Internal better than external?

[Shaolindynasty]

I know this is old but Royal Dragon and I are talking about this on his board and I thought the conversation could benifit from more people and info. I'll catch you up


It started here

Shaolin Dynasty

I don't beleive in those catagories. But it seems they are used this way, internal=Daoist arts, external=Shaolin arts. And according to most CMA all Korean, japanese, Okinawan and western arts are external. Kinda shows hat most CMA don't understand what qi really is and about the different ways to develop it. According to the principles I learned in traditional chinese medicine, most all exercises including weight training could be considered qigong and all qigong trains the physical bosy to an extent. So they are the same, kinda like Yin and Yang, that's why I don't beleive in the catagories cause they are misleading.



Royal Dragon

I'm not sure I agree with you. Now that I'm working with this Li Hu, Pa Fa teacher, I'm startin to see that there is a big difference in mechanics as well as expression of the three internal sister arts when compared to purely "external" arts. Going slow is actually minor.
So far from what "I" can see, external arts drive off the leg and power through the hips transfering power to the shoulders where it's added to arm strength. Linear and spiralling energy are both used (depending on the system).
In "internal" systems, Power is stil generated from the legs, but it's usually rooted through the heel (external does not seem to care on this) and is also transfere to the torso through the hipps. BUT things get different in the torso. Instead of early transfering power to the shoulder, it is now MULTIPLIED through the use of a compression - expansion accordian like movement of the entire upper body. This drives the arms which seem to be loose, and then lock up in a "rounded" position just before or at the moment of contact. They are held firmly just past contact, and the torso expands (thus multiplying power)to drive them into thier target. They then go loose again. VERY explosive.
The internal arts seem to be much more "mechanical" in application, whereas the external arts seem to use more muscle power. Both use leverage, but the internal seems to use more of it, with VERY violent explosive intent.
Sifu Livingston expalined it best when he said; "external arts are like a Lumber Jack chopping down a tree with an ax, Internal arts are like a lighting bolt blowing the tree in half!!"
Comments anyone?



Shaolin Dynasty

All you did was discribe a different method of using the body to generate power. I guess my point was just because "internal" arts focus more on mechanics, saying "external" arts rely on pure muscular force in my eyes degrades them. You have to have some of both in everything, you can't move without muscles or without qi. No offense but I think Sifu Livingston's comment may show a little ignorance of what he does, at least in part. In combat I don't see either as being more effective. The way "I" researched and drew a conclusion is, studing Daoism, Daoist monks use every aspect of live to understand the Dao. Martial arts are no different, their main purpose of practiceing martial arts was the same as the reason for practicing qigong. The reason mechanics are so important in "internal" arts is to ease "internal friction" it's about aligning the body and meridians in such a way that the flow through the meridian is free. In Daoism(internal alcamey) qi is very important in reaching enlightenment and everything they do in martial arts is to enhance qi flow to reach enlightenment. Buddhist's on the other hand beleive the mind is the most important and don't focus on the qi as much. In fighting ability they are equal but as far as qi is conserned Daoist arts(or based on the philosophy) are more conserened with controlling the qi. Qi in fighting has been "exagerated" by some of the stories and legends of the martial arts. Just cause you learn an internal art doesn't mean you can fight better but maybe mentally you could gain more. Still though it depends on your goals.
I think I got off track but it'll have to wait cause I just got some food


Royal Dragon

: All you did was discribe a different method of using the body to generate power. I guess my point was just because "internal" arts focus more on mechanics, saying "external" arts rely on pure muscular force in my eyes degrades them. You have to have some of both in everything, you can't move without muscles or without qi.
Reply]
True, but i have yet to see theses perticular "force multiplying" mechanics in ANY external art. I have only seen them in internal arts. All three internal sisters (Hsing I, Tai, Bagua) use this however, it is also very prominant in Yi Chuan and HIGHLY developed in Li Hu, Pa Fa. Also, now that I'm slowly starting to "Get it", I can see how the mechanics actually do multiply force and power, where as the external mechanics mearly transfer power from the lower body to add to the powere generated by the upper body. Both are FAR better than hitting with the arms alone, but powere multiplcation is going to be stronger than a mear power transfer.
No offense but I think Sifu Livingston's comment may show a little ignorance of what he does, at least in part. In combat I don't see either as being more effective.
Reply]
Again, I dissagree. I feel the internal arts ARE more combat effective, for several reasons. The most ovbious should be the fact that they are graduate courses of study. Because they have longer learning curves they are usually not taught to beginners. Genrally a beginner is taught an external art, like Long Fist. Once they top out with that, an animal style is nessasary to take them to the next level. Once they top out with the animal style only the internal arts allow the practitoner to continue advancing. By the time a student gets to that point they are VERY familliar with the world of combat, and they are taught to use thier internal art to exploit the weaknesses of the previously learned external arts. Remember it's thier intimate understanding of the external systems that allows them to do this and have superior internal combat skills. If they had just learned an internal art alone they would not be able to do this, infact since internal arts have such a long learning curve it could be argued that learning an internal art on it's own would actually put you at a DISadvantage because you would not have the foundation nesassary to sucsessfully apply it against the external arts due your lack of experiance in them.

The way "I" researched and drew a conclusion is, studing Daoism, Daoist monks use every aspect of live to understand the Dao. Martial arts are no different, their main purpose of practiceing martial arts was the same as the reason for practicing qigong. The reason mechanics are so important in "internal" arts is to ease "internal friction" it's about aligning the body and meridians in such a way that the flow through the meridian is free. In Daoism(internal alcamey) qi is very important in reaching enlightenment and everything they do in martial arts is to enhance qi flow to reach enlightenment.
Reply]
YES!!!, THAT is why they are more powerful!!!
Buddhist's on the other hand beleive the mind is the most important and don't focus on the qi as much. In fighting ability they are equal but as far as qi is conserned Daoist arts(or based on the philosophy) are more conserened with controlling the qi. Qi in fighting has been "exagerated" by some of the stories and legends of the martial arts. Just cause you learn an internal art doesn't mean you can fight better but maybe mentally you could gain more. Still though it depends on your goals.
Reply]
True, just because you learn an internal art does NOT mean you can fight better, especially when you factor in the longer learning curve of internal arts. remember, the internal arts are graduate courses of study. to get the most out of them, you still NEED a strong external foundation.

: I think I got off track but it'll have to wait cause I just got some food.
Reply]
Food is good, infact I think I'll go snack right now myself!!!
RD


Shaolin Dynasty

Ok, let's try this. Find me recent proof of internal guys fighting superior to external guys. It can't be done, they both win and lose from time to time meaning they are on average equal. Also I have never heard of your "progression" from longfist to animal to internal. Y'know this is a good topic, so good infact, I think I'll post this stuff on KFO or maybe just link to here.




Ok guys so that's how it began now please feel free to add some thoughts or whatever you can. I think even though we may be beating a dead horse we can add some new info. So post away!

[Leonidas]

What i wanna know is exactly how studying an Internal art would help you fight better in the long run? Is it the Fa-jing. I bet if someone mastered Longfist or an animal style they would know the movements so well that they could fight just like an Internal MAist. What i'm trying to get at is if someone practiced a style for 20 years just like Internal Masters do, they would eventually know exactly whats works and what doesn't. He would have a clear understanding of how to put his art to better use. He'd be more efficient. Better movements and mechanics. Things like that. I think one thing that the Internal arts have going for them is the the way they train and the theories behind it. Not many animal imitative techniques but based on human movements . Bagua for example. Known for dissapearing, just practice circle walking a few thousand times and you'll do the same Has nothing to do with chi. What about Xingyi, known for it's simple yet crushing attacks. If you practiced a straight punch a few thousand times wouldn't you be known for your attacks too. There just really good ways to fight, which makes it effortless. I think it all has to do with skill levels. Besides some people have more potential then others. Every single style ever created has atleast one Grandmaster who was never defeated.........I hope that made alittle sense.

[Braden]

Casting aside the argument about which is 'better' for a moment, the underlying question is - do the two categories describe some fundamental difference in training and/or application, other than historical connection?

I believe the answer to this is yes, and RD has alluded to some of the reasons for this.

[Paul]

I have this gut feeling that it is probably much easier to find a good external school than a good internal school.

In my personal opinion the internal arts are boring as hell to learn, I tried Hsing-I and it bored the crap out of me. I can't even imagine how mind numbingly boring Tai-chi would be. I guess if you have that kind of patience you deserve some kind of reward at the end. Jesus.

[Felipe Bido]

Yeah, they could be boring, but it all depends on the school. If you are in a Xingyi school, for example, that only teaches you forms, and makes you repeat them over and over again, you'll be bored to death. But if you find a school where they teach you the forms, along with explanations and drills, combined with applications and techniques, everyday of practice will be an experience of discovery and "fun".

[No_Know]

If there is a better, if you don't understand then which is better wouldn't matter.

I get the perception that you are looking for a, the best. And think that if you do that you can be great or the greatest. Harvard or junior college, once you are accepted, It is up to you. Grow-up with hunger and death live your Heart. Become a Popular music Icon. Get involved in a group activity. Your will and conciousness cast a mold of leadership. Become financially well-off. Or merely feed your family or help others who can't see Hope or Care.

Cultures don't tend to state that Humans created the Earth, yet you do make the World in which you live. Some-such, some might say.

Better doesn't matter. It's preference based on comprehension. Do with what you have and are willing to obtain. One Is limited by One's Imagination. Be Imaginative.-Ernie Moore Jr.

[Shaolindynasty]

I beleive they are different but is one better than the other? In theroy internal stylists make good arguements cause of their indepth knowledge of what they do but in combat I don't really see they kicking external @$$. I also don't beleive the internalists have the monopoly on generating power and example would be Bruce Lee. H was definatly an external stylist but look at his inch punch or his side kick, he generated a great deal of power. I personally don't like the catagories of internal and external cause every system generates power differently. I am sure hsing Yi, Bagua, and Taichi all generate a little differently and so do all the external styles. I beleive in qi so thats not an issue with me. Let me say this, as far as "internal" methods go I have never seen anything to prove to me that the "inernal" styles are any more advanced than the "external" styles. People on these boards say how the wing chun guys are egotistical but I don't think most of the internal guys are any better. Qi development doesn't make you invincible.

[Braden]

I don't think anyone is really interested in proving that one category is 'better' than the other - most notably because there are so many variables involved that the term 'better' becomes utterly meaningless. That's why the phrase 'comparing apples and oranges' came about. Is 8 higher than 7? Yes, that is clear. Are apples better than oranges? That's just a ridiculous question. But it's the same one that's posed here.

I personally love the methods of baguazhang. They're 'fun' to do. But I enjoy alot of wierd stuff. I can certainly see why people wouldn't like them. But to each their own.

[Shaolindynasty]

RD's point was that internal was more advanced than external, he put it like internal was college level while external was elementary. My Point was that they are different and that's all, I don't even like those catagories. I just stated to him that with all their "advanced/superior principles" they seem pretty equal to the so called external styles in combat.

[Royal Dragon]

Actually, if you go to my site and re read the conversation, I agreed that the internal arts were not much better at fighting "IF" that's all you learned. I explained that it's a progressive thing. My experiance tells me that external styles top out. By than I mean after a wile you just can't get any better. THIS is when the internal arts come into play because after you top out, the internal arts can take you further, and infact teach you how to defete your original art. It's just like you can't skip High school, and go directly to college. If you did, you'd be lost and unable to comprehend what was going on due to a total lack of foundation.


Your intimate undestanding of your primary art is essential for this, in my opinion. By knowing it so well, you are able to identify it's weakneses and use the internal arts to exploite them.

Also, I have increased my hitting power quite noticalbly by just getting the internal mechanics to come together (and I really suck at it). If I go back to the "Old" way I hit, I'm still the same as before, but when I do it the new internal way, I'm hitting way harder. So there HAS to be something to it.

RD

[Shaolindynasty]

Maybe it's that the different mechanics suit you, not that they are more advanced. Your analogy is kinda hard to understand so sorry if I didn't get your original point. I think a better way to say it would be each "catagroy" is counter from the other so by learning internal you will know how to deal with external and vis versa. But still how does that make the "internal" methods better?



p.s. I pasted the original conversation in the first post.

[lightfoot]

Just wanted to say thanks to SD for starting this thread. My knowledge is well below the others who have posted but this is exactly the kind of topic I come to this board to see.

[Renlei]

In my experience I have studied Hung Gar and also study Taiji. I have found that Hung Gar is a very internal art, and believe that all external systems have some form of internal training. Bruce Lee had studied Wing Chun which again is an internal art. Most internal arts fight externally. They concerntrate on the internal to build the chi, and generate the power for the strike. To say that an Internal stylist can beat an external stylist, well that comes down to the practitioner.
Excellent post.
Regards,

Renlei.

[Bak Mei]

There is a distinction, you can label them how ever you want, but there is a difference between arts like Hung Gar and Cho Li Fut and Ba Gua.

Now internal and external are just names, but they are pretty good names for the differences.

Internal = healthier: Proper body alignment, proper chi gong, proper organ massage, ect.

Internal = better fighting principles: never strength vs. strenght. One can not fight the bigger man this way. I know every style claims they do not use strenght against strenght, but then turn to dynamic tension in their forms, and a lot of technique relying on shear strenght.

There's nothing wrong with those arts. They can turn you into a good fighter, make you healthy, unless practiced wrong (I woulda rgue that S. Mantis breathing could be very dangerous if practiced wrong). Unfortunately, most things in life have degrees. It would be very PR if I said I thought Wing CHun and Ba Gua were on the same level, but in my humble opinion I truly do not think this to be true.

Most Ba Gua masters have already mastered several external arts. Wise men do not down grade, they upgrade.

Biggest differences I have seen is body alignment, straightnening the spine, very affective when receiving force, drill first, the internal is with out a doubt better. I have studied Isshin-Ryu, Hung Gar and Wing Chu, with pretty good lineage, as well as S. Mantis, I never felt chi until training in the internal arts. It is very recognizabale, its not a maybe I felt it thing. You know it when you feel it. Then it continues to grow, or at least for me -- more sensitive.

[guohuen]

Just a thought.
I basically agree with you Bak Mei. Perhaps you were'nt clear that our hung gar is both internal and external and trains soft and hard in your response.
Toney

[Kumkuat]

Originally posted by guohuen
Just a thought.
I basically agree with you Bak Mei. Perhaps you were'nt clear that our hung gar is both internal and external and trains soft and hard in your response.
Toney


wow, another external guy claiming his art has both. Surprise surprise. Soft does not equal internal. And some weird breathing meditation qigong like exercises with your fingers pointed in whatever direction does not mean your art is internal either.

[Shaolindynasty]

"Internal = healthier: Proper body alignment, proper chi gong, proper organ massage, ect."

So by that definition almost all of CMA are internal.

Proper body alignment: All styles try to acheive this, not all use the same methods but there alot of ways to do the same thing.

Proper Qi Gong: This includes that "dynamic tension" you were saying is for pure force training. Dynamic tension is a different method of qigong and is actually the bases for iron body training. You said you studied Hung Gar, I am suprised that you didn't know the purpose of "iron wire" training also dosen't Ishin Ryu have the San Chein form?

Proper organ massage: Alot of "external southern" styles use paticular shouts that corispode with certain meridians and organs. Some northern use wide twisting motions. So the "internal massage" is covered, and I fail to see how HsingYi and Taichi have MORE of this than "external" styles.

healthier: Didn't Yang Cheng Fu way like 300lbs.? Also aren't alot of internal practioners also on the heavy/fat side? I don't care how much qi you have, all that weight is unhealthy.


"better fighting principles: never strength vs. strenght. One can not fight the bigger man this way. I know every style claims they do not use strenght against strenght, but then turn to dynamic tension in their forms, and a lot of technique relying on shear strenght."

Again show me where they used these "better principles" other than arguements and the "1920 Najing tournament" which I have only heard about and never seen any kind of actual results for, in theroy it's good stuff but not better than other stuff. Dynamic tension isn't an actual fighting technique but a "proper qigong method". Alot of your "internal fighting techniques" come from/are in external styles............but they are called external so they use physical strength.:rolleyes:

"I never felt chi until training in the internal arts. "
So thank your current teacher and you found your method but it doesn't mean that the ability to sense or build qi wasn't in those other arts, those arts just may have been wrong for you and you couldn't "get it".

[guohuen]

Thank you for the distintion Kumkuat. I'm personally well aware that soft chi gong and daoyin breathing are not in of themselves, internal. I do small and grand circulation, four and five points breathing, skin marrow breathing, ect. I also develope jings without movement. I can apply all of this weather I am doing soft, soft-hard, or hard wuyi.

[bamboo_ leaf]

I don’t think either one is “better” I do think that what is called internal is not as available as many seem to think.

The first part really finding some one to show you the way and the second actually believing it until it becomes a reality for you.

In the US we are used to the idea of training the body. In some sports we use words like heart, and sprit, they seem to have a much more palpable meaning in the Chinese use of these words. Even the word sung (relax) it seems so easy yet I believe that not many really find it.

The new buzzwords “sung” “fa jing” “chanasijing” (silk reeling or twisting strength) “chi” some very hard and what I would call high level concepts. I have talked with older people who have practiced scores of decades on these concepts none will say that they have mastered it or even approached what their teacher had of it. Really finding some one who can do it may not be as easy as it would seem.

Actually believing it, this ties in with the first part not having anybody that can really do it its hard to believe in something with out experiencing it first hand.

Once found translating this into your own reality brings us back to the time and effort it takes.

I have met some people, even with the right teacher are not willing to give up their thinking they will make some progress but never reach the heart of the matter.


So I would say it’s very rare, the training, idea and usage is very different from most of what I read here.


Approaching these concepts through other arts might make them a little more assailable and understandable but not what I would call the same. At one point I too used to think that all arts would lead to the same place.

I no longer believe this. I think it gets down to what you want, and your innate ability to grasp and actually use these concepts. Many people will never get it but the training will still be good for them. :)

[TenTigers]

It's not the art, it's the person. It totally depends on whom you studied with as well. I know huge wing chun and Hung-Ga guys who teach their art the way they understand it-350 lb wing-chun,350 lb Hung-Ga. There is a world of diference between strength and power. These arts will differ between Sifus, depending on their own preferences, and also on their level of understanding. I have had the opportunity to have studied under quite a few Hung-Ga Sifus, and quite a few Wing Chun Sifus, and NOBODY teaches their art the same. I have seen people in the same lineage, same school with completely different understanding of the same art, and concepts. I have also seen teachers who due to the fact that they haven't been in contact with their own teachers on a rgular basis, drift and deviate so far off course that the art is unrecognizable. Some people teach things they themselves have not yet understood, let alone mastered, and the techniques, come out completely different than originally intended. I have seen people doing ch'i-gung with so much tension in an excercize that originally had no tension whatsoever(noi-gung), I've seen weird variations of Tiet Sien Kuen that are very abrupt and dangerous, combined with exertions that didn't match up withthe proper breathing/release technique (iron wire is actually more about the release)which will eventually-if not immediately cause damage internally. Then on the other hand I have seen Wing Chun and Hung Kuen Sifus that can generate such power with effortless movement, with a connection that ripples throuought their bodies that their energy comes in a wave, or a shock that jolts your entire body with what appears to br a mere touch. I've seen men in their late sixties that I am scared to touch hands with, because their lessons hurt like hell;-)-I do it anyway, hey, some things are worth the pain, right? Bottom line:It's not the art, it's the person.

[Sam Wiley]

Many people mention Bruce Lee to illustrate how effective "external" gung fu is without being aware that Lee learned Taiji from his father (Yang style, I believe). I have only heard of one instance where he demonstrated the form, and have never heard of any instance where he taught it. And although I have never heard that he studied it, it is known that he researched Bagua for a while.:)

[Ray Pina]

Bruce Lee's 3 inch punch is still a low level. I do not understand people's fascination with this crap.

One should be able to produce power FROM CONTACT; zero inches.

I did study Hung Gar, and I can tell you the "internal" of that art is not related, as in, completely different, from Ba Gua or the other internal that I am studying.

Everyone's internal -- I know, I know. But when I was studying Hung Gar, I was honest with ymself, want to call it chi gong, fine, but that is not internal if you are trying to compare it with the internationanly understood internal arts of Ba Gua, Hsing-I and Taiji. Want to call it internal, fine. But it is not the same, not even closes. Again, with Wing Chun, you can say Sil Lim Tao is internal, sure. So is tying my shoe. For real. You just didn;t have as good of a shoe tying teacher as I did.

This is what the argument always comes down to. All the styles have internal, just that your sifu isn't as good as mine. Do you think true internal is so easy to come by, that the average Hung GAr or Wing Chun Sifu really knows the complexities of internal. I say no.

To the "external" stylists I ask: why is your style internal? SHare your experience. Because I know most sifu will just say, "Yes, its internal at the higher level." Well, have you reached it, do you feel the power of the internal, in your every day life, in combat. Are you guided by your intention?

[Merryprankster]

I swore I'd stay off KFO for awhile, and I know nothing of internal and external, but I offer a view as an outsider:

Who cares? The real questions should be:

1. Is your teacher good?
2. Is what you are learning sound?
3. Can you apply it?

I'm sure that the "who cares?" comment will be taken by some to mean I don't understand the complexities of something or other and that's very likely true.

[Ray Pina]

What you said is what it really all comes down to.