The difference is in how you feel when you're doing it.Originally Posted by Robinhood
Registered User
The difference is in how you feel when you're doing it.
Resigned
LOL - finally RH sucums to the urge to whip out his worn out old saw of "u don't know internal" - we cud tell he was chomping at the bit ever since Philbert closed the last thread; I'm surprised he was able to keep it in his pants this long
We all missed it, because he can't explain internal using his definition of bio mechanics, for two reasons, first he does not know what internal is, so how can he explain something he knows nothing about or thinks does not excist.
And second if he could do it or knew what it was, he would not be trying to say that it was not real.
It always amazes me that people can comment on experiences they have not had, its probably because someone else taught them that also did not have experience, and the myth continues.
I'm complaining to Gene - KFM REALLY needs to improve its screening procedures for new troll applicants - they just don't have the same panache they used to have here
Registered User
It looks like you are the troll !, complaining about other people, grow up, and stop crying about everything!.
I'm going to tell Gene.
Resigned
lol - RH needs new material; all he seems to b able to do is jump onto threads randomly stating how no one knows real internal, making pointed accusations without offering any substantiation for his comments, and when he is called on his TROLLING, he tries to flip it around and make it seem like he is the victim; pathetic...
Registered User
Your posts show what you know about internal, your internal is not the same internal I am talking about, as per MA internals.
I am describing internal application as describe in books like Tai-Chi Classics, you are talking about a religion or something else.
Resigned
a troll is not a troll because he says someone else is:
pretty straightforward, wouldn't one think? RH jumps into a conversation that has NOTHING to do with him, to spew his baseless statements that he can't even back up; seems like trolling 101, yes?
but wait! no - apparently I am the troll! what's more, evidently I cry about everything!!!
curiouser and curiouser...
(LMAO - u can't get entertainment like this anywhere else...)
Resigned
not only is my internal not the internal he is talking about, but
凸 囧 凸
Banned
What makes you think someone doesn't know what internal is simply because their view on it differently than yours?
We all missed it, because he can't explain internal using his definition of bio mechanics, for two reasons, first he does not know what internal is, so how can he explain something he knows nothing about or thinks does not excist.
And second if he could do it or knew what it was, he would not be trying to say that it was not real.
It always amazes me that people can comment on experiences they have not had, its probably because someone else taught them that also did not have experience, and the myth continues.
Doesn't internal arts teach about bettering oneself? If it does, then why are you so closed minded about other people's views on internal arts?
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, just like you are entitled to your opinion on him, but that does not mean you have to come on here and say "You don't know internal! I know internal!"
I have a signature.
Banned
Here is something to dwell about...
The term "Internal art" is less than a century old. It was created in the early 20th century to describe different forms of exercise.
You won't find a book pre-dating 1911 (I use this year as the basis because we are in 2011) that talks about "internal" arts. Sure you can find stuff about Taiji and Baguazhang and Xingyiquan pre-dating that, but they won't actually say "Xingyiquan is an internal art" in the material.
So why are people getting so wrapped up about centuries old martial art that wasn't classified as "internal" until less than a century ago?
I have a signature.
凸 囧 凸
Still waiting for you to address this, since you're so knowledgeable and all;
We all missed it, because he can't explain internal using his definition of bio mechanics, for two reasons, first he does not know what internal is, so how can he explain something he knows nothing about or thinks does not excist.
And second if he could do it or knew what it was, he would not be trying to say that it was not real.
It always amazes me that people can comment on experiences they have not had, its probably because someone else taught them that also did not have experience, and the myth continues.
Resigned
let me just state unequivocally, that if someone, anyone, wants to come and say "you don't know internal, and I can tell by what u post", that's fine - please show me specifically what it is about what I post that makes u so certain, and provide something substantive and specific to demonstrate where specifically I am in error; and hey, mayb provide some sort of evidence that supports ur own capacity to even make any statements about internal practice urself...
if OTOH, all u can do is say "u don't know it and I know it, just because", then what is the point of posting here at all? this is a discussion board - we are here to discuss - if u can't discuss, if u can only condemn, then there's really no point to ur presence...
Resigned
he won't; the reason is because
apparently, Micro / Macro Heavenly Circulation now has nothing to do w MA internals...
凸 囧 凸
http://www.nardis.com/~twchan/henning.html
The earliest reference to Zhang Sanfeng as a boxing master is found in the Epitaph for Wang Zhengnan (1669), composed by Huang Zongxi (1610-1695 A.D. but, as I pointed out in my 1981 article, the real significance of this piece at the time lay not so much in its reference to boxing but in its anti-Manchu symbolism. The Epitaph is the first reference in the history of Chinese martial arts to describe boxing in terms of a Shaolin or "external" school versus an "internal" school of boxing, originated by the Taoist immortal from Mount Wudang, Zhang Sanfeng.[4] While the Epitaph accomplishes its intended purpose of eulogizing Wang Zhengnan, it conveys two additional messages as well, one reflecting trends in thought on boxing and the other political defiance.
Registered User
TGY,
The Lurker would like to read what you have to say about: nxt time I'll discuss some of those woefully innadequate biomechanics in regards to how to define parameters of so-caled "internal" practice...
I am a fan of biomechanics, and I also don't know "internal", so if you could humor me with some information I would greatly appreciate it.
Oh, and by the way, the links in your signature are priceless. I've held forth very similar theories for years. Not being involved in the medical field, I've not had anything but anatomy books, accupuncture theory and my own guess work to go on.
These articles aren't proof of any kind, but it's still good to know that I'm not alone in this belief.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
