Disinguishing Internal from External

[Subitai]

* Yet they are always in flux and interchangeable, never just one only or the other.

[wiesiek]

Internal is the cultivation of qi. based on Chinese internal medicine.
External is everything else.

"The mind leads the qi, The qi leading the movement".

this is my understanding for today
as well

[windwalker]

Windwalker, can you provide YOUR ideas on the differences between internal and external?

What is it you are actually training that is different to the external arts?

I think the problem with a lot of people is that they like to talk about 'Internal' this and that but rarely want to put their ass on the line with that they think it really IS! Preferring stories of old timers, texts of old masters and tales from exchanges.

I never ever buy the idea that people are "being IMO confused until they meet some who actually has the skill set.". I am sure many haven't, but when this is used on the board it smacks of a cheap get out in order to not properly explain your own position. "ohhh you need to find someone who has it before we can talk!"

I have had this thrown at me before by people, followed by a list of people that they say i 'really should meet to understand what internal is!' ... And half of them i have already bloody met! haha. Then the response invariably is, 'Oh they clearly didn't want to show you'. Bullshit ... I think some people just see what they want to see, they want magic not methods.

I have met people with extremely unusual levels of power, sensitivity and skill. Stuff that seemed outside of what many would consider 'normal' and have met people who express the highest levels of their internal arts. I like my definition of 'internal training' because it covers everything i have ever felt from anyone and any method i have ever been taught.

Thanks
Chris.

an interesting question.

Having asked this same question to myself for the last ten yrs after meeting others who've I've felt, I have yet to arrive at answer that would suffice for most people until they've felt it, then we could could talk about what was felt. Otherwise what I've found is that people start to talk about the things you've mentioned "translations, historical accounts, or teachers" all of which may or may not be agreed on depending on level and understanding of the reader.

They try to use others accounts, as I have done to illustrate what others have found that seems to be similar in nature to what they or I have found
that may explain it better or depending on person used to be more credible to those reading it.

When I read many of dglenns, in depth translations for example,
its not to learn from them but to compare what I've felt and experienced with others that I know.
Interesting enough people tend to agree with what is written, until its shown..

.
My own training and experience was and is by doing.

I could post clips of my teacher or others doing the same things, which I've felt first hand, and have some small skill in,
what then happens is people start talking about woo woo on line but off line many will also confirm what they felt.

What i note in the many postings here is the talk of power,
which for me the practice is about the absence of it. How to use and understand emptiness as it relates to ones self and others.

Why do people move with what seems to be a light touch to no touch at all.

The common answers always seem to relate to its BS, drinking the koolaid ect........
why would I or anyone share things directly that they've been working on or with only to be mocked or questioned.
Maybe this is why some will not post clips understanding how it will be received.

Here and in China, people are well aware of force and the common methods by which things are done,,,,its the uncommon methods
that they seek....many of the seekers have many yrs in other arts this helps them in understanding the differences in what they seek.

They seek others to "feel it"

I think the problem with a lot of people is that they like to talk about 'Internal' this and that but rarely want to put their ass on the line with that they think it really IS! Preferring stories of old timers, texts of old masters and tales from exchanges.

I never ever buy the idea that people are "being IMO confused until they meet some who actually has the skill set.". I am sure many haven't, but when this is used on the board it smacks of a cheap get out in order to not properly explain your own position. "ohhh you need to find someone who has it before we can talk!"

So how would you talk about something that most people would say is not real, or BS?

My own position is that its not something directly explainable unless one has a common frame work from which to talk about it.
In which case the talk would be on practices that foster it,,,,and usage,,,,,here on RSF it never reaches that point,,,, Even here
with the many postings seeking to deny it. I respect all view points while still not agreeing with them....for me its pointless to come
debate or argue about it.

All things I talk about I've felt, some I can do. Of those those that I've asked to come here "RSF" to talk about it
or help explain it most dont stay long understanding that its not something that is accepted here dispite
the many who talk about internal, as I mentioned in print its ok until its seen then,,,it starts

[windwalker]

"The mind leads the qi, The qi leading the movement"

a common saying, one might start by asking what mind?
Of those I've worked with they talk of "yi" leads the "qi" which in reading the many postings on it here
seems to be different then what most here seem to feel it to be.


I use the term focused awareness, with my western students most of the local Chinese understand and agree
with the Chinese use of word yi....

There are fields and levels of interaction all depending on what ones practice is based on will make them available or assailable
its all related to training, hence the terminology
used to differentiate between practices
that focus on one or the other.

[wiesiek]

windy ,u know, mind is quite simply term, ....
or
can be complicated like hell...
ah
well
humans with their names

fell don`t think

BUT
here is the internet forum, you`re communicating here by typing words, not exuding the beautiful smell... for example ,
wake up,
No chance to feel it yet...

[wude]

[willie]

"The mind leads the qi, The qi leading the movement"

a common saying, one might start by asking what mind?
Of those I've worked with they talk of "yi" leads the "qi" which in reading the many postings on it here
seems to be different then what most here seem to feel it to be.


I use the term focused awareness, with my western students most of the local Chinese understand and agree
with the Chinese use of word yi....

There are fields and levels of interaction all depending on what ones practice is based on will make them available or assailable
its all related to training, hence the terminology
used to differentiate between practices
that focus on one or the other.

O.K. Then we hear it right from the BIG guy, LOL!
https://youtu.be/_XRyc2kiTlM
Thanks

[middleway]

Windwalker,

Thanks for the comprehensive response.

thanks.

[windwalker]

Windwalker,

Thanks for the comprehensive response.

thanks.

actually thank you for a good question

the topic "distinguishing internal from external"
is one of the main focuses of my own work.

When working with others I often tell them its okay to use force/power,
understand it, feel it, know it, but its not what we work with here.

They need to use it so that they understand it and its limitations.
They also need to understand why they use it, and then train the mind/body not too.

In my own work the focus is on how not to use it and to distinguish between the two.
Once one can do this its quite clear but not so easy....

luck in your training

david

[Interloper]

Probably, there will never be a concise, single definition for what comprises "external" and "internal" training, largely because everyone has such different experiences and so no two viewpoints ever seem to be quite the same. So, we can only speak from our own individual experiences. With this in mind, I will speak from mine.

One observation I have made, however, is that "external" training is, and must be, technique-based. The power of the technique is inherent in the movement and execution of the technique itself. For example, a karate straight punch can be broken down into specific steps, each of which includes not just proper form (i.e. making a correct fist, aligning the bones so force isn't dumped into bent joints, etc.), but also prescribed overt movements, such as pushing off a braced leg and twisting the torso, which serve to build momentum and acceleration of mass to power the punch. Each step is sequential and adds incremental power, in a chain of actions. There is a beginning point and an ending point to the movements (and technique). At the end point, one must go back to the beginning and go through again, step by step, to create another punch.

In contrast, "internal" training is a method of creating fully connected body (upper and lower work as a unit), as well as force and power that is separate from, and not inherent to, technique (e.g. kicking, punching, striking, grappling moves, etc.) itself. As has already been pointed out, it involves the training and use of particular muscle groups and connective tissues in very specific ways to create varying degrees of force that can then be fed to and used by any limb or part of the body, in a variety of ways. The process in which these muscles and tissues are manipulated is a cyclical one rather than a sequential one, so there is no beginning or end to the power production, though the nature of the power will transitions cyclically between "Yin" and "Yang."

In my experience, the ways in which this force can be used include: Defensively -- To deflect or absorb (to the ground) incoming force from an attacker; offensively -- to penetrate an opponent's defenses (both in attacking a vulnerable target and in unbalancing him at his center of mass); Manipulatively -- to cause an opponent's body and movements to have to merge with your own and be carried along with your movements, unable to resist. Force is fed through the joints, via the point(s) of contact, to the center of mass, often in subtle ways that the opponent cannot feel or perceive.

Not all "internal" arts appear to use these different applications equally; some seem to focus more on the outward expressions of power or force ("fajin"... or "hakkei" in the Japanese internal arts), while others, particularly some of the Japanese internal arts, appear to concentrate more on the latter -- the manipulative, "merging" aspect, which they call "aiki." When fajin/hakkei is used explosively, it tends to be concussive (affects deep tissues) rather than percussive.

Both external-technique and internal power development are separate learning processes from those of developing fighting skills; They are component tools of fighting, but not the strategy and tactics of combat. nor are they the mental conditioning. So both "external" and "internal" arts have separate practices for developing the ability to use the fundamental skills for fighting.

My 2-cents' worth.

[willie]

I have a lot of my own theory's as to what internal martial training is, however as my teacher tells me, Remain humble, Stay as close to the
source as you can. The true source of taijiquan came from Chen. It was created by Chen, Therefor it can not be wrong. There are dangers of
staying off the path.
I feel that there are people claiming to be experts on the subject who are only entry level. Yet they feel that they are the porthole to
the real. They refuse to humble themselves, Talk badly of others, Use their size or other arts to intimidate. All these things must be avoided.
From 1:07
To 1:15
Tells how taiji was created .https://youtu.be/fQKkvzIoCoc
I feel there is a lot more to discuss, but It's a better idea to stay with the origin's.
Thanks

[Steve James]

Imo, separating internal and external in action is like separating body and mind or body and soul. I think that a person can emphasize a specific type of training (which will result in a specific set of abilities), but an individual acts as a whole. Imo, the idea is to unite all those elements at the time of action. I also think that there are those who equate "internal" with physical (tangible) skills and the training of them, and then there are those who equate "internal" with metaphysical (intangible) skills.

[willie]

Imo, separating internal and external in action is like separating body and mind or body and soul. I think that a person can emphasize a specific type of training (which will result in a specific set of abilities), but an individual acts as a whole. Imo, the idea is to unite all those elements at the time of action. I also think that there are those who equate "internal" with physical (tangible) skills and the training of them, and then there are those who equate "internal" with metaphysical (intangible) skills.

I would agree with that on a personal note, However I would compartmentalize that theory and stay with the origin.
Spirit body
Physical body

good post