Internal Martial Arts Explained

[Steve James]

So, if you can stand in a natural stance, feet shoulder width apart, arms relaxed at your sides and then let someone push on your stomach or chest in a downward angle using that "third leg weakness" and you are moved ... no intent.

Is this true for all "internal" arts? Do xingyi people use this to test "intent"? One reason I ask is because, though we can argue about the meaning of "intent," we know that none of the founders of these arts spoke English or ever used the words intent or intention. It's interesting too because I seem to remember people explaining the quality you describe above as using their "qi." Yeah, I know yi and qi are connected. M

[windwalker]

Interesting posts.

From those I've trained with and to those I work with.
When we talk of intent its something that is felt before contact is made.

When you meet someone who just stands there while you physically push on them from any angle with any force ... they don't move, don't use their arms or hands at all ... and at every point of contact that you initiate, you become off balanced ... No physical movement on their part, just relaxed standing there. Then when they actually do move, you cannot stop them because at every contact point, you're still being unbalanced. Now, the movement part can be faked with good external abilities. That's the easy part. It's the standing still that's important. That can't be faked because they aren't using timing, movement, body placement physics, etc. Trying to drop them using that "third leg weakness" theory doesn't work when they're just standing there in a natural stance.

Using the above examples the body has already changed because the "intent" of action from the other has been neutralized ie changed
before the physical action has arrived.

This means that an action does not have to have a lot of force behind it to move some one, or that forceful actions will move someone.
It depends on the level that one operates at.

For those who can feel, use and understand intent, its a different level allowing different responses and actions.

Depending on the clearness and focus of the intent that one can direct and use,
another person will react to it as shown in many clips that get questioned here.

Very much agree with developing, understanding, and testing it is one thing
this alone depending on teacher and method is the work of a few yrs or many.
This depends on how flexible one's mind body is in remapping what has been normal for ones
life experiences to something that is opposite or outside of it. Even with a teacher its not so easy to overcome
a lifetime of acquired habits.

Bringing it back into ones practice is another practice in itself.

I have often found that for many the intent of action often prevents them from directly feeling what "intent" is or feels like.

[windwalker]

Is this true for all "internal" arts? Do xingyi people use this to test "intent"? One reason I ask is because, though we can argue about the meaning of "intent," we know that none of the founders of these arts spoke English or ever used the words intent or intention. It's interesting too because I seem to remember people explaining the quality you describe above as using their "qi." Yeah, I know yi and qi are connected. M

If I may share some thoughts, experiences.

There was a xingyi teacher as well as a couple of other teachers from IMA styles where my teacher practices/practiced.
My own teacher while relatively unknown is known. Many teachers him or in some cases also teach in the same area.
I had chance to see and feel different teachers using different methods expressing the same ideas.
My thoughts while most use the same ideas to express the same things the level, and ability is not the same.

This tends to lead some to put limits on what they cant do, or have not felt.

The xingyi teacher also spoke of "yi" his demo of it would be to hit someone,
in most cases they would move before the hit arrived like the startle reflexive action.
In other cases they would drop from feeling the hit deep inside.

It really wasn't from the hit itself, but from what was felt.
The hit was just a shape.

[Bao]

What do you mean by the kind of "intent" that is very rare. Just curious on what your definition is.

When you meet someone who just stands there while you physically push on them from any angle with any force ... they don't move, don't use their arms or hands at all ... and at every point of contact that you initiate, you become off balanced ... No physical movement on their part, just relaxed standing there. Then when they actually do move, you cannot stop them because at every contact point, you're still being unbalanced. Now, the movement part can be faked with good external abilities. That's the easy part. It's the standing still that's important. That can't be faked because they aren't using timing, movement, body placement physics, etc. Trying to drop them using that "third leg weakness" theory doesn't work when they're just standing there in a natural stance.

When asked how they can accomplish the above, the answer is to change the body with intent. Everyone talks about "intent" and "intention" but after seeing people with 10-40 + years of very good martial experience fail against someone with internal martial capabilities, you kind of learn that what you always thought "intent" meant, well, isn't.

So, if you can stand in a natural stance, feet shoulder width apart, arms relaxed at your sides and then let someone push on your stomach or chest in a downward angle using that "third leg weakness" and you are moved ... no intent. Remember, you must not use your arms or hands, especially to touch the person pushing as that's a cheat and can be taught to anyone. If you can stand like that and let someone push on your chest in a 45 degree angle upwards and you are moved ... no intent. If you can stand like that and let someone push forward on your upper back and you are moved ... no intent.

If you are using intent and you start changing your body via internal training methods, then you become harder and harder to be moved using the above examples. (Just to clarify ... I'm not saying you're going to become invincible. Intent is used to change the body so you still have to learn *how* to use that changed body. In other words, learning a martial system, fighting, etc. Just because you're using intent doesn't mean you're going to become a great fighter. You have to learn how to fight. Nor does using intent mean you're going to become some invincible, immovable object. That's fantasy.) And those are just one small set of examples.

This is the kind of intent that I think the classics talk about regarding internal martial arts. It's the kind of intent that they meant when they named their arts.

I understand better what you mean, but I don't fully agree. Honestly speaking, yi and also qi are words that teachers use when they don't want to explain what they do. You can become unmovable with a perfectly natural stance and seemingly no movement. You can call this using Yi, but if Yi doesn't affect your physical body in some way, i.e. help your rooting or make you relax in a certain way, the intent can't make you to become immovable. If you use the idea of Yi to help your body to make this subtle shift in your body, or if you don't care about the word or have never heard about yi doesn't matter. You can still learn to do this just as good as the masters. The skill is not extremely rare and not the level of Yi needed. There's no magic, it's a matter of practice with your body a certain way just as much it's a practice of using mind. The yi will help you to stay relaxed and rooted, but it's not thinking about the word Yi that makes you use yi or even helps your yi to do something else. Another example, that I believe is a function of using yi, is something I wrote in a blog post recently on push hands... :

"Keep below his center all of the time.... [this] doesn’t mean that your head need to be lower than his. Neither does your own center. This is hard to describe, but it’s more of a feeling, a feeling that you can always topple his balance, uproot him whenever you want. Use your tingjing to feel the balance of his feet in your hands. Never lose this feeling. Few practitioners are good in this, so if you can keep your awareness to always be ready to catch his root and unbalance him, you will have a great advantage." https://taichithoughts.wordpress.com/20 ... -strategy/

Now, I could have used the term Yi, because it's really about keeping your intent on sensing that you can uproot your opponent at any whenever you want, and the intent will help you to do this. But people tend to intellectualize and focus more on thinking than on sensing and doing, so I don't like to use the concept of intent when I write.

[Steve James]

There's an old Italian saying, "traduttore tradittore" or translators are traitors. It was written to suggest that as soon as one translated a word from one language to another, the translation was not true to the original meaning --because the translator, not the original speaker, became the definer of meaning. No matter how close it came, the translation was a betrayal. Of course, that refers to translating from one verbal language to another. Words/concepts in martial arts are always translated into physical feelings. Those physical feelings may be different, too. Anyway, in this case, my main point is that "yi" is a far better term to use than "intent." That's even if people disagree on what yi is or isn't. Once the term is translated, we are almost certainly talking about something else and the problems of mutual communication are multiplied.

[Bao]

I have often found that for many the intent of action often prevents them from directly feeling what "intent" is or feels like.

Nicely put
Agree very much that "intent of action" should be avoided.
...And just let things happen by itself.

There's an old Italian saying, "traduttore tradittore" or translators are traitors. It was written to suggest that as soon as one translated a word from one language to another, the translation was not true to the original meaning --because the translator, not the original speaker, became the definer of meaning. No matter how close it came, the translation was a betrayal. Of course, that refers to translating from one verbal language to another. Words/concepts in martial arts are always translated into physical feelings. Those physical feelings may be different, too. Anyway, in this case, my main point is that "yi" is a far better term to use than "intent."

+1000

Couldn't say it better than this.

[amor]

Generalizations.... Rubber ball? It's also said that tai chi is steel wrapped in cotton.
To yr qn: it's said that tai chi keeps the middle empty, bagua keeps the middle turning and xi keeps the middle steady directed forward.

In the tai chi mind and body, there's only emptiness. Movement is born from stillness. I am no expert in the other arts and there seems to be different philosophies, but in general, from my own very limited understanding it seems that in bagua, the idea is kept on change, and in XY the idea is moving forward with the intent on the five shapes. Someone with better knowledge should fill in here.

Generalizations.... Rubber ball? It's also said that tai chi is steel wrapped in cotton.
To yr qn: it's said that tai chi keeps the middle empty, bagua keeps the middle turning and xi keeps the middle steady directed forward.

In the tai chi mind and body, there's only emptiness. Movement is born from stillness. I am no expert in the other arts and there seems to be different philosophies, but in general, from my own very limited understanding it seems that in bagua, the idea is kept on change, and in XY the idea is moving forward with the intent on the five shapes. Someone with better knowledge should fill in here.

Some good thoughts there that I can relate to. I would add though that before you're able to work with intent that it's pre-requisite is to change the body as it were. Others in this post have talked already about the body-changing required to work with intent and it has been discussed as well in a number of previous posts and we're all familiar with it.

This method of 'changing the body (so you can work with intent) is, I believe, common to the 3 sister IMA's i.e. taichi, hsing-i, bagua.
So, if it is the common factor (the body changing method) then what distinguishes the 3 arts because they are different as identified by the type of body one builds.
I would say you have to get into the energetics of it all to begin to appreciate why different body types arise. But put simply hsing-i is focussed on cultivating the yang energy and taichi the yin energy. Bagua I'd say is closer to taichi with some extra emphasis on other features which Dglenn has written about in some thread which I can't recall right now but he says something about bagua aims to put the root in the lower dantien as opposed to the foot which he attributes to taichi, something which I believe he is mistaken in, (the foot is important for other reasons which I'm not gonna go into, not just for rooting) since taichi is all about the lower dantien as well. I'd say even hsing-i uses the lower dantien since the body work is similar to all 3 and therefore you can't not be aware of the lower dantien and that goes for any art that works according to internal principles.
So the cultivating of yin and yang energies is one aspect to this. Hsing-i is uses 6-directions forces so it's exerts a lot of the cultivated yang qi to the edge of the body, gives a hard-feel I suppose as they are known for having a 'steel' outer body. Taichi doesn't use 6 directions, preferring a more relaxed approach, full and empty to follow and neautralise then attacks you where you're most vulnerable, and here the 'steel' is inside as per your 'steel wrapped in cotton' statement.
It's can make for an interesting debate to go deeper into what truly distinguishes each art and the how's and why's of the different body types that arise. In Cohen's book he mentions that Wang Xiangzai used the neutralization aspect of taichi together with hsing-i's striking ability and bagua's footwork. So, perhaps each art cultivated different elements with more emphasis on one aspect so it's only natural the intent or yi would be used differently.