Who Switched from External to Internal Martial Arts and Why?

[No_Know]

Decades ago the talk was about Chinese Kung-Fus, only which meant there were only three in popular knowledge- Hsing-I Ch'uan, Bagua Ch'uan, Tai Chi C'huan. That some blended things came-out or people didn't know what the terms were referring to and so made-up or interpreted for them selves the meanings. Internal or External Are labels, to how the practice begins, if it switches later is not in the mix.

No Know

[Miqi]

Decades ago the talk was about Chinese Kung-Fus, only which meant there were only three in popular knowledge- Hsing-I Ch'uan, Bagua Ch'uan, Tai Chi C'huan. That some blended things came-out or people didn't know what the terms were referring to and so made-up or interpreted for them selves the meanings. Internal or External Are labels, to how the practice begins, if it switches later is not in the mix.

No Know

Deciphering your meaning is not easy - but I think you're issuing the same old chestnut that one begins with external and then goes to internal training. If this is indeed what you're saying then it just goes into the 'obscuritanism' box with most other 'definitions', in that it doesn't actually describe, mean or explain anything. It's just a trick of words that hides the fact that you haven't actually defined either term - it hides this by saying that you move from one to the other. What that move actually entails is never quite explained.

However, what people usually mean by this, as far as I can tell, is that they've moved onto a less strenuous training regime, but instead of acknowledging that they're now on their way to an even lower level, they pretend that they've moved to a 'higher' level of training, so called 'internal' training, lol.

[Dragonzbane76]

nice passive aggressive stance you have there.

[No_Know]

Miqi, thank you for trying to understand what I was saying. Deciphering my meaning. Let's try a more external approach...No. You took the meaning Wrong.

Decades ago External was only applied to Chinese Kung-Fus. Shao-lin kung fu, animal styles and the five families.

External kung-fus used, muscles dynamic tension and forced speed. Once these were addressed and mastered to some point. Including conditioning by bruising skin-muscle and calases to the skin. Sometimes needing medicines and ointments. There might have been training that got provided later involving softer trainings of breathing tactics, rhythm/pacing, relaxing.

Internal was only Hsing-I Ch'uan, Bagua Ch'uan, T'ai Chi Ch'uan. These start with a blend of moving and breathing or moving and pacing but certainly Internal started slow. One thinking-perception and familiarizing the coordination slowly makes a foundation of coordination. If one slowly adds speed so that later one moves fast with high coordination and deft action by start slow build on slow to add speed until one is very fast.

Internal might have trained relax with attack. Relax with block. This reduces damage taken and means a person can fight longer.

But Internal was specific. External was specific . Later people seemed to use the words but no-know the meanings or back-grounds and made-up meanings. People who came later picked-up the made-up Don't-know-the-real-answer meanings and we are where we are with philosophical views using what was once general definite terms, applying them to styles that were not talked about nor originally included. And if styles were created recently (thirty years or so) they are of course different and should not be compared or described with the older general terms External-Internal that was used for things hundreds of years old.

[ShaolinDan]

nice passive aggressive stance you have there.

That's the real taiji.

This discussion is one that comes up every few months. To me "internal" and "external" are just lenses we can put on our training. Just like sometimes we may focus on throwing skills and other times we may focus on striking skills, or one day work upper body strength and another day work legs... I can make my cross more powerful by doing strength training and hitting the heavy bag and I can make it more powerful by working on my body mechanics and breath control. To optimize I have to do all of it. Every martial artist works on all of these. The only real differences come down to proportion.
Usually we study "external" styles at my school (shaolin, longfist, eagle claw), today we worked taiji push hands. The skills are the same...just in the push hands, we work with a speed and a rule set that emphasizes structure, instead of one that allows speed, power, and adaptability to compensate for weak structure. Ultimately we have to have it all to really reach a high level.
To me the internal/external labels make much more sense as training approaches than as style designations...Shaolin kung fu is the classic example of "external," yet without internal work, it isn't real Shaolin. And, as Bawang will point out , "real taiji lifts weights."
Looking at the forms and jibengong, it's easy to see why taiji is considered internal, but after studying tongbeiquan for three months, I really couldn't tell you why it's considered an "internal" style...probably just to feel special.
But yeah..every martial artist should train speed and power, and every martial artist should train mechanics...so...?

[Miqi]

nice passive aggressive stance you have there.

Well, if something is falling, give it a push.

[Dragonzbane76]

Well, if something is falling, give it a push.

this argument/discussion about external-internal has fell over and been laying on the ground rotting for a long time.

[Miqi]

Miqi, thank you for trying to understand what I was saying. Deciphering my meaning. Let's try a more external approach...No. You took the meaning Wrong.

Decades ago External was only applied to Chinese Kung-Fus. Shao-lin kung fu, animal styles and the five families.

External kung-fus used, muscles dynamic tension and forced speed. Once these were addressed and mastered to some point. Including conditioning by bruising skin-muscle and calases to the skin. Sometimes needing medicines and ointments. There might have been training that got provided later involving softer trainings of breathing tactics, rhythm/pacing, relaxing.

Internal was only Hsing-I Ch'uan, Bagua Ch'uan, T'ai Chi Ch'uan. These start with a blend of moving and breathing or moving and pacing but certainly Internal started slow. One thinking-perception and familiarizing the coordination slowly makes a foundation of coordination. If one slowly adds speed so that later one moves fast with high coordination and deft action by start slow build on slow to add speed until one is very fast.

Internal might have trained relax with attack. Relax with block. This reduces damage taken and means a person can fight longer.

But Internal was specific. External was specific . Later people seemed to use the words but no-know the meanings or back-grounds and made-up meanings. People who came later picked-up the made-up Don't-know-the-real-answer meanings and we are where we are with philosophical views using what was once general definite terms, applying them to styles that were not talked about nor originally included. And if styles were created recently (thirty years or so) they are of course different and should not be compared or described with the older general terms External-Internal that was used for things hundreds of years old.

This explanation is in the cateogry of "internal equals soft, external equals hard". I reject this explanation because it's so trivial - it makes the terms 'internal' and 'external' utterly pointless: they are simply euphemisms for 'soft' and 'hard', hence, one might as well just say 'soft' and 'hard'.

If, indeed, as you claim, there were people in the past who made this explanation and claimed that it was the 'real' explanation, then their insight was tirvial and pointless, and leads to nothing in the end. Or rather, it leads to the state of so called CMA as it is now - i.e. trivial and pointless, for the most part.

[Miqi]

this argument/discussion about external-internal has fell over and been laying on the ground rotting for a long time.

True - but I don't make any of those old arguments, nor do I have any truck with them. (I.e. my 'passive aggressive' stance). Those arguments were dead because the people wh made them followed training paths that were dead. But nevertheless, the ideas that they parrotted were reflections of genuinely useful ideas and insights, just waiting to be reclaimed with a bit of thought. However, as long as you continue to think in their terms (the dead, that is), then the terms will seem dead too.

[Miqi]

That's the real taiji.

This discussion is one that comes up every few months. To me "internal" and "external" are just lenses we can put on our training. Just like sometimes we may focus on throwing skills and other times we may focus on striking skills, or one day work upper body strength and another day work legs... I can make my cross more powerful by doing strength training and hitting the heavy bag and I can make it more powerful by working on my body mechanics and breath control. To optimize I have to do all of it. Every martial artist works on all of these. The only real differences come down to proportion.
Usually we study "external" styles at my school (shaolin, longfist, eagle claw), today we worked taiji push hands. The skills are the same...just in the push hands, we work with a speed and a rule set that emphasizes structure, instead of one that allows speed, power, and adaptability to compensate for weak structure. Ultimately we have to have it all to really reach a high level.
To me the internal/external labels make much more sense as training approaches than as style designations...Shaolin kung fu is the classic example of "external," yet without internal work, it isn't real Shaolin. And, as Bawang will point out , "real taiji lifts weights."
Looking at the forms and jibengong, it's easy to see why taiji is considered internal, but after studying tongbeiquan for three months, I really couldn't tell you why it's considered an "internal" style...probably just to feel special.
But yeah..every martial artist should train speed and power, and every martial artist should train mechanics...so...?

In essence, what you're arguing here is that 'internal' refers to 'improved structure', or 'working on structure' - which is a sub-category of the 'internal equals whole body power' bizz-phrase/explanation strand.

All of these 'explanations' are really just a shifting around of terms without ever really defining what they mean. It is not at all clear why 'structure' should be described as 'internal' - which tells me that 'structure' is simply one new buzz phrase that is replacing 'internal' as a rather unenlightening attempt to describe otherwise particularly unremarkable body mechanics in a way that makes them seem like something other than unremarkable movement that almost anyone could do. (Hence the need, so often, to have shills fly back at the master's magic touch).

[Dragonzbane76]

Those arguments were dead because the people wh made them followed training paths that were dead. But nevertheless, the ideas that they parrotted were reflections of genuinely useful ideas and insights, just waiting to be reclaimed with a bit of thought. However, as long as you continue to think in their terms (the dead, that is), then the terms will seem dead too.

passive aggressive and putting words in people's mouths.

I have no issue with your "search" for what ever truth's you seem intent upon. All I'm saying to you is that this worn out record has been hashed and rehashed. If your looking for answer there are plenty of old threads you could sift through and delve into mythic "understands" with shamantic voodoo, no ones stopping you.

[ShaolinDan]

In essence, what you're arguing here is that 'internal' refers to 'improved structure', or 'working on structure' - which is a sub-category of the 'internal equals whole body power' bizz-phrase/explanation strand.

All of these 'explanations' are really just a shifting around of terms without ever really defining what they mean. It is not at all clear why 'structure' should be described as 'internal' - which tells me that 'structure' is simply one new buzz phrase that is replacing 'internal' as a rather unenlightening attempt to describe otherwise particularly unremarkable body mechanics in a way that makes them seem like something other than unremarkable movement that almost anyone could do. (Hence the need, so often, to have shills fly back at the master's magic touch).

Well...I wouldn't use quite the same words, but...pretty much. As far as my experience goes, "internal" training method is when you focus on mechanics, breath, and mind...the things you train in slow speed. And "external" training method is when you work on developing physical attributes, strength, speed...things you train at higher speed. And, no, it's nothing super special and inaccessible. The term "internal" is what? Like 150 years old? Whoopedy doo...that's nothing in the time frame of combat.
Are you waiting for someone to say, "Please, Miqi, tell us, what's the real internal?" 'Cause it ain't gonna happen on this forum.

[MarathonTmatt]

Would it be fair to say that what people label as "internal" and "external" are found in all good Kung Fu systems and styles? This could potentially be any style.

One of the patterns, or keys, I think of from the style I train while reading this thread is "Turning like wheels." I do not consider this to be an "internal" principle or an "external" principle but simply a principle that must be observed in the training. It could be expressed in many techniques both offensively and defensively. But whatever the technique you need the proper execution and co-ordination to do it the "right way" (as others were saying earlier in this thread.) Without the skill-set, the kung fu is not complete.

[Miqi]

passive aggressive and putting words in people's mouths.

I have no issue with your "search" for what ever truth's you seem intent upon. All I'm saying to you is that this worn out record has been hashed and rehashed. If your looking for answer there are plenty of old threads you could sift through and delve into mythic "understands" with shamantic voodoo, no ones stopping you.

I am always looking for deeper understanding. However, in this case, I'm not here to ask a question, but to answer it. What I am saying on this subject hasn't been said before, in any of these threads - or if it has, it's been long forgotten and overlooked. And what I'm saying is the precise opposite of the voodoo shamantics we've had peddled to us for so long; what I am saying is simply that 'internal' means that a major apsect of your training should be ann intuitive exploration of wushu, following your own ideas, abilities, insights etc. and that without following that method, you will never really fulfil your potential. However, I wouldn't want to be accused of putting ideas into your head - it might make you might feel the need to tell me just what's wrong with me.

[Miqi]

Well...I wouldn't use quite the same words, but...pretty much. As far as my experience goes, "internal" training method is when you focus on mechanics, breath, and mind...the things you train in slow speed. And "external" training method is when you work on developing physical attributes, strength, speed...things you train at higher speed. And, no, it's nothing super special and inaccessible. The term "internal" is what? Like 150 years old? Whoopedy doo...that's nothing in the time frame of combat.
Are you waiting for someone to say, "Please, Miqi, tell us, what's the real internal?" 'Cause it ain't gonna happen on this forum.

I don't know what the 'real' internal is in that sense; I only know that all the other explanations are 'dead', and don't achieve anything at all. I only know that 'internal' is really just what Wang Xiang Zhai described as 'proceeding via intuitive practice'. I haven't waited for you to ask this, I've said it many times - but thanks for the hard taste on my ego.