her arms from her torso. John Painter does a much better job of it in my opinion, maybe the lady is a wushu competitor? The O-Sensei statue shows better technique than the lady, yet supposedly he never did Pa Kua! Compare his form to Painter's and look at the application.



Originally posted by Rockwood
To me the essence of Ba Gua is in it's use of the simple Ko Bu Bai Bu and whole body power to create an endless multitude of spontaneuos technique. In theory, one wouldn't need Circle Walking or even Palm Changes in order to "do" Ba Gua. It is a conceptual martial art, and the forms are fluff on the surface of a very profound way of moving.

Agreed. I don't know why there is so much resistance to the idea that Aikido is related to IMA. It seems like anyone who's taken enough time to practice these arts would be able to see the extraordinary similarities. Funny thing is, when I had to relocate and find a new teacher, I checked out the two local schools that teach Hsing-i and had to discard them right off because thier bodymechanics were not correct. The Aikido dojo I train at now was the only place where I saw people actually using the full body power that IMA are noted for.


Originally posted by Rockwood
Ueshiba had a very similar way of moving, and his Aikido is characterized by the big committed forward stepping attacks that are identical to Xing Yi's, the in/out sweeping, circular steps of Ba Gua and the full, alive, ki-filled, extended body posture that is common to both Xing Yi and Ba Gua.


Really this is the whole point for me. It dosen't matter what art you are studying. IMO it's most important that you learn the proper way to move for maximum efficency, power generation, and health benifit. Aikido can do this just as well as an IMA, as long as the teacher knows what s/he's doing. Great posts!

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Doug
The notion of "challenging" was already in your mind and was not inspired by me. Do not blame me on your need to experience violence.Are you a mind reader now?
Speaking of idiots, you might want to go back and re-read the post where you mentioned challenging tai chi fighters. If you do that, you will notice that you brought up the notion of challenging the tai chi fighter before it was ever mentioned by me.

Since you are obviously not a qualified representative of tai chi fighting ability, maybe you should just shut the **** up in the future about challenging tai chi fighters.

[ketchup]

I studied aikido for a couple of months in Los Angeles and really enjoyed it. However, after reading the book Angry White Pyjamas (a non fiction account of the Yoshinkan's 1 year riot police training in Japan), I had some major red flags raised for myself about the art. Specifically, there is one part in the book where a bunch of the senior instructors of the Yoshinkan get into a bar fight. Afterwards, when asked if they had used their aikido, they replied to the effect that they had just brawled. This raised serious questions for me as to aikido's practicality. Opinions?

[Samurai Jack]

It's practical. I've used it many, many times as a volunteer police officer and mental health worker. The restraint techniques (ikkyo,nikkyo,sankyo,katagatame,etc.) are very effective for controlling violent mentally ill patients and uncooperative suspects. There's a reason that so many cops study aikido.

[BAI HE]

Getting back to the original thoughts...

I believe Ueshiba certainly saw something in China. Maybe his methods were "Codified" before these trips, but was his shintai?

Having studied AJJ, I can clearly see that there is no "Shen Fa " or body method to develop power as in IMA's.

I do believe Ueshiba saw something and trained it. It matters little if he spoke Chinese.... Considering the trade history between the two, often at odds, countries, one might consider that many chinese merchants spoke Japanese or could serve as interperters.

Ueshiba's love was of the martial arts, it would hardly be surprising that it would be one of his primary interests when travelling in China.

Considering the transmission of chuan fa to Okinawa, resulting in
the birth of Nara-Te empty handed methods, one can clearly see why Aikido is under the microscope.

I personally believe Ueshiba saw something. Maybe not enough, but enough to see a big lightbulb go off and embrace a new way of training.
Do I have proof? No.
Is this what I think? Yes.

[Doug]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
maybe you should just shut the **** up in the future about challenging tai chi fighters.
Keep on talking.

Doug M

[BAI HE]

TO ADRESS SOME OF MR. AMDUR'S STATEMENTS...

Actually, I've never heard any claim that Ueshiba studied xingyi. This one is an easy call - no way. Or if he studied it, he didn't learn anything of it - because the way one exerts force is dramatically different. As for bagua - Kumar Frantzis is one of the main sources of this claim.

KUMAR NEVER ACTUALLY "TOUCHED HANDS" WITH UESHIBA. IT JUST DIDN'T HAPPEN.

But let's take a closer look. In Ueshiba's first trip to China, he was on the move as part of a small group of Oomotokyo conspirators, trying to start a religious revolution in China. He was on horseback, he was hiding in huts, ending up in shackles, and he was only there a few months.

NO ONE EVER SAID HE HAD TO GO TO THE ART. THE ART MAY HAVE COME TO HIM. ****, WE JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT A BAGUA MAN FROM AN OBSCURE LINEAGE IN EDMONTON....

YAO LI HAS LIVED ACROSS THE STREET FROM MY GRANDMOTHER FOR MORE THAN A DECADE, I NEVER KNEW THE GUY KNEW ANY GUNG-FU.

A view of the 1936 film of Ueshiba shows that he'd already consolidated his techniques - aikido - and this was before his subsequent trips there.

SEE ABOVE. THINK ABOUT THE HISTORY OF NARA-TE AND TRADE BETWEEN CHINA AND JAPAN.

In Ueshiba's subsequent trips to China - and there were several - he was always a dignitary. Ueshiba always travelled with a posse - he had a group of students who attended to him. There are no accounts by these men of him sneaking out on a regular (or even irregular basis), which is what he would have had to do. Bagua was utterly unknown in Japan. If he had learned to walk the circle and do the palm changes, no Japanese person would have had a clue what he was doing, if he had continued the practice - he could have called it his tengu dance and no one would have been the wiser. But there are no accounts of his walking the circle, and his techniques, compared to even the more simple palm changes, are far less "detailed." Ueshiba never displayed the characteristic Kou/bu steps used in turning, nor ever walked with "mud treading steps" (common in many bagua systems).

THERE IS WHAT A TEACHER TEACHES AND WHAT A TEACHER TRAINS PERSONALLY. WHY HAS NO ONE REACHED UESHIBA'S SKILL LEVEL THEN. IF I USE THE SAME LEGO'S AND DIAGRAM TO BUILD, SAY A ROCKET? WHY WON'T IT FLY.
THIS IS IRREGULAR. I CAN'T ATTEST TO UESHIBA'S SKILL LEVEL, BUT I'VE HEARD THAT NONE WITHIN THE AIKIDO CAMP EVER CAME CLOSE. IS THIS DIEFICATION OR FACT?

A Japanese man named Takeda, who was a lineal successor of one line of tombeichu'an, mentioned that Ueshiba, as part of a group of Japanese martial arts personages, visited him in 1936 in Beijing. But this was one evening - Ueshiba was with his posse - and Takeda made no mention of any techinical exchanges.

Yes, there are techniques similar to ikkyo, nikkyo, irimi-nage, kokyu-nage in bagua - but this is truly superficial - one can find similar techniques in early fencing texts from Holland as well. But aikido doesn't "coil" the muscles/tendons like bagua, views combat from a very different frame of reference ("grab my wrist"), has no kicks, leg traps, and the atemi is very very different from the strikes one finds with bagua.

NO ARGUMENT THERE. WITHOUT THE BODY METHOD AND THE PROPER SHEN FA TRAINING THE BODY AND FASCIA WON'T TWIST AND COIL AS IS PARAMOUNT TO IMA. THE MECHANICS AND ANGLING ARE BEING OVERLOOKED THO'...

Frantzis did not, to my knowledge, ever view much Daito-ryu - (maybe he did, but DR wasn't OUT much in the sixties when he spent most of his time in Japan) - and therefore did not see that DR technique, the roots of aikido, has the same methods.

I'VE STUDIED AJJ (TAKESHIN) AND KNOW A FEW BOYS AIKIDO PLAYERS. I SEE SOME SERIOUS DIFFERENCES IN APPLICATION, TRAINING AND INTENT. IMO AJJ IS SMALLER, TIGHTER AND MORE AGGRESSIVE THAN AIKIDO (GOES WITHOUT SAYING) AND ALSO FEATURES MORE ATEMI AND LEGWORK.

Aha! So DR must be derived from bagua. Nah. No records of Takeda Sokaku EVER being outside of Japan. And DR is even further away in technique.

NO ONE EVER CLAIMED THAT. DR (IN MY UNDERSTANDING) IS CLOSER TO BAGUA THAN AIKIDO. AGAIN, WHO KNOWS WHAT TAKEDA SAW AND DID, OR WHO HE MET OR KNEW?


In sum, the resemblences are very superficial, the record of Ueshiba's travels may show that he had time to have seen Bagua in Beijin, after he'd already made aikido what it is today, and finally, his son stated, when asked, that his father never talked about Chinese martial arts, nor did he ever do any practice which resembled it, while in the privacy of his home.

THe odds of him doing bagua are perhaps a little higher than his doing flamenco.

AGAIN, SO LITTLE IS REALLY KNOWN ABOUT UESHIBA'S PERSONAL PRACTICE, IT IS A STRETCH TO ASSUME ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
HE MAY HAVE STUMBLED ON THE IDEAS HIMSELF OR SAW THE RAY OF LIGHT?
WHO KNOWS.
I THINK HE WAS PRIVY TO SOMETHING AND TOOK IT TO HIS GRAVE.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Doug
An issue of The Journal of Asian Martial Arts, which has an article on DonDraeger, has Draeger claim that any Japanese looking to learn about chi should study a Chinese system.So, you are basing your assumptions on the effectiveness of aikido based on one year of training and some magazine articles?


Originally posted by Doug
Other differences exist, but Aikido by itself is only as effective as the current practitioners are today. And how many current practioners have you met and crossed hand with?

[BAI HE]

We're back on topic. Maybe you should grind
your axe with Doug on a seperate thread.

BTW - Did you go to the Nov. Gathering of the pack?

Best,
Pete

[Samurai Jack]

I know I may be dragging us off topic again, but seeing as Bai He and Knife are into the dogbrothers thing, do either of you happen to know Lester Griffin? I'm wondering how his school in Hemet is doing. Actually, how he is doing too. :D

[BAI HE]

Don't know him.
I don't don't do the Dog Bros. thing,
but I would if zi was on the Left coast.

One of my KF brothers weapons teachers
competed. I was wondering how he made out.

I like weapons, I just have always gravitated toward empty handed work. That's just me. As far as weapons go? I like rocks

[Doug]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
So, you are basing your assumptions on the effectiveness of aikido based on one year of training and some magazine articles?
Ha, ha, ha! What a poor attempt at making me look bad.

You make a hasty generalization about my experience when I have not revealed how much I actually have, you dolt. Apparently, you like digging holes you cannot get out of.

And how many current practioners have you met and crossed hand with?
Many. And, surprisingly, I have never felt the need to try to disprove any of them. Maybe you could take a hint and humble yourself somehow.

Stop wasting this board's space.

Doug M