Is "internal" real that important?

Discussion on the three big Chinese internals, Yiquan, Bajiquan, Piguazhang and other similar styles.

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby Trick on Tue Jan 28, 2020 1:41 am

johnwang wrote:
Trick wrote:together with an touch of ShuaiJiao promotion 8-)

I try to promote science (格物), not metaphysics (玄學).



, we all know that atom contains protons, neutrons, and electrons. It can be proved. This is science (格物) - external.

.

The atoms are the atoms, as the human is the human. It’s how we(and the atoms) act among the different bodies and within themselves that could be defined the ‘internal’ or ‘external’. ?
If we deal with atoms in the way of splitting them, one may speculate that’s an brute external way do deal with them, while fusing atoms could perhaps be thought as an more harmonious internal method or perhaps result....?
Trick
Wuji
 
Posts: 2892
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 1:30 am

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby LaoDan on Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:08 am

johnwang wrote:
Trick wrote:together with an touch of ShuaiJiao promotion 8-)

I try to promote science (格物), not metaphysics (玄學).

People believe in "object -> parts" approach such as: Taiji -> Yin/Yang -> 4 corners -> Bagua. But they can't prove it. This is metaphysics (玄學) - "internal".

By using the "parts -> object" approach, we all know that atom contains protons, neutrons, and electrons. It can be proved. This is science (格物) - external.

In the past 300 years, if Chinese didn't spent all their effort to dig into metaphysics (玄學) and ignored science (格物), China won't be almost divided by foreign power. By using the metaphysics (玄學) approach, the "internal" MA was created.

You have pointed out a duality in approaches, but I think that they go together. It has been shown that children learning to tie shoelaces learn quicker if they are shown the end bow (the whole object) in conjunction with the step by step instructions (the parts), rather than just trying to get them to follow the step by step instructions without them understanding the completed whole. I suspect that this would hold true for other activities, including martial arts instruction. Plus your science analogy is flawed in that atoms were discovered prior to the components (protons, neutrons, and electrons), which would be more the way that you describe for the “metaphysics” or “internal” way than what you describe as the “science” or “external” approach.

To sum up your points in this thread (correct me if I am wrong):
You think that SJ already contains “internal” principles, so the thread topic “Is ‘internal’ real that important?” is not really the correct question. You view the “internal” principles included in SJ as sufficient, and other “internal” principles that are not included in your SJ practice (and “internal” principles that you do not agree with BECAUSE they are not incorporated into your version of SJ?) are not important to you. So, the question you are asking is more about those “internal” principles that you do not use in your practice, and you are asking if they are important for other IMA practitioners and their styles?

Bowman, P. 2019 wrote: All martial arts and approaches to fighting are the manifestation of a kind of theory, or philosophy, or ideology, or fantasy. The moves, the training, the sparring, they all imply either a conscious or an unconscious ‘¬theory’ or ‘philosophy’ of all sorts of things: What violence is, what combat is, what works best, how bodies work and interact, what teaching and learning should be like, what society is like, what the place of the individual is within society, and so on. All martial arts, from the most supposedly ancient to the most avowedly modern, are based on tacit, implicit or explicit premises, hypotheses, arguments, theories, fantasies or philosophies about the world, society, and our place and responsibilities within it.


I know that you do not like to get too philosophical or theoretical, but to answer your concerns we would probably have to. Earlier I tried to point out the problem of trying to define a dividing line between two (or more) approaches to fighting (especially when many may view the options on a continuum). What matters to you differs from what matters to others. Other people view the differences differently than you do and have different opinions as to what is important and what “should” be incorporated into IMA. It partly depends on personal beliefs and experiences, and every individual is different psychologically and socially. For example, you have mentioned the idea of protecting loved ones from potential attacks, and having finishing moves, etc. I do not know how many times protecting loved ones has occurred in your lifetime, but I personally have needed to use my IMA training to defend myself from someone who tried to physically harm me only one time in over 40 years! Training as frequently and consistently as I have does not really make sense if protection from physical attacks is this unlikely in my life. For me, there must be other reasons for training. Therefore I emphasize other things than you do – I emphasize things like balance and self control rather than finishing moves and defeating others. For me personally, IMA training is challenging and interesting and fun, even if I only use sparring as a way to obtain feedback on my understanding of the art rather than to defeat someone else...
LaoDan
Huajing
 
Posts: 387
Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 11:51 am

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby Taste of Death on Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:18 pm

johnwang wrote:This clip shows a good example that "leg skill" solo training can develop your balance up to a much higher level. IMO, even if you don't use "leg skill" in fighting, it has great "health" benefit.

Image


Tom posted this He Jinbao video in the Yin Style Bagua thread. Plenty of "leg skill" in YSB, an internal art.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hk3WipJ ... =emb_title
Last edited by Taste of Death on Fri Feb 07, 2020 7:47 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"It was already late. Night stood murkily over people, and no one else pronounced words; all that could be heard was a dog barking in some alien village---just as in olden times, as if it existed in a constant eternity." Andrey Platonov
User avatar
Taste of Death
Wuji
 
Posts: 1255
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 11:07 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby Trick on Wed Jan 29, 2020 3:00 am

johnwang wrote:
Trick wrote:together with an touch of ShuaiJiao promotion 8-)

I try to promote science (格物), not metaphysics (玄學).

People believe in "object -> parts" approach such as: Taiji -> Yin/Yang -> 4 corners -> Bagua. But they can't prove it. This is metaphysics (玄學) - "internal".

By using the "parts -> object" approach, we all know that atom contains protons, neutrons, and electrons. It can be proved. This is science (格物) - external.

In the past 300 years, if Chinese didn't spent all their effort to dig into metaphysics (玄學) and ignored science (格物), China won't be almost divided by foreign power. By using the metaphysics (玄學) approach, the "internal" MA was created.

Also if we are down to atom level, we can mention stuff like the God-particle, Spooky action. We can go on into Dark matter, Blackholes, and even the long time well known but still puzzling force of gravity.....All favorite topics in science, thing that proven not so easily handled and controlled...(yet)....
It’s as there is a splash of metaphysics in the science world that somehow makes science leap forward, so why not also in the martial world too.... 8-)
Trick
Wuji
 
Posts: 2892
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 1:30 am

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby johnwang on Thu Jan 30, 2020 1:27 pm

How does internal system train "borrowing force"?

Here is how SC train "borrowing force". You give first, you then take afterward.

Image
Last edited by johnwang on Thu Jan 30, 2020 1:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I'm still allergic to "push".
User avatar
johnwang
Great Old One
 
Posts: 9309
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 5:26 pm

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby oragami_itto on Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:19 pm

Directly, as they try to put force into you, use that force directly against them.

Switching topics slightly, there's recently been some studies (that I saw in a HEMA group) that prove scientifically humans can tell where on a grasped stick contact is being made without looking. By reading the vibrations in an object we can tell what is happening to the object without looking at it.

Internal is similar in some respects, at least one aspect, ting jin. On contact the internal player can read a tremendous amount of information about what the opponents body is doing, coupled with control over one's own body allows for very quick responses to changing conditions.
Last edited by oragami_itto on Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"My own knowledge is shallow and I await corrections from the intelligent."
-Hermit of Jade Well
User avatar
oragami_itto
Wuji
 
Posts: 2008
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:11 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby johnwang on Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:32 pm

oragami_itto wrote:Directly, as they try to put force into you, use that force directly against them.

What technique do you use? How do you train it? Do you have any clip for this?
Last edited by johnwang on Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I'm still allergic to "push".
User avatar
johnwang
Great Old One
 
Posts: 9309
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 5:26 pm

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby windwalker on Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:10 pm

oragami_itto wrote:Directly, as they try to put force into you, use that force directly against them.

Switching topics slightly, there's recently been some studies (that I saw in a HEMA group) that prove scientifically humans can tell where on a grasped stick contact is being made without looking. By reading the vibrations in an object we can tell what is happening to the object without looking at it.

Internal is similar in some respects, at least one aspect, ting jin. On contact the internal player can read a tremendous amount of information about what the opponents body is doing, coupled with control over one's own body allows for very quick responses to changing conditions.





In the past, people used ears to listen.

It is better to listen to the heart, to listen to the heart. It is better to listen to the air. The ears are heard, the heart feels the emptiness, and the air is the most spiritual.

Even parts of the human body are the skin. There is also a nuance like Qi in hair. Qi is omnipresent, so if you are good at using Qi, it will be very spiritual. The so-called listening is actually a feeling, so you must drive Qi before your heart. The use of qi to touch before the heart is the most important principle of sensation.




http://www.baihepai.com/pak-hok-pai-lio ... %E7%BB%8F/


This means that if one depends on physical touch for the most part it’s too late.

Gen comment: All martial arts developed in China are internal. The ideas coming from the culture in which everything they do including their physical arts are expressions of it.
One cannot escape this while claiming to practice CMA
Last edited by windwalker on Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:25 pm, edited 3 times in total.
基於開合、虛實與吞吐 的知覺運動
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 7773
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby oragami_itto on Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:30 pm

This means that if one depends on physical touch for the most part it’s too late.


I can only speak about what I've experienced from the perspective of my own understanding and what you describe transcends both so I won't.
"My own knowledge is shallow and I await corrections from the intelligent."
-Hermit of Jade Well
User avatar
oragami_itto
Wuji
 
Posts: 2008
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:11 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby oragami_itto on Thu Jan 30, 2020 3:32 pm

johnwang wrote:
oragami_itto wrote:Directly, as they try to put force into you, use that force directly against them.

What technique do you use? How do you train it? Do you have any clip for this?


Through pushing hands from cooperative to freestyle. It's a central idea with many manifestations in what I practice so there's no one way to work on it, and honestly you can work on different things using the same external drills.

For example you can start by defining the Force, either active or reactive. Either they are trying to do something to you or they are reacting to something you are doing.

Next you can define what you are doing with it. Either helping it continue in the same direction or redirecting it.

Then if redirecting you can redirect it into the opponent or into empty space.


Depending on what you're working on various drills may be more beneficial than others in getting the feeling of the specific borrowing. Cooperative drills teach the basic feeling. Antagonistic drills teach getting it in controlled circumstances, and freestyle teaches getting it in uncontrolled situations. Ideally at some point that means you can pull it off in various degrees in free fighting.

From the last gif you posted and your description I'd say what you mean by borrowing force is one kind of what I consider borrowing force, specifically reactive, helping, empty space. Push to get them to resist the push, then change direction so you add your throwing force to their resisting force.

This in my opinion is one way to work on another kind of borrowing force, though it isn't presented directly as such.

Last edited by oragami_itto on Thu Jan 30, 2020 7:23 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"My own knowledge is shallow and I await corrections from the intelligent."
-Hermit of Jade Well
User avatar
oragami_itto
Wuji
 
Posts: 2008
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:11 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby ctjla on Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:28 am

Maybe another way to look at this is one's probability of success at becoming the "defend your loved ones", "invincible neighborhood champion". If it's cultural exploration or for health reasons, something else entirely. Feel free to drop in your own percentages. This is just a concept.

- modern mma - go to decent gym, get in shape and within a year, solid chance you'll be able to survive a parking lot altercation. Call it an 80%. bet. Not bad.

- boxing and wrestling - odds are pretty good that you'll be able to do ok in an altercation within a couple of years. Let's say 70% .

- specialized martial sport - maybe 5 - 7? 50/50 depending on how hard one pushes it.

- traditional hard style external with adequate sparring - 5 - 7 years depending on the school. 50/50.

- traditional cma - likely to take a bit longer. At least 10 years in most cases. 30% chance of developing applicable skills. Not the art, just typically a lot of forms practice. There are always exceptions.

- internal - I don't know how anyone can do it without the right teacher, it's just too difficult and can't possibly be learned from a book or video. 5% probably get somewhere.

-- going back to the beginning of the thread, if the focus is solely on finishing a fight, why would anybody do anything other than mma? perhaps with a blend of some self-defense focused or internal art to balance things out according to preference. If that's the agreed upon goal we should all be heading down to American Top Team or some Thai Boxing gym, right?

SC might have a leg up on bad YMCA taiji, by the same token doesn't a place like SBGi (MMA) have the same leg up on those grappling sports that choose not to focus on striking/groundfighting?

This discussion seems to be switching back and forth between absolutes and personal preferences. I suppose if we were to choose one logical framework it wouldn't be as entertaining. :)
ctjla
Santi
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 11:54 pm

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby johnwang on Fri Jan 31, 2020 11:47 am

ctjla wrote:This discussion seems to be switching back and forth between absolutes and personal preferences.

The main purpose of this thread is to discuss how can "internal" help in the basic throwing (not striking) skill development such as foot sweep, ...

Does "internal" guys train foot sweep

1. differently?
2. same as external guys, but add "internal" into it afterward?

It seems to me that we all agree that 2 is the case (not 1). People try to share their experience in this area.

This thread has nothing to do with

- cultural exploration,
- for health reasons,
- self-cultivation,
- inner peace,
- ...

It only has to do with "skill development".
I'm still allergic to "push".
User avatar
johnwang
Great Old One
 
Posts: 9309
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 5:26 pm

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby windwalker on Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:33 pm

johnwang wrote:
ctjla wrote:This discussion seems to be switching back and forth between absolutes and personal preferences.

The main purpose of this thread is to discuss how can "internal" help in the basic throwing (not striking) skill development such as foot sweep, ...

Does "internal" guys train foot sweep

1. differently?
2. same as external guys, but add "internal" into it afterward?

It seems to me that we all agree that 2 is the case (not 1). People try to share their experience in this area.

This thread has nothing to do with

- cultural exploration,
- for health reasons,
- self-cultivation,
- inner peace,
- ...

It only has to do with "skill development".


Is it not only through the culture from which the movements are questioned that the words "internal/external"
have any meaning?

If its not judged/ questioned on this basis then how should it be ?

boxing or wrestling as far as I know do not speak of these distinctions?
Last edited by windwalker on Fri Jan 31, 2020 3:21 pm, edited 4 times in total.
基於開合、虛實與吞吐 的知覺運動
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 7773
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby ctjla on Sat Feb 01, 2020 1:31 am

johnwang wrote:
ctjla wrote:This discussion seems to be switching back and forth between absolutes and personal preferences.

The main purpose of this thread is to discuss how can "internal" help in the basic throwing (not striking) skill development such as foot sweep, ...

Does "internal" guys train foot sweep

1. differently?
2. same as external guys, but add "internal" into it afterward?

It seems to me that we all agree that 2 is the case (not 1). People try to share their experience in this area.

This thread has nothing to do with

- cultural exploration,
- for health reasons,
- self-cultivation,
- inner peace,
- ...

It only has to do with "skill development".


Ok, great...so we can cross that off the list and only focus on the combative aspects.

What if we rephrased the question as "is 'traditional' that important"? MMA is a much more efficient training paradigm. Why do you bother with SC when there are much shorter routes to combat effectiveness?
ctjla
Santi
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 11:54 pm

Re: Is "internal" real that important?

Postby ctjla on Sat Feb 01, 2020 1:49 am

johnwang wrote:
ctjla wrote:This discussion seems to be switching back and forth between absolutes and personal preferences.

The main purpose of this thread is to discuss how can "internal" help in the basic throwing (not striking) skill development such as foot sweep, ...

Does "internal" guys train foot sweep

1. differently?
2. same as external guys, but add "internal" into it afterward?

It seems to me that we all agree that 2 is the case (not 1). People try to share their experience in this area.

This thread has nothing to do with

- cultural exploration,
- for health reasons,
- self-cultivation,
- inner peace,
- ...

It only has to do with "skill development".


The "training differences" question has been answered several times. Maybe not in terms of specific drills but the outcomes and mechanical contrasts have been outlined more than once. So I'm not certain that we're really after an answer to that question.

However, quite get it that some things are a little difficult to transmit on the web. An example would be the difference between same side and cross body connections. Often the same move can be executed using either a same side or cross body set of mechanics, they would look the same to an untrained observer but the effect on one's opponent would be drastically different.

If we're wondering why nobody has come up with more detail outlining the distinctions, we should ask the question...who would give up a key concept that cost them 5 or 10 years to uncover on a web post that's obviously trolling individuals with that kind of experience?
ctjla
Santi
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 11:54 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests