Aikido and Internal MA connected?

[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.