Originally Posted by Hardwork108
What YiQuanOne is actually saying is that you are trolling this thread cluelessly, without a point of reference.
What he is saying is that he has no factual rebuttal to what i say, and neither do you.
Registered User
What YiQuanOne is actually saying is that you are trolling this thread cluelessly, without a point of reference.
What he is saying is that he has no factual rebuttal to what i say, and neither do you.
Registered User
A: Which body is better? The Taiji body, the XingYi body, or the Bagua body?To be honest and seriously speaking, I am not even arguing about the superiority of the Internals, I am just arguing that they EXIST, to start with.
B: If you can beat the sh!t out of your opponent, you have good body, otherwise, you don't.
Registered User
Like you pehaps???? BWAHAHHear is a measured study. You be the scholar and find a genuine Internalist sifu and ask him to thump you on your skull. It should not be too difficult to convince him, knowing your "charmingness".......
Read the original question moron, im responding to the original question.If you were really interested then you would seek a qualified master and ask him personally. The problem is that you guys are not really interested as you have made up your minds. So what you are doing here is trolling with your predictable clueless admiration of MT, BJJ and MMA.
No problem with that either, except for the fact that you should go and admire all that none- TCMA stuff in a none TCMA thread. Sounds logical, doesn't it? I mean it is not rocket science or Internal training, things that are way above your heads....it is common logic - go to MMA forums and pat each other's backs for discovering the "true" martial arts.....
Its on page 1 of this thread, the 1st one. Do you need directions?
Youve got nothing have you?Why should I show you measurable results? I found my own measurable results, if you were INTERESTED then you would go and find it, or at least try to and not in an internet forum but a genuine kung fu kwoon (if they let you in, that is LOL).
BWAHAHA! Will Jackie Chan be there as well!You could not beat a genuine Internalist if your life depended on it. That means you would get killed!
BWAHAHA! (again) And will i also be a marked man by the Triads?Listen, instead of talking BS from behind the safety of your key board, get up and go to your local China Town and spread the word that you are looking for some Internalist sifus and masters to beat up.
BWAHAHA! (you got the hat trick!) Stop it, im laughing so hard it hurts!No need to say, that you should write will before hand and make any organ donations and so on clear in writing. Actually, you could leave your brain to Science Fiction! LOL!
Registered User
Thats actually pretty funny Graham..... youre still a tool thoughHere are the five elements that we "CAN PROVE" from reading this thread.....
1. Horse dung
2. Cow dung
3. Sheep sh1t
4. Dog sh1t
5. Cat sh1t
These are five valuable elements that are needed when posting comments like has been on this thread. They are part of the "Kuen Sh1t". More readily available than the made up nonsense kung fu ones!
GH
Registered User
Thanks Simon.Bingo! Give this man a prize!
I personally, after practising a lot of martial arts, and reading a lot of books on the history of martial arts, the philosophical and religious traditions out of which they developed and the historical concept within which they developed began to doubt that "internal" was anything more than a modern appellation to three disparate arts.
Xingyiquan is a very practical spear art adapted to bare hands. The thrust-and-twist power generation that constantly comes up in Xingyi isn't a reference back to a byzantine Taoist yin/yang metaphysical dichotomy, it is how any sensible person stabs with a spear.
Plain And Simple.
Taijiquan, on the other hand, is pretty much indivisible from the Taoist metaphysical aspects built up around it. In fact, so much attention has been given to the metaphysics that it is entirely divorced from any sort of martial root, having become a good, low impact, method of keeping fit while practising meditation-in-movement.
Bagua is about half-way between these two extremes, it includes Taoist metaphysics but retains a fair bit of the original wrestling and locking content that it was intended for.
Circle walking isn't the wisest course of action on a battlefield (in fact it'll get you dead fast) but in a duel being to change angles rapidly could have been of use, suggesting that Bagua may have evolved out of gentlemanly duelling arts as well as a grapple / lock basis.
Considering the significance of standing locks and arm control to sword and knife practices this actually makes a certain amount of sense and, when perceived through this filter, provides a rational basis for how we might have ended up with something anomalous such as Bagua.
Please don't think I'm ignorant of the creation myths for each of these arts. I know them in detail. I just don't think them to be that relevant to discussing the actual evolution of the "internal" school.
So what do we have as "internal?"
1) A battlefield art - xingyi
2) A duellist art - bagua
3) A meditative / fitness / cultivation art - Taiji
Where do our references to "internal" arts mostly derive?
Why from the writings of a general on a well-rounded syllabus!
What social status did generals occupy in dynastic China?
Why I do believe they were gentlemen!
Who were expected to know how to duel? Gentlemen!
Who would be expected to practice personal cultivation? Gentlemen again!
Wow, surprising how that all fits together.
But these three disparate arts all sort of got blended a little, mostly in the last 150 years. A lot of the Taiji metaphysics rubbing off onto Xingyi and Bagua practice.
Fast-forward a hundred years more ant that "internal" metaphysics has started to rub off onto completely disparate arts like Wing Chun. It's not internal, there isn't anything internal about it. As with Xingyi, and to a lesser extent, Bagua, the apparent anomalies in how power is generated are actually things with rational explanations - the principle of the shortest path for instance.
However part of why Taoism has survived for 2500 years is because it is changeable. Successful religions and philosophies are. So, being changeable, it is easily adapted.
Somebody adapts Taoist metaphysics, drawn out of Taiji, to the power generation of a martial art and slaps the label "internal" on it.
What frustrates me is that by creating "internal" you create an opposite "external" which is defined as everything that is-not-internal.
My reading of the dedaojing is such that this is not the true Tao.
Only in the dissolution of opposites into unity will you find the Tao-That-Cannot-Be-Named.
Therefore the orthodox Taoist interpretation would be that there is no internal.
Of course, I am a crafter of beautiful lies that speak to truth. It is my stock in trade both to dissolve opposites and also to mislead in a way. So perhaps I am doing that right now.
Nicely written response, though you'll now be labelled an externalist now!
Registered User
Boy, some of you guys would make the beginners in my kwoon fall down from laughing! :rolleyes]
Dont underrestimate yourself.... youre making me fall over laughing and im not even in the same country as you!
Registered User
Well see, id say all of the above is your opinion. Thats fair enough, but it is your opinionBut, at least as far as Ip Man lineages go, the Siu Nim Tao is internal and not very different from what you said about the "meditation in movement" seen in Tai Chi. It is the base of all the movements that are learned in Ving Tsun. The idea that Ving Tsun has internal aspects is not something new from the modern day Ving Tsun practitioners, this idea has been passed down in the Kuen Kit for generations. In fact, I'm sure even various kuen kit from different lineages would agree with this.
[/QUOTE]I think the problem is that many people look at "internal" martial arts as if they require no work and build up energy that requires no physical power at all. That's just not true (at least from my experience). There's a lot more similarities between these movements than some may think:
Tai Chi
Shaolin (blurry but i chose it because it was facing the same direction as other two pics)
Western Boxing
just my 2c
So from your photos and comment are you saying, that ultimately, it all looks the same and gets there doing the same thing?
Banned
Spencer, now you know why I have ridiculed these people and people like them, for years.Y'know, for a martial artists you can be a real numpty!
Please, for everyones benefit, tell us where I have claimed to be an 'expert' in 5 elements??
You mean because I teach using the 5 elements? Or was taught how they relate directly to my Wing Chun learning?? You know this is all regarded as 'common knowledge' don't you? You don't need to have a degree in TCM to understand this, and those who proclaim to be experts, like yourself, sometimes miss the point completely.
Sorry for your confusion about such things. My experience is embedded in my Wing Chun learning whereas yours has come from other sources. Great that may have been for you, but I'm quite happy in my inexperienced, amateur understanding thank you.
How can anyone discuss anything with them when their point of reference is based on everything else BUT on genuine TCMA studies?
How can one put his point across when these people think that they have discovered the pinnacle of martial arts studies -and that pinnacle is unrelated to the TCMAs?
I mean, there is a man here who claims decades of TCMA experience who thinks baguazhang's circle walking is for the battlefield....LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL!
I mean, you couldn't invent this stuff....LOL!
Of course, the biggest mystery of it all, that is a mystery bigger than the Internals themselves, is why people with so much contempt, not to mention utter ignorance and cluelessness, as regards genuine TCMA methodologies, insist on posting in a TMCA Forum????
Could the reason have something to do with excess brain damage from too much external training?
Could it be that these people know deep inside that they don't have what it takes to study the Internals, so they vent their frustrations for those of us who take the time and make the effort to study methodologies that require more mental and emotional input?
I don't know the real answer, but I am glad that there are a few of us here who do our best to study the TCMAs the way they were designed to be practiced, and not the way some clueless wannabe instructor wants to "teach" for his own convenience.
All the best.
Last edited by Hardwork108; 07-16-2011 at 04:47 AM.
Banned
The factual rebuttal is our own TCMA training and the knowledge and understanding that comes from it. By the way, you get that from actually training it yourself, not from people "explaining" them to you on internet forums.......
Banned
I agree with you. The objective of arts that emphasis the External approach and those that emphasis the Internal one is the same - combat effectiveness. Some people can become combat effective through the External emphasised training and others can do so through Internal emphasised training.
They both exist and within each other. The Internal arts have external elements and the external arts will have internal elements. However, they represent different core methodologies and I guess this difference and the lack of comprehension of some as regards the Internal side of the equasion, is causing us to have this endless discussion, where we are going in cirlces all the time.
Banned
It could not be otherwise as you have as always some kung fu tagged glorified kickboxers invading a TCMA forum and telling everyone that genuine TCMA methodologies are "fantasy", "ineffective", etc.
This is in contrast to many actual TCMA practitioners or those who are interested in practicing them, who come to forums such as this one to learn about genuine TCMA methodologies from people who actually practice them with genuine masters and sifus, not at some "kung fu" Mcdojo, BJJ or kickboxing gym.
So, you end up with an unproductive conflict, where in a TCMA forum, the TCMA-ists put the case for genuine TCMA methodologies, while the kickboxers - who are NOT here to learn anything, that is they are here to apparently "teach"
Registered User
maybe it comes from the fact that one person prefers viable scientific proof that what you do actually gives better result then other training methods, while others believe in magicI agree with you. The objective of arts that emphasis the External approach and those that emphasis the Internal one is the same - combat effectiveness. Some people can become combat effective through the External emphasised training and others can do so through Internal emphasised training.
They both exist and within each other. The Internal arts have external elements and the external arts will have internal elements. However, they represent different core methodologies and I guess this difference and the lack of comprehension of some as regards the Internal side of the equasion, is causing us to have this endless discussion, where we are going in cirlces all the time.
Banned
Please show me where in this thread anyone has mentioned "magic", that is anyone who has actually practiced the Internals and not the glorified kickboxers who regularly make their (foot in the mouth) posts in threads such as this one!
Last edited by Hardwork108; 07-16-2011 at 01:47 AM.
Registered User
please show me any scientific evidence to suggest internal training produce better results
Banned
The only way you are going to find out is by training it or by touching hands with someone who has trained it, not by reading "evidence" on internet forums!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
