[Ben]

Check it out:
http://shouyuliang.c...nal-Styles.html

[Ron Panunto]

That article is nothing more than a rehash of mythical crap.

[Interloper]

"External styles first train hard, then train soft." That assumes that the given external system actually has internal components tucked away somewhere for senior practitioners to learn. Maybe it used to be that way, but not so much now, unfortunately. Some old hard-external systems did, but lost them somehow so that few if any practitioners can demonstrate a "soft" side to their "hard" art now. Goju-ryu and Uechi-ryu karate (Okinawan, with Chinese origins) are examples of hard external styles that used to have a strong internal side as well. Most of it is lost now, and the vast majority of schools in these arts no longer understand the meaning of their own forms - which once incorporated internal training movements.

[steelincotton]

"External styles first Li (muscular strength) and then Qi, while internal styles first Qi and later Li."


This is simply not true imho. No matter what art you practice, it will be external (Li) for some time. Developing and using chi/energy is NOT intuitive. MYL said something like it took him 10 years to find his chi, and 20 more to learn how to use it - even he was external for a while.

This post has been edited by steelincotton: 03 January 2008 - 09:54 PM

[Tao Joannes]

I think the real logic behind "external becoming internal" is that, once you do something 100,000 times using "hard" mechanics, it's natural for the body to go "hey, this is the dumbest possible way to go about accomplishing this, I should subtly change the mechanics to use less of my energy and get more work accomplished" thus it becomes "internal".

[Hakke]

Well, one of the better articles on this topic IMHO. Good find!

[wuji]

Internal Vs External is the worth thing ever. This is all just one big false dichotomy.

[Tao Joannes]

It definitely muddies the waters way beyond the point of usefulness.

But that being said, there is definitely a difference between the styles under those headings.

But then, there's definitely a difference between Taiji and Xingyi and Bagua.

Bottom line is that folks take everything way too personally and are far too emotionally invested.

[josh]

That article is nothing more than a rehash of mythical crap.

QFT, the whole purpose of this article is just to sell his and Yang's books which contain more of the same.

I'm starting to think the internal vs. external distinction is really just a self-fulfilling prophecy; the more people repeat stuff like this the more they seem to believe it and act it out in their own training.

[Bao version 0.2]

"External styles first train hard, then train soft."

Yeah, Xie Peiqi/He Jinbao Yin Bagua is an external style. We should definitively ban them from this board!

[shawnsegler]

I'm allergy to this thread

S

[I am]

I think the real logic behind "external becoming internal" is that, once you do something 100,000 times using "hard" mechanics, it's natural for the body to go "hey, this is the dumbest possible way to go about accomplishing this, I should subtly change the mechanics to use less of my energy and get more work accomplished" thus it becomes "internal".

Agreed. The process is in part, largely learning how to quiet the mind enough to feel what you are actually doing. This can be done with meditation, slow movement, and even by just doing something so much that you finally pay attention once in a while to what you are doing. Regardless, once you feel it, you are bound to use the new tool you have found (body mechanics, power generation types, energetics, qi, insert other term here).

Developing a jin/ging is a good example of this. You are mapping another persons rules for a movement onto your own until you become aware enough and familiar enough with it to cross over to your way of doing the same. At that point it has become yours, and you will be able to not only refine it, but even change it and play with it, just like you would tweak your diet, workout routine, or choice in clothing in day to day life.

I don't think all arts have the same "engine" or methods, but I also don't know that much of what internalists consider "internal" are exclusive to only those arts. They do however have specialized methods of attaining their attributes and methods, and so their methods are their own. That being said, there are some things done in these arts, that are more often taken to a much higher level than in another art, just as a TKD guy is more likely to take kicks to a higher level than a Hung Gar guy is. To think that everything is unique though is tough to know for sure. Shen fa, however, can be fairly unique, and so give a certain flavor to an other wise similar method done by another.

Thoughts?

This post has been edited by I am: 03 January 2008 - 10:25 PM

[Interloper]

Refining "external" mechanics to make them more efficient does not make them become "internal." Maybe we're not all on the same page when it comes to defining what "external" and "internal" mean?

In my opinion, EMA doesn't get "softer," just more efficient so what used to be large "gross-motor" movements get more refined and subtler. Movements become smaller to effect the same power. But the mechanisms that generate power are still "external," meaning they rely on such things as accelerated hip torque, gravity, forward momentum (and pushing off the pivoting/supporting foot for a kick), etc. rather than internal structure manipulation such as coiling/winding, and the pivoting and stretching of the spine (dropping and tucking the pelvis, and simultaneously stretching upward through the neck and head, to take slack out of the spine) and the like.

The old idea that "internal" and "external" become more alike with mastery, is a myth; it's just that both get more efficient in their movements so that when you look at either person, he appears to do less to accomplish "more." This can be said of any discipline (for example, polished writers can say the same thing in fewer words than can an inexperienced writer). But what they are doing, specifically, with their bodies is completely different.

[Ben]

Refining "external" mechanics to make them more efficient does not make them become "internal." Maybe we're not all on the same page when it comes to defining what "external" and "internal" mean?

Whats you're definition of internal?
For me internal means paying attention to whats going on within the body, first your own and then the opponents. It also includes refining mechanics to become efficient.

[qiphlow]

b t d t

[Bao version 0.2]

b t d t

kidding? Can this subject ever become btdt? . . .

[Interloper]

Now, Chief Low, you know that Internal vs. External is worthy of its own forum, even its own website. We never tire of plumbing its depths. Banish it Not to BTDT!

P.S. Ben, my interpretation of "internal" is in the post right before yours.

[Tao Joannes]

I think that both Interloper and I am are saying the same thing.

Basically, the idea is that in "IMA" and "EMA" we focus on the opposite things.

IMA develops strict technique that leads to power, EMA develops power that leads to improved technique.

Cheng Man Ching mentions that the dan tien in "external" athletes, when removed from the body, has a thick lining that protects it from damage, and that the same sort of thing can be seen in "internal" practicioners.

Basically, the philisophical split is this:

EMA - Force the body to become stronger by adapting to ever increasing loads
IMA - encourage the body to become stronger by cultivating Qi

In EMA we don't get stronger while working out, we get stronger while resting after working out.
In IMA we get stronger WHILE working out AND after we work out.

[Interloper]

I'd go a step further and say that IMA is not technique-based, but body-conditioning-based. In other words, IMArtists cultivate the ability to "shape" and manipulate their internal structure, tissues, even neural impulses. This creates a new way of carrying and moving the body that makes it stable, able to shift and "hide" the center, able to "process" energy from an opponent's attack, able to generate energy and power from one's own internal manipulations, and to present a body that is very difficult to compromise, enter, throw, hit, or kick. In this state, the body does not have to perform "technique." It only needs to maintain its integrity -- to be "held" that way -- and an attacker will not be able to easily find an opening to exploit. He will bounce off the person, be stuffed to the ground or raised into the air and off-balanced, sucked in, frozen in place... whatever the user desires, simply by using the subtlest of shifts and adjustments. Then, if you choose to, you can use your power to fuel any technique you wish to throw, lock, kick, strike, hit and/or take down your opponent. The techniques you choose are also the artistic expression of a given style/art. The body power behind the technique and powering it, however, is universal and usable in any art. It is not art-specific. This is what binds all IMAs together, regardless of their country of origin.

This post has been edited by Interloper: 03 January 2008 - 11:29 PM

[Darth Histrionic]

perhaps sifu liang is appealing to what most people understand and tries to speak to that? I certainly don't have any doubts about his depth of understanding when it comes to kungfu.