"Internal" Strength

[Mr. Nemo]

This is an offshoot of the "external training for internal arts" thread, on which the consensus seemed to be that external training was innapropriate for the internal arts.

Now, let's say I want to throw someone. The way I see it, good throws with good technique are based on leverage - the larger the range of motion the throw goes through, the less effort I have to expend to execute it. Same with a simple lever - I can lift a very heavy weight with little effort if I expend that effort over a larger distance.

Now to me, this is the basis of good throwing. There are other factors, like putting your body weight into the throw, staying relaxed so you can adjust the direction of the force you're issuing on the fly, catching the guy off guard, getting his momentum going in a way that aids your throw, etc... - to an extent, these are all matters of timing and experience. The heart of the throw is the lever.

Now for "internal" strength. The way I see it, a good internal stylist can execute a throw with comparatively little muscular strength because he or she uses this principle. So, a small person can throw a big one, and this is "internal" strength - not so much strength as technique that, in effect, "multiplies" the effect of whatever strength is used. Internal skill is a multiplier.

However, what I'm hearing on here is that internal stylists use a different kind of power generation altogether - that they use their tendons, and their bodyweight exclusively to generate whatever power they need? In this case, internal skill is a method of generating power, independent of what we usually call "external" strength - so developing external strength will not aid your ability to throw someone using internal methods.

The way I see it, any throw will meet resistance - both from your opponent's muscles and from his inertia. If you divide that resistance over a larger range of motion, it will decrease and you'll need less effort to get the throw. However, even in internal arts, you're still using your muscles to apply whatever force is needed.

[miscjinx]

There are problems with trying to over analyze and over focus here. Obviously some muscle is used because otherwise you would be a limp pile of jelly with some hard bits of bone. But internal strength and power is generated differently than external arts. Think about picking up a cup, what are you using – your arm or your center? The two are different ways to generate the power to lift the cup. Internal arts tend to focus on body weight and gravity as one main source of power…also intention and timing of both you and your opponent.

You picked the throw as an example. Your ideas work if you think about it as a dead weight you are trying to move, but internal arts use more finesse. In Ki Aikido, for example, you will lead the person’s intention and body so they more or less throw themselves and little or no effort on your part is needed. In higher levels, you deal with no-touch throws…you are manipulating your opponents movements and they end up throwing themselves. That is the flaw in saying it is just a lever principle. Leverage is an issue, but you can use the other person’s balance, timing, and intention (etc) against them so you don’t need to muscle them down. I have a judo book at home that talks about the essence of throws – you don’t throw a dead weight and you don’t try to throw a person until you have disrupted their balance (inertia minimized). In internal arts, if you meet resistance you change to another technique. You don’t meet resistance with resistance. In tai chi they talk of using 4 ounces of power, that is the degree of finesse that tai chi tries to attain to manipulate someone.

But this is all too complex – use a more simple approach: lifting a cup, turning a doorknob, etc. The differences between externalists and internalists are easier to see in such circumstances because how they move (generate the power) is different and all the variables, possibilities, etc are eliminated from the equation.

Tell me, what you do and use to pick up a coffee cup and turn a doorknob to open a door?

[Mr. Nemo]

All the methods you described, except for the "no-touch" throw, are methods of decreasing the amount of resistance your opponent offers, but you still use muscular force to finish the job. Maybe a minimum of muscular force, but muscular force still.

"However, what I'm hearing on here is that internal stylists use a different kind of power generation altogether - that they use their tendons, and their bodyweight exclusively to generate whatever power they need? In this case, internal skill is a method of generating power, independent of what we usually call "external" strength - so developing external strength will not aid your ability to throw someone using internal methods."

This was the real question I was asking - why is it that external training is seen as detrimental to internal arts? How does external training disrupt internal ability?

[Ka]

I think to fully answer this people will have to come to an agreement as to the definition of Internal and External.
Everyone seems to be answering from a slightly different angle.

[miscjinx]

Actually, why would you need muscular force to finish the job…by then all their balance is destroyed and all you have to do is drop your body weight on them and let gravity do the job. But this is all just over-analyzing it…like I said, if you used no muscular force you would be a pile on the floor unable to move. It is how you move that is the important factor.

External training is particularly frowned upon in the beginning of internal martial arts training because you have to basically retrain your body how to move (in a complete integrated whole). If you go to the gym (which isolate muscle groups) for example, you are hindering yourself from training a different way to move. In the beginning when I was starting to get this, I could not use more than a couple pounds of resistance (usually applied by a partner) or separate muscles would kick in, tension would pop up, and I lost full body connectivity. Gradually you can take more resistance. Until you learn how to move and don’t loose it when weight is applied, weight training can not really be done internally (to strengthen the overall) and you will end up training externally which only puts you back into old patterns.

It is not easy to learn to move in this internal way, and continued external training and movement only gets into the way.

But Ka is right, a lot of this is definitions. Also over analyzing or polarizing the issue. How I move is very different than I used to when I was in karate...I see it as a very different way to move. However the higher level karate guys talk about changes in movement similar to what I do in internal styles. So they come together. Perhaps the internal going to external refers to the fact you have to be so soft and can't take much weight in the beginning and you have to work up to more. Who knows...I just know this is easier to show somebody than to talk of it.

[RAF]

Terminology error possiblity but if your structure is not strong and developed, then it may not be able to contain and direct what the mind evokes.

I've never seen it but from credible sources, qi gong people can often develop such strong intent but the body cannot hold it. It ends up with complete loss of muscular control and trance-like state.

Again Dong Haichuan, Yang Lu Chan and many others had a strong foundation in what we term external training or styles. We often start children in long fist or mantis and as they age, the so-called internal (neigong) components are added. The initial training in baji stance work is more on the external and later seeks balance in the internal (if our definitions)

The mind is a powerful thing and you need a strong frame to contain what may be evoked from it.

I got a feeling this is going to go in circles. Let me jump off here and read what others have to say.

[red_fists]

Hi All.

Personally, I don't think that this can be resolved in Intenet fashion.
Only by people getting together and touching hands.

Interna Arts rely a lot on personal self exploration and experiences and add to that each persons perception and
different ways of communicating. Presto!
Instant confusion.

But still nice to read other people's account and ideas though.

[Fu-Pow]

Let me offer an alternative to "internal" and "external."

Internal arts are generally "stick and follow" martial arts.

External arts are generally "striking arts."

Now even this definition is a little confusing because there "external" arts that "stick and follow" and there are "internal arts" that "strike."

Lets look at another way to define them.

Internal arts are "open and close" martial arts.

External arts are " circular" martial arts.

What I mean is that internal arts (or stick and follow arts) employ a twining and twisting action that goes through the center of the body and into the ground. This requires "opening and closing" of the joints and especially rib cage, back and spine. The force comes from the ground stretching out from the ground. The body is springy and stretchy. Strikes instantly "snap back" after being thrown. Throws are executed by receiving the opponent leading them into the center, then adding to their energy and pushing them out.

External arts use twining/twisting in the limbs (think of a reverse punch) but they don't go all the way "through." They move in a circular pattern around the "center" or torso but not "through" it. Its like those little drums with the two beads attached on the string. The beads move around as the drums rotates back and forth. The force is centrifugal kind of force. Throws are executed by using the center as a kind of fulcrum point.

This is my understanding of the difference but I in no way represent myself as a "master" of either type of art. But in my experience training in both this what I percieve to be the difference. When I go to push hands practice and I try to turn my whole torso like in a external arts I am easily thrown off balance where as when I "open and close" the torso then I drive toward the persons center.

Totally d

[Ka]

Mr Nemo
Depending on your definition of External,I would say that external training is not bad for internal understanding,in fact I think one should pass through external training in order to fully appreciate and utilize internal power generation.

It was mentioned that many older masters had strong foundation skills in arts considered purely External.And I agree with Miscjinx that what we may define as purely external master's can exbit internal priciples.I think that Redfirst is right this is one discussion that needs the touch feel deal.

Which leads if I may to a post that I put up Waijia/Neijia,external(outside/foreign) families /internal familes,Who first brought up this definition,and why have these 2 families got further apart as time goes on?(in reference to arts that say are internal/external/require both)

[bamboo_ leaf]

Using the throw, what needs to be thrown is the others mind, the body will follow.

You don’t need force for this.

If you put your hand on a pipe, you can feel the water before it gets to a certain point. If it is a water hose you can bend the hose before the water arrives or if you could attract the water you could make it follow the attraction in the direction and shape that you wanted based on its flow and direction.

All this depends on the sprit, mind, emptiness or changeability of your mind and body.

the methods and training to be able to approch things in this way, at least in my exprince are very differnt. For me they are incompatable others may find a more what some would call a more balanced approch between the two.

if it works and you can really do it, this is good. i haven't found it to be so for me in my own travels, i had to choose.

[red_fists]

Here is me jumping into the deep end.

What follows is my current understanding based on some researches I have done.

The Human body has 3 type muscles fibres, each of these types of muscle fibre fulfills a slightly different role.
Now most muscles consist of a mix of those 3 muscles.

By doing certain exercises you can change the ratio of those 3 muscle types.
Example:
Type I : Slow
Type II A: Fast
Type II B : Very fast.
They also differ in many other aspects like aerobic vs anaerobic

Now I is see the diff. between external and internal MA training as the way to promote a certain Fibre type over others.
And learning to get the optimum out of each fibre type.

Same muscles, different Fibre composition for different goals.

Now if we didn't use muscles in internal MA as most people would assume, we would be limb and lying around as an inactive muscle is a decaying muscle.

Personally, I have found not a significant muscle growth(except legs) doing internal MA, but that the feel and texture of my muscles has changed.
Thus leading me to believe that the muscle fibre composition has changed.

This would also explain why certain types of Qi-Gong are better for certain MA.
Anybody got something to add to this, or pick holes into this theory??

[TaiChiBob]

Oh well.. They told me if i got involved in this forum i would eventually hang myself.. here goes..

First i sense the only difference between internal/external is an expression of "ego".. this is better than that type of thing..
certainly there are differing modes of training, different applications but... i have yet to hear a reasonable description as to what seperates the individual into distinct parts(internal/external).. We strive for balance in life, yet in our training we would segregate and embellish one, neglect another (seems unbalanced).. Tai Chi is an art for living (IMHO).. however adept we are at "soft-energy", life will offer challenges that require simple strength, brute force.. i am only suggesting that the better prepared we are for life, the better our Tai Chi expresses itself..

Highly refined Chi is expressed best through a highly refined body, not a poorly maintained carcass.. Balance..

be well, do good deeds (deeds define us)..

[red_fists]

Hi TaiChiBob.

Have a look at this Thread:
http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10010

Personally, I think that there is less difference between internal & external Arts than is talked about this days.

For me both type of MA aim for the same mountain top, but travel different roads to get there.

The way I see it and I might hang myself next to you:
1.) External MA incorporating internal aspects at a higher level.
2.) Internal incorporating external aspects at some level.

Yes, the are different in philosphy and training, but as I see it both that are based on Tao principles.
And how can Yin exist without Yang and vice versa.
So, yes IMHO, internal arts have external aspects and vice versa.

I think that the internal/soft side/Health aspects have been over-emphasized to sell the Arts better and to differentiate them from the other styles.
Anyhuh, time to turn in and get some shuteye while the flaming starts.

[miscjinx]

Too many people are saying things like this..."highly refined body, not a poorly maintained carcass"

Practicing internal martial arts does not mean that your muscles atrophy and you become weaker unless you start going to the gym and working out (external movements).

Internal arts are very much a work out as well (in which I have sweated buckets), but it is not the same as external arts.

You don't need to go to the gym to make up for doing internal arts.

[miscjinx]

Red_fists,

Sounds right to me. However, although internal at some time goes towards external for balance...the error is to train externally too early.

[miscjinx]

Additional note,

Train externally too early...and then resume old ways. You can train with weights in an internal fashion, and that is how an internalists builds up their body after learning how to move (IMO).

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Sorry, poor choice of words..
Absolutely, i have sweated my own buckets during internal workouts. I certainly didn't mean to imply that one should go to the gym to "make up" for internal training.. rather, to enhance it.. My own preference is to maintain a lean, wirey, physique.. bulk seems to get in its own way.. One of my past teachers was adamant about training with no more than your own body weight.. "master your own weight, and the weight of others will make no difference". I train for living, not any single aspect of it, but ALL of it.. Internal training is only one of the arrows in my quiver (perhaps my favorite arrow, though)..

By way of analogy.. Suppose we have refined a new super fuel (Chi).. then we are faced with a race for our life.. do i choose a Volkswagon or a Porsche to utilize this new "fuel"?..

Internal/external, i would hope that there is a beneficial balance rather than segregated exclusivity.. As a unified Whole Being my own sense of self is enhanced, as a segregated assembly of concepts i am constantly choosing and judging (wasted effort as i intuit it).. My "intention" is to improve my own life, and.. through the experiences that work for me, share them with others.. i do not assert that i am right/wrong, only that this has been my own experience, i share in the spirit of offering, not forcing.. I have no need to convert someone to my point of view, only to share it..

Be well, be sincere, be compassionate.. the rest will take care of itself..

[red_fists]

Originally posted by miscjinx
Additional note,

Train externally too early...and then resume old ways. You can train with weights in an internal fashion, and that is how an internalists builds up their body after learning how to move (IMO).

I agree absolutely with that.

Seeya.

[Sam Wiley]

A Volkswagon or a Porsche?

Hmmm....

I'd choose a Porsche 911 Carrera, yellow with blue trim.

But that's just me.

Of course, the Volkswagon is probably more fuel efficient...but the chicks, man, the chicks.:D