Does anyone have a clear definition of the difference between "internal" and "external" when it comes to martial arts? This seems to have become a "buzzword" in recent years in Wing Chun circles. There are often entire discussion on the FB forum about whether someone's Wing Chun is "internal" or not. A couple of the decades ago the buzzwords were "hard vs. soft." From the way I have seen people describing "internal" and "external" though, it doesn't really equate to the same thing. Just curious if anyone has a good clear explanation to share.
Internal vs. External
- Thread starter KPM
- Start date
Martial D
Senior Master
- Joined
- May 18, 2017
- Messages
- 3,407
- Reaction score
- 1,156
You know, I really don't.
Over the years I've heard the distinction that internal means the primary focus is on one's own energy or chi while external means the focus is on the opponent, I've also heard that it means hard vs soft. Both distinctions seem fairly meaningless to me.
In the first case, both are important. It seems illogical to choose one and forgo the other. In the second case, likewise..but it is more situational.
Over the years I've heard the distinction that internal means the primary focus is on one's own energy or chi while external means the focus is on the opponent, I've also heard that it means hard vs soft. Both distinctions seem fairly meaningless to me.
In the first case, both are important. It seems illogical to choose one and forgo the other. In the second case, likewise..but it is more situational.
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
You know...it doesn't really matter...I use to get into long drawn out discussions/arguments about it, a few here on MT and after years in "internal" arts, and researching Chinese Martial Arts, I came to the conclusion that for the most part they are useless categories (with more than one definition) that have much more to do (historically) with a protest against the Qing Dynasty by Han people than they have to do with anything all that important as it applies to martial arts
But these days most associate it with a difference in training and application methodologies. Hhowever both (internal/external) end up in the same place if trained correctly. The saying goes...Internal goes to external and external goes to internal.
But these days most associate it with a difference in training and application methodologies. Hhowever both (internal/external) end up in the same place if trained correctly. The saying goes...Internal goes to external and external goes to internal.
A "non-MA scholar" invented the term "internal" at the end of the Ming dynasty (about 400 years ago) so people can argue with that term for the next 1000 years.
There is only right and wrong. There is no "internal" and external. if your don't have
- hand coordinate with foot, elbow coordinate with knee, shoulder coordinate with hip,
- all body parts start/stop at the same time,
- body push/pull limb,
- compress and release,
- bottom -> up, back -> front,
- ...
you are wrong whether you train "internal" or external.
There is only right and wrong. There is no "internal" and external. if your don't have
- hand coordinate with foot, elbow coordinate with knee, shoulder coordinate with hip,
- all body parts start/stop at the same time,
- body push/pull limb,
- compress and release,
- bottom -> up, back -> front,
- ...
you are wrong whether you train "internal" or external.
Last edited:
Cephalopod
Green Belt
The way I break it down...
External is the elements of movement and position that can be observed from the outside. Structure, angles of attack, speed and the like. As such, external elements can be demonstrated to a crowd or observed from a youtube vid.
Internal is the elements that are more inside the body and brain such as tension, intention, mindfulness, root and the like. You can include qigong if you're into that kinda thing. Internal element can be explained to students but it can quickly end up being a pompous waste of breath. It's really though physical contact in movement that the good stuff is transmitted from teacher to student. The student learns by feeling and testing to develop better proprioception.
It goes without saying that all good WC movement has both external and internal elements.
External is the elements of movement and position that can be observed from the outside. Structure, angles of attack, speed and the like. As such, external elements can be demonstrated to a crowd or observed from a youtube vid.
Internal is the elements that are more inside the body and brain such as tension, intention, mindfulness, root and the like. You can include qigong if you're into that kinda thing. Internal element can be explained to students but it can quickly end up being a pompous waste of breath. It's really though physical contact in movement that the good stuff is transmitted from teacher to student. The student learns by feeling and testing to develop better proprioception.
It goes without saying that all good WC movement has both external and internal elements.
Last edited:
Flying Crane
Sr. Grandmaster
More and more I have come to believe it is a meaningless distinction that is often used by people to imply that they have reached a deeper understanding. I believe that claim cannot be substantiated. While some people may actually believe their own spin, I believe it can be a deliberate smokescreen.
Meaning: “my Kung Fu is internal. Oh, yours isn’t? You don’t understand the internal aspects and practice? Well your Kung Fu is crap, then.”
I believe that is nonsense.
Meaning: “my Kung Fu is internal. Oh, yours isn’t? You don’t understand the internal aspects and practice? Well your Kung Fu is crap, then.”
I believe that is nonsense.
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
Internal and External Martial Arts first appeared in 1669 in the Epitaph for "Wang Zhengnan" written by Huang Zhongxi.
Cephalopod
Green Belt
They're just words, descriptors. No need to revere or resent them. Some people can sound douchy no matter what words they choose.
I do think that they are useful catagories in breaking things down for students. For example, a student's tan sao isn't working for her. Is it the external elements, the position of the elbow, the angle with respect to the opponent? Or is it the internal elements, stiffness in the shoulder, lack of forward intention?
That the way my mind works. But it must be said, I usually communicate using words like position and stiffness rather than external and internal. So that I don't sound too douchy.
mograph
Master of Arts
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,826
- Reaction score
- 1,026
I don't find the distinction that useful in terms of teaching or learning: I think that both terms are too general in an instructional context.
I do see Cephalopod's point, though: a useful distinction seems to be between what we can see explicitly versus what we can see implicitly. But that distinction refers to internal/external techniques/movements/acts, rather than internal styles, forms, and so on. Useful, that.
I do see Cephalopod's point, though: a useful distinction seems to be between what we can see explicitly versus what we can see implicitly. But that distinction refers to internal/external techniques/movements/acts, rather than internal styles, forms, and so on. Useful, that.
Is there any difference between "internal" and external when you train:
- hip throw,
- single leg,
- roundhouse kick,
- side kick,
- shoulder lock,
- elbow lock,
- ...
In another forum, I had asked people to put up clip for "internal" hip throw or "internal" roundhouse kick. It has been over 15 years by now. I still have not seen any of those kind of clips yet.
Also is there any "internal" sword fight vs. external sword fight? When someone uses his sword to cut you, how will you be able to know whether he uses "internal" force or external force?
- hip throw,
- single leg,
- roundhouse kick,
- side kick,
- shoulder lock,
- elbow lock,
- ...
In another forum, I had asked people to put up clip for "internal" hip throw or "internal" roundhouse kick. It has been over 15 years by now. I still have not seen any of those kind of clips yet.
Also is there any "internal" sword fight vs. external sword fight? When someone uses his sword to cut you, how will you be able to know whether he uses "internal" force or external force?
There's no difference. It's a label that labels nothing nowadays.
Internal = arts inside the Wudang Temple
External = arts outside the Wudang Temple
It has NOTHING to do with your Chi, or your Yi, or your relaxation, or your energy, or your techniques, or your footwork, or your breathing. It was a geographical term for practitioners of Bagua, Tai Chi, and Xing Yi.
Nowadays, the Bagua, Tai Chi, and Xing Yi crowd like to call themselves "internal" often to give themselves an excuse to be lazy in their training and move super slowly, not spar, and spend half of their time standing still and talking.
In reality, TRUE training for "internal arts" is the same as external arts: (Sparring, bagwork, partner drills, conditioning, push-ups, etc).
Internal = arts inside the Wudang Temple
External = arts outside the Wudang Temple
It has NOTHING to do with your Chi, or your Yi, or your relaxation, or your energy, or your techniques, or your footwork, or your breathing. It was a geographical term for practitioners of Bagua, Tai Chi, and Xing Yi.
Nowadays, the Bagua, Tai Chi, and Xing Yi crowd like to call themselves "internal" often to give themselves an excuse to be lazy in their training and move super slowly, not spar, and spend half of their time standing still and talking.
In reality, TRUE training for "internal arts" is the same as external arts: (Sparring, bagwork, partner drills, conditioning, push-ups, etc).
- Thread Starter
- #12
Do you guys realize there is an entire forum here at Martial Talk entitled "Chinese Internal Arts"? But I do like DanT's explanation. I've never heard explained in terms of geography before. That makes sense. Not sure how historic it is though.
Just came across this and thought some of you might enjoy it.
Just came across this and thought some of you might enjoy it.
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
Yup, because Xingyiquan, Baguazhang, Taijiquan, Yiquan/Dachengquan and Liuhebafa are all listed as internal arts...... And I have trained Taijiquan, Xingyiquan a bit of Baguazhang and a touch of Yiquan/Dachengquan.....but again...it is just a label, that has more than one definition. Wudang vs Shaolin, From inside China vs Outside of China, Taoist vs Buddhist, Han arts vs Qing arts, etc.
I also trained Police Military Sanda a bit of Wing Chun as well as a bit of Jeet Kune Do. And I see similarities and differences between all of them. Actually a lot more between Taiji and Sanda than either side of that equation is willing to admit and a whole lot between Xingyi and JKD that at least one side of that equation is not to comfortable with and to be honest I see similarities between Sun Taijiquan and JKD as well.
As far as the video is concerned, not so much funny as pathetic...but he has succeeded at one thing....he successfully taught his students to fall down on cue.
Last edited:
Cephalopod
Green Belt
Thanks KPM...it always leaves me with a deep existential sadness when I see a vid like that. Do people really waste their lives with these pursuits or are we just being put on by youtube mockumentaries?Do you guys realize there is an entire forum here at Martial Talk entitled "Chinese Internal Arts"? But I do like DanT's explanation. I've never heard explained in terms of geography before. That makes sense. Not sure how historic it is though.
Just came across this and thought some of you might enjoy it.
To a lesser degree many people come to the martial arts with ideas that are nearly as far fetched.
This may have been worse in decades past. I know when I first began training a so-called CMA in the 70's, there was a lot of magical thinking. Just look back at the old movie and TV representations of martial arts.
I remember one time we had one guy come in the door and address my teacher saying "Master, I haven't got any money to pay for lessons, but I want to be your disciple. You know Quai Chang Kane on TV? I want to live my life like that!"
This may have been worse in decades past. I know when I first began training a so-called CMA in the 70's, there was a lot of magical thinking. Just look back at the old movie and TV representations of martial arts.
I remember one time we had one guy come in the door and address my teacher saying "Master, I haven't got any money to pay for lessons, but I want to be your disciple. You know Quai Chang Kane on TV? I want to live my life like that!"
Cephalopod
Green Belt
You missed an opportunity, Geez....
I remember one time we had one guy come in the door and address my teacher saying "Master, I haven't got any money to pay for lessons, but I want to be your disciple. You know Quai Chang Kane on TV? I want to live my life like that!"
You too could have had a legion of addle-minded followers. Think of the possibilities!
An army of martial minions on some island fortress with a big laser cannon popping out the top...
...oh...wait...
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
To a lesser degree many people come to the martial arts with ideas that are nearly as far fetched.
This may have been worse in decades past. I know when I first began training a so-called CMA in the 70's, there was a lot of magical thinking. Just look back at the old movie and TV representations of martial arts.
I remember one time we had one guy come in the door and address my teacher saying "Master, I haven't got any money to pay for lessons, but I want to be your disciple. You know Quai Chang Kane on TV? I want to live my life like that!"
Wait...are you saying this isn't real
Flying Crane
Sr. Grandmaster
All I wanted was a friggin shark with a friggin laser on his head...
