What is Internal, What is External?

[Matt Stone]

Just curious what definitions you folks out there in Martial Talk Land use to differentiate between the two.

I know the commonly held view, I know the original view, and I understand the differences and ultimate similarities between them, but I would like to see what others think/feel about this issue...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[Taiji fan]

interesting question...I won't give you the bog standard definition, I believe that at a high level of skill, all martial arts are 'internal' at lower levels when you are getting used to the movement and how to line up your body and feeling awkward then regardless of which style you practice then it is external.

[chufeng]

TaiJiFan,

That IS it exactly...


As a side note...

Nishiyama Sensei of Shotokan fame actually wanted his most senior students to learn TaiJiQuan to help them discover the internal in their art...Nishiyama Sensei practiced TaiJiQuan, but he didn't advertise it...He recognized the internal in the art and followed a path that would help him develop a better understanding of his art...

Thanks...
...you see we really are on the same track here...just explaining it differently...and NO, I don't practice Karate...never did...

:asian:
chufeng

[Taiji fan]

you see we really are on the same track here...just explaining it differently...and NO, I don't practice Karate...never did... well I did practice karate for a time and let me tell you those boys would have given my a$$ a good kicking, it was working with them that i did realise that they were good internal martial artists.....interetsing thing though they were also practising qiqong and and talking about 'energy' and body mechanics........its a funny old world:)

[East Winds]

Yiliquan1

Well done for bringing this discussion to a more appropriate location. And yes, I am convinced we are all sitting around the same camp fire. And once again if I caused offence, I unreservedly apologise. I was of course indulging in the classic IMA tactic of gently pushing my "opponent" in a direction he/she did not want to go, in the expectation of provoking a predictable response. But of course, if I apply too hard a push, then I lose the contest!

The relationship between the external and internal arts is not clear cut. In fact it is extremely complex. I have three external exponents (Tai Kwon Do, Karate and Lau Gar) who come to my Taijiquan classes to try and find the relationship between their own arts and the Internal arts and to try and make their external arts more internal. Will it work? I don't know. I don't know that you can pick and mix or mix and match. I think that cross-training is essential no matter which MA you practise, but others would say that it dilutes the original art. What's the opinion of others. I am hoping that the Lau Gar exponent (who also incidentally teaches) will write something for a Chinese Arts magazine on the subject shortly.

As for Zhan Zhuang (standing post), it can be used in a variety of ways. Health, strength or even "character building". We use it in Yiquan/Dachengchuan (Mind Boxing) to train the stabiliser muscles. Those muscles which we are not aware of, but asTaji Fan so quaintly put it, stop us pouring ourselves into a bucket.

As for the definition of an internal art, my master always claimed that an internal art was initially defensive whilst an external art was primarily offensive and that muscle power translated as forceful intent had no place in an internal art. And as you know, 1000 pounds can easily be deflected by four ounces of turning the waist.

Yes, lets get back to sensible discussion.

Very best wishes.

[tshadowchaser]

An excellent disscusion so far I hope you can get more responses. Thanks for putting the question on the board]
As for myslef Im not sure I can give an answere different from what has been given.
My guess is that you have to first belive in the internal arts for them to work for you where as as anyone can produce with the external power.
Shadow:asian:

[chufeng]

Shadow,

Yes and No...

Belief, in the sense that qi moves where yi (intent) goes.
It also requires a certain amount of relaxation in one's technique, so the training is a bit different.

But I've been hit by "external" stylists (who didn't give qi much credence) who were relaxed and focused their intent...they were moving qi, no doubt about it...they just didn't know it.

So, I think if the mechanics are correct and one moves with intent, one IS doing internal boxing of sorts...

This whole idea of internal vs. external is a contrived thing and oftentimes moves the two "camps" apart...when we should all be moving in the same direction; different paths, maybe, but with a single destination in site.

:asian:
chufeng

[yilisifu]

It's all relative. I had a dear friend, Mr. Sherm Harrill, who was a 6th dan in Isshinryu karate (he recently passed away). Sherm was fascinated with the idea of chi and we would often talk about it and I showed him some of our training methods. He developed some of his own methods and came up with his own "style" of Isshinryu that was, truly, internal! A light slap from Sherm would often cause an explosion of white light in your head and would knock you out - even if he hit you on the arm!

JKA Shotokan karate Master Hidetaka Nishiyama possesses great skill with chi although he trains in Shotokan (he has also trained in Taiji to help improve his karate).

I am old enough to remember when the martial arts media "discovered" the internal arts which they then termed "soft" (as opposed to "hard"- as in karate and so forth). This terminology led to a lot of misunderstanding...for instance, Xingyi stylists certainly don't appear to be "soft" at all!
They also would write articles about how these "soft" arts used no muscular strength or force; they used a mysterious power known as "chi."
Naturally, many of those in the "hard" camp thought this was so much horsepoopie.

Later, the media found the terms "internal" and "external" to be more accurate. So the classical arts of Taiji, xingyi, and bagua were termed "internal" and arts such as karate, taekwondo, Shao-lin (and it's derivatives) - pretty much most of everything else was "external." They inferred that external arts did not use chi but relied on muscular strength instead.
This also led to a lot of misunderstanding because ALL Chinese arts utilize chi one way or another.

This "hard vs soft" dichotomy doesn't exist in China (at least it didn't when I was there).

I would say that the so-called "internal" systems train to move FROM THE INSIDE and utilize the whole body in their movements. The so-called "external" systems focus on moving FROM THE OUTSIDE and concentrate primarily on moving the limbs independently of the rest of the body (as a whole).
Some "external" systems DO have chigong training programs (particularly those which are Chinese) while others have nothing of the sort.

I also believe that one who trains assiduously in an "external" method will ultimately become "internal." That is, hard (yang) ultimately becomes "soft." I have seen this in highly advanced karate masters who can make a very slight motion and send an opponent flying (or drop him on the spot).
On the other hand, that which is "soft" (yin) become "hard" (yang) as can be seen when an "internal" stylist makes a light slap and it feels like the blow of a sledgehammer.

Based on several decades of observation, I would say that it generally takes longer for hard to become soft than for soft to become hard.

Yang ultimately becomes yin. Yin ultimately becomes yang. However, let us seek that which is "wuchi"; that which existed before yin or yang. Therein lies the truth.

[arnisador]

Originally posted by yilisifu

I also believe that one who trains assiduously in an "external" method will ultimately become "internal." That is, hard (yang) ultimately becomes "soft." I have seen this in highly advanced karate masters who can make a very slight motion and send an opponent flying (or drop him on the spot).
On the other hand, that which is "soft" (yin) become "hard" (yang) as can be seen when an "internal" stylist makes a light slap and it feels like the blow of a sledgehammer.

Based on several decades of observation, I would say that it generally takes longer for hard to become soft than for soft to become hard.

This was a very interesting post, and it's going to affect how I describe "internal" vice "external" in the future. I can't match your experience but your last line corresponds with my observations as well.

[arnisador]

Thread moved from Tai Chi forum.

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-

[lhommedieu]

Originally posted by yilisifu
I would say that the so-called "internal" systems train to move FROM THE INSIDE and utilize the whole body in their movements. The so-called "external" systems focus on moving FROM THE OUTSIDE and concentrate primarily on moving the limbs independently of the rest of the body (as a whole).
Some "external" systems DO have chigong training programs (particularly those which are Chinese) while others have nothing of the sort.

That's a pretty good description. I would say though, that a lot of the "external" martial arts practice how to use the whole body.

I'd like to attempt a clarification: the practitioners of the so-called "internal" systems pay attention to how their bodies are feeling while they practice a movement. This involves an awareness of certain internal connections (also called "body mechanics") that are deemed more important than the ability to issue power right away. This is why progress is relatively slow compared to the external styles. The practitioners of the so-called "external" systems pay attention to the immediate and practical application of power. Athletic ability usually accounts for a lot here, There is also an appreciation of body mechanics (usually conceived in terms of structural allignment and leverage) but generally this appreciation is subservient to the actual results. This is why progress is generally faster compared to the internal styles.

[white belt]

The development in an external style towards eventual internal I believe I am experiencing first hand. I had some Bagua training years ago and am now a TKD practicioner of some years. I always noticed how loose my TKD teacher seemed and how his smallest of gestures carried a lot of force over the years. It's the progression pattern of forms, in my school, that helps this along in large part I think. After practicing Koryo for some time, I noticed/felt a suppleness not experienced since my taste of Bagua. My body was rotating more at the hips and waist. My spine was also snapping forward into my strikes like a willow branch or leafspring. When I went back to my lower belt Palgae forms, my movements started having a more explosive whip like motion and the other students were seeing it before I myself noticed. It is very gradual apparently. My arms feel like ropes with bricks or hatchets at the ends more and more. My center a catapult. My sparring partners were doing extra cardio to keep up with me. I mainly practiced my TKD forms. The relaxed development was allowing me to conserve energy in my sparring by not tensing up. They thought I was running everyday or something. Now some of them too are starting to experience it. If a person does not eventually surrender to the center of their body, I think they will hit a ceiling in their potential development and spin their wheels. The other Black Belt forms seem to be doing some interesting things to me too. Not too many pointers were given from my Korean teacher on this, but he always emphasizes two words, "turn" and "loose". "More breathing" is a mantra of sorts too. Are we talking about the same thing here guys?

white belt

[chufeng]

You are fortunate...so few (very, very few) TaeKwonDo practitioners figure this out...in large part. because so many start teaching too soon...but it sounds as though your teacher understands...

Yes, coodinate each movement with the breath...relax and only the muscles necessary for any given technique will come into play...you will maximize mass and velocity...further you will NOT impede the flow of qi...

Keep working on it...don't let the "naysayers" convince you otherwise; you are following the right path...

Good training

:asian:
chufeng

[Rich Parsons]

Internal Versus External

External is the use of the body and the physical impact?

Internal is the use of the mind and the spirit or 'ki' or 'qi'?


As a street fighter and a Filipino Martial Arts practitioner, I would have to say I have only been trained in external fighting.

We have been taught to use your breath to control your pulse, to breath properly to get oxygen to the body and brain. If you bring your breathing under control you can bring your heart rate under control.

Now do the following questions / examples represent internal?

While bouncing I knew there was going to be a fight, I would relax and exhale and allow the adrenaline to flow through my body. In this state I could move quicker than when I was all tensed up and 'Ready' to fight. I found this as a natural survival method / technique. Numerous time this occurred, so it was not a single event.

While test driving a vehicle and having someone else control the switch to lock up the brakes. I just reacted to the vehicle by the 'feel' of the body of the vehicle. The instructor seriously trying to lock the brakes and make it spin out, while the vehicle was on a wet surface designed for spins.

While learning a new technique, many times I need to close my eyes and feel how my body is working and moving. Once I understand how my body is moving then I see how the opponents body is moving.


Are these examples of Internal Martial Arts?

Thanks

Rich

:asian:

[chufeng]

Rich,

In a way, yes...

But you see, even though your trainingt was mostly "external" you were able to use "internal" ideas in certain situations.

Truth is, there is NO external or internal...it was a thing contrived in the 60s by American martial arts magazines...people who knew little to nothing about some of the more esoteric systems from China tried to explain, in their own limited way, how those systems differed from "hard-style" karate...

All Chinese systems utilize the development of internal energy...
All of the classical "internal" systems rely on some sort of muscle strength (you can't fight or stand if your as loose as a wet noodle). What the "internal" systems emphasize is a relaxed state of readiness...a coiled force ready to be released...brought about by correct body allignment and expansion of every joint along the line at just the right moment.

Yes. relaxation is necessary...
Yes, breath control and coordination are necessary...
BUT...the "external" arts develop these things too, just later in the curriculum.

I hope that helps...

:asian:
chufeng

[TkdWarrior]

I always noticed how loose my TKD teacher seemed and how his smallest of gestures carried a lot of force over the years.
hmmm i wonder if that's common in TKD on higher level... my teacher too hav this quality n he's just IV dan, his form looks like tai chi moving whole body connected...

just doing TKD forms with powerful flow makes u feel like doing tai chi(remeber i m doing tai chi too :D)
from my point of view on Internal n external is that they r bit different to start with but in the End they r at the same place... External becomes internal too but the question is how many of those externalist become like that??...
-TkdWarrior-

[lhommedieu]

Re. "All of the classical "internal" systems rely on some sort of muscle strength (you can't fight or stand if your as loose as a wet noodle). What the "internal" systems emphasize is a relaxed state of readiness...a coiled force ready to be released...brought about by correct body allignment and expansion of every joint along the line at just the right moment."

That's right. The first nine months of my Xing Yi training consisted of exercises designed to strengthen muscle and sinew; they're still some of the most difficult callesthetics I've ever done. One of the reasons is to build the body up in order to avoid injuries later on. Later on there is more emphasis on exercises designed to loosen the body up and to bring everything into proper allignment, but these are done after the initial set of exercises.

As far as "external becomming internal, etc." goes I agree that these are just names for a certain way of training and living in the body. I've met boxers, wrestlers, fencers, etc. who are, in essence, "internal" martial artists due to the way that they train and fight.

Best,

Steve Lamade

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by chufeng
Rich,

In a way, yes...

But you see, even though your trainingt was mostly "external" you were able to use "internal" ideas in certain situations.

Truth is, there is NO external or internal...it was a thing contrived in the 60s by American martial arts magazines...people who knew little to nothing about some of the more esoteric systems from China tried to explain, in their own limited way, how those systems differed from "hard-style" karate...

All Chinese systems utilize the development of internal energy...
All of the classical "internal" systems rely on some sort of muscle strength (you can't fight or stand if your as loose as a wet noodle). What the "internal" systems emphasize is a relaxed state of readiness...a coiled force ready to be released...brought about by correct body allignment and expansion of every joint along the line at just the right moment.

Yes. relaxation is necessary...
Yes, breath control and coordination are necessary...
BUT...the "external" arts develop these things too, just later in the curriculum.

I hope that helps...

:asian:
chufeng

chufeng ,

Thank you for the feedback.

I will continue with my studies, and also continue to read here, even though I know nothing of the arts yuo all speak of. Yet, I learn a little by reading here.
Thanks again

Rich
:asian:

[SRyuFighter]

I take Karate and it is a good mixture of internal and external.

[Kong]

There are plenty of qigong/breathing excersises in most styles of Karate. Mas Oyama had an extensive program for his Kyokushin style, and that`s considered one of the hardest styles out there!
Same with shaolin ("more chi!train harder!") and as mentioned earlier most if not all chinese systems. It`s interesting that the distinction between "hard" and "soft" styles seems to come from a western point of wiew.

[yilisifu]

Actually, the terms "hard style" and "soft style" were coined by American martial arts magazines back in the 60's and 70's. I remember it.

When I was in China, the teachers there refer to the internal arts as "neijia" rather than "soft." They don't understand why Americans call it "soft" because it isn't...

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by yilisifu
Actually, the terms "hard style" and "soft style" were coined by American martial arts magazines back in the 60's and 70's. I remember it.

When I was in China, the teachers there refer to the internal arts as "neijia" rather than "soft." They don't understand why Americans call it "soft" because it isn't...

I think the term soft and hard came about on how people saw the defensive blocking techniques.

Just bare with me for a moment please.

If your block is a 180 degree opposite direct of the attack and it is meant to be as offensive as the attack, this is hard. The impact is hard between the two opponents.

If the Block is a parry/slip or redirection of the opponents force then it is perceived to be soft. There is nor harsh meeting of the forces.

This leads to the description of Hard Styles and Soft Styles and those that are also Hard/Soft.

Just my own idea of how I have seen Americans describe systems.
:asian:

[arnisador]

Originally posted by yilisifu
When I was in China, the teachers there refer to the internal arts as "neijia" rather than "soft."

What is the literal translation of neijia?

[lhommedieu]

"Neijia" may be loosely translated as "internal family" is sometimes used by practitioners of Xing Yi, Ba Gua, and Tai Ji to refer to their similar approach to training.

Best,

Steve Lamade

[yilisifu]

I believe it was Sun Lutang who coined that term "neijia" when referring to the arts of Taiji, Xingyi, and Bagua. He passed away in 1936, so the term was coined fairly recently. Prior to that, the Chinese really didn't have a general term for these arts as a whole.

[Arthur]

I wrote a little piece related to this subject for a friend a few years ago. I never got around to writing the second half of it, but what I have I think might contribute to the discussion.

Here it is:



What is an Internal Art?
Arthur Sennott Copyright 2000

The word “internal” is probably responsible for more misunderstandings and arguments in martial arts circles than anything else. In a group of people who all have the same idea and definition of what internal means, the words use can be a quick easy way of delineating certain things. However, as soon as people, who hold different definitions of that term, try to communicate with it, all hell usually breaks loose.

The prevalent use of the word “internal” in popular martial art culture comes from Chinese martial arts. It has become popular in recent years for people in almost any martial art to speak of the internal vs. the external. It is spoken of, as though it is a regular component of whichever martial art has chosen to co-opt the term. In reality of course they are borrowing the term and then attempting to “superimpose it upon whatever practices already exist within their art.

It should be noted that virtually everyone, who chooses to speak of the distinction between internal and external, manages to categorize their own art as either “internal” or “half external and half internal”. No one ever seems to bother to make that distinction, and then proudly proclaim their art as being external.

So before we can understand the reasoning behind misguided “borrowings” of the term, we first need to look at what the term means to Chinese martial arts.

In current Chinese Martial arts circles, their are generally 4 widely circulated theories of what this means.

Theory 1)
Internal systems place an emphasis on the cultivation and/or manipulation of Qi (energy), as being of primary (or at least high) concern. While external systems do not have this emphasis.

Theory 2)
Internal arts place an emphasis on a certain kind of coordinated, whole body power. This power is generated through specific types of body alignments and mechanics that are inherent to the individual art, and common across all internal arts. This type of movement is not inherent in external arts, though individual practitioners of a particular external art, may come to move that way.

Theory 3)
The idea of “internal-ness” refers to a specific mind set and attention to ones self in practice and performance. Internal arts are practiced with a hyper awareness of every nuance of ones motion. A reflection of this can be seen in the fact that most internal arts include slow motion performance, as part of their curriculum. One should only move as quickly, as one can move correctly, is a major thought in this theory.

Theory 4)
The word internal refers to arts whose creation is solely from “inside” China. External referring to arts whose origin is external to the borders of China. As the Shaolin styles are based on Buddhism (which comes from outside China), and as they are rumored to be based on movements that Damo brought from India, we can see why an extremely ethnocentric country like China, would call them external.

Theory 5)
Well, not so much a theory, as it related historical and documented background. The regular use of the term internal being used in a way that refers to what we now know as internal arts, was a custom started in the early 20th century. The term Nei jia (Internal Family) was propagated by Sun Lu Tang and a group of his peers. History suggests that this may have been an early “marketing ploy”, to which we all now, put way to much investment in.

Of these different theories, come most peoples ideas of what the word “internal” means in Chinese martial arts. Different “camps” of practitioners will tend to agree on one or a specific combination of more than one of the theories. Generally any given camp will tend to think of a “camp” that subscribes to a different theory, as being hugely uninformed and deluded.

Arthur

[arnisador]

Yes, everyone seems to think their art is half-and-half!

I see you note that it is a distinction for Chinese arts only, but how would you classify Systema as fas as this goes? I've heard it described often as internal.

[Matt Stone]

In my experience (limited though it has been), the entire Internal vs. External debate has been mostly confined to the Chinese arts.

It seems that practitioners of all arts are fascinated with labeling and identifying their arts as something separate from everyone else's art... Everyone wants to believe, deep in their heart, that their art is the ultimate fighting system. Too bad there is no such animal.

Karate has what appear to be the hallmarks of "internal" training in many of the original Okinawan styles. Not surprising given their Chinese origins. However, Daito-ryu and Aikido are very "internal" in their approach (though I have seen some "external" aikido demonstrated and it still worked just fine...).

Bottom line, Internal and External are labels that really should be simply done away with completely. Getting rid of labeling methods like that would go a long way toward educating people more appropriately about what the arts can do, what they are all about, and how they should be practiced properly.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

[Arthur]

I see you note that it is a distinction for Chinese arts only, but how would you classify Systema as fas as this goes? I've heard it described often as internal.


I think that the true origin of the Chinese distinction revolves around theory 4 and the Sun Lu Tang issue. the rest of the theories are fun, but are really more of a way of making ourselves feel special than a useful distinction. Notice that only theory 4 has distinctions which can be arrived at solely on fact.

The others all fall under the "yeah we do that too" category.

A a Systema guy, I don't really feel the need to categorize what we do, however for fun I'll play along :)

Everybodies Systema is different, so I can only speak for myself. I know that the things that the main purveyors of the other theories consider to be core principles that define their outlook on the matter, I can do. they are a part of what I do. However, I lso advocate using physical raw, localized power if that's the most efficient thing for your survival. Those cases may be rare, but you need to be flexible enough mentally to not restrict your art based on the theoretical.

When fighting underwater for instance... a lot of the rules for Ground Strength vectors and the like go out the window. And while you may never need your martial art in the Ocean... if you do you'll need it more than ever. Quite a few murders have taken place at the bare hands of one man, while the object being fought over was a single life preserver.

So to us (at least me) its important that our operating System not be confined in application to ideal theoreticals.

Some Systema practioners emphasize different things as well, so it can be a bit tricky to get a read. I'm nt sure if I really said anything. Sorry if I didn't. Its a tough subject :)

Arthur

[arnisador]

Originally posted by Arthur
I'm nt sure if I really said anything. Sorry if I didn't. Its a tough subject

I'm not sure you answered the question but it was an interesting read anyway! I think you addressed it as well as it probably could be addressed given that it's a Chinese idea--the question was wrong in the first place.

[arnisador]

This page doesn't mince words on its style (Lau Gar Kung Fu):
http://www.stafford-lau-gar.co.uk/association/lg-classification.html

[Arthur]

Man I've got to get a new keyboard! Sorry about all those typos.

Thanks Arnisador

Arthur

[GaryM]

Originally posted by Arthur
I think that the true origin of the Chinese distinction revolves around theory 4 and the Sun Lu Tang issue. the rest of the theories are fun, but are really more of a way of making ourselves feel special than a useful distinction. Notice that only theory 4 has distinctions which can be arrived at solely on fact.

The others all fall under the "yeah we do that too" category.

A a Systema guy, I don't really feel the need to categorize what we do, however for fun I'll play along :)

Everybodies Systema is different, so I can only speak for myself. I know that the things that the main purveyors of the other theories consider to be core principles that define their outlook on the matter, I can do. they are a part of what I do. However, I lso advocate using physical raw, localized power if that's the most efficient thing for your survival. Those cases may be rare, but you need to be flexible enough mentally to not restrict your art based on the theoretical.

When fighting underwater for instance... a lot of the rules for Ground Strength vectors and the like go out the window. And while you may never need your martial art in the Ocean... if you do you'll need it more than ever. Quite a few murders have taken place at the bare hands of one man, while the object being fought over was a single life preserver.

So to us (at least me) its important that our operating System not be confined in application to ideal theoreticals.

Some Systema practioners emphasize different things as well, so it can be a bit tricky to get a read. I'm nt sure if I really said anything. Sorry if I didn't. Its a tough subject :)

Arthur No one (that I know of) practices or teaches The Systema here in Utah, however I acquired the tapes about 3-4 years ago and was quite impressed and have tried to incorporate much into my Kenpo. I feel that ultimatly it is based on taijquan. The stance is the same and the movements are very similar. The breathing is the same and both turn on the heels. Plus the training for much of the systema is in 'slow motion'. The manner of striking is also very similar (I.E. loose and whipping.) In the intro to the tapes it is stated that the Russians had to defend against invaders from China (which Russia borders).

[Arthur]

GaryM,

There is a guy named Joe Maredisch who use to teach in Utah. Officially he's not listed anymore, but he might still be teaching privately if you can track him down.

I know another guy who is sometimes in Utah, and while not an official teacher, can certainly teach someone plenty. there are also teachers in most tof the states bordering you. Feel free to send me a PM if you'd like more info.

For the record, Systema is not based on Taiji Quan. Systema has a nature that tends to allow it to "look like" anything people are already familiar with. Taiji people see Taiji, Silat people see Silat, Ju jutsu people see Ju jutsu. It is however very much its own art.

While it has things that are in common with each of thearts above, as well as many others.... it also has many characteristics that those arts would find to be "the opposite" of the way they think things should be done.

At any rate what Systema seems like from watching it, and what it feels like from feeling it are two totally different things. even if you don't plan on studying it, you should make an attempt to get to feel it some time. It's an interesting experience.

Arthur
PS to my eyes I see reflections of Ba gua, Yanagi Ryu Aiki Ju Jutsu and Roppokai Aiki no Jutsu... but its all systema:)

[Nightingale]

some cool info in this thread...

[arnisador]

Thread moved.

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-

[Kempo Guy]

Here's some of my thoughts on the Internal - External "debate" (I posted this on another forum):

"I was taught that Internal has nothing to do with whether an art is soft, uses Qi or what not. It has to do with how you manifest your 'jing', i.e. the issuance of whole-body power using proper biomechanics and being in a state of dynamic relaxation. IMA's (internal martial arts) also seek to develop the feel of a "united body" over strength, and uniting your mind and body to direct your "jing". One of the requirements during the issuance of force in IMA is using a unified body.

External MA then uses sectional power, meaning the body is not united in it's issuance of force. An external artist may strike using a lot of rotational power from the hip which generates a whip like motion to the fist (as an example). While the external practitioner may be relaxed during the strike (until the final moment of impact), the issuance of power differs from the 'whole-body power' used in IMA.

Of course one of the GENERAL differences in characteristics between IMA and EMA imho is the difference in it's application.
IMA's characteristics are to never issue force until you are in an advantageous position by trying to 'borrow the opponents energy'; sticking and following the incoming force vector; and lastly avoidance of direct contact (never meet power with power).

These principles hold true for most biomechanically efficient styles.
Just some thoughts from the cheapseats...

Also in regards to Qi/Ki, I believe it means 'life force', nothing more nothing less. Hence, without ki we would be unable to live. Everybody/thing has ki some stronger, some weaker."

Here's an addendum to the above in the same thread:

"I want to make myself a little clearer so there’s no confusion.

An external martial artists may shift his ‘whole body’ to engage a strike, but often uses compartmentalized power to generate force. When looking at issuing power there are definitely a couple of distinct ways it cam be issued. As discussed there are what I have come to call "sectional" and "whole body" power. When struck, you would very much be able to tell the difference between the two types of force.

Having a long Karate (Kyokushinkai and Kempo) background I can certainly relate to the 'sectional power' theory. For instance, many Karate and Kung Fu styles will harden their fist (ala iron fist, iron palm training). Now this is never seen in IMA as the focus is never on the striking weapon but on the connection of mind, body and the ground to generate the force. The fist/leg or what not just happens to be there to be used.

As many of you know, different arts have different training methodologies. However, how you issue power is quite congruous between most external styles, the same can be said of internal styles... (since we're using these labels for the sake of this topic). There definitely are commonalities when you break down the biomechanics of each 'branch' (i.e. internal vs. external).

As I mentioned, I don't like using the labels... but I look at the styles as biomechanically efficient vs. not. BTW, this by no means mean that one is more effective than another… perhaps less efficient?
Also, another thing I've observed is that most styles that fall within the biomechanically efficient systems (internal) are the focus on teaching principles over techniques, which may be the case of some Kenpo styles. Some of the internal systems may teach forms but most teach sequences of movement (kinetic chains) in order to program your neuromuscular system as opposed to external systems were they use rote memorization of techniques."

KG

[arnisador]

I definitely have the impression that many people think the internal arts are more "biomechanically efficient" than external ones.

[liangzhicheng]

Kempo guy-

I think that's a pretty good description of the differences between internal and external :)

[Pat]

I believe to understand the real differences between the internal and external systems, you have to train in an external and an internal style to a certain skill level in each. As in most cases, experience is the best teacher. Words do fall short at times, verbal explanations do help though. :drinkbeer:

[Kempo Guy]

Pat,
I agree. Feeling is believing. :)

But, I think there are certain principles that seperate the two which can be explained through writing. Trying to put these things down on paper can be quite challenging yet a great learning process.

I know it took me quite a while before I could verbally express myself regarding this topic. Thankfully I had instructors who could explain and demonstrate these things quite clearly. Of course having practiced external martial arts for the better part of the last 25 years and Chinese Neijia for the past four or five years has helped me clarify some things.

KG