If Internal Skill Is Internal, How Can a Form Have “Missing Movements”?

[Kung Fu Wang106]

You seem to be reframing my point.
Talking about how force is generated, not joint movement.
If the focus is different on your side, it might be clearer to open a separate thread for that direction.

I'm saying that force generation is not always needed. In other words, to address the difference between "internal" and external is not always possible in combat.

 

[isshinryuronin]

to address the difference between "internal" and external is not always possible in combat.

I am envisioning two separate flowing streams - one of "external" water and the other "internal" water. When they join together to form a river (combat) you cannot scoop a bucket of water from it and say which stream that water came from - they cannot be differentiated. Is this close to your meaning?

 

[Kung Fu Wang106]

I am envisioning two separate flowing streams - one of "external" water and the other "internal" water. When they join together to form a river (combat) you cannot scoop a bucket of water from it and say which stream that water came from - they cannot be differentiated. Is this close to your meaning?

An "internal" guy will type his keyboard the same way as an external guy.

If the difference between "internal" and external is power generation, IMO, power generation is not always needed in defense situation (such as you bend your leg and allow a sweep to pass under). So, to assume that if you train "internal", you don't need to train certain skills doesn't make sense. A Taiji guy doesn't know how to escape a foot sweep is no different from an external guy who doesn't know how to escape a foot sweep. If you don't train it, you won't have it.

If a defense skill is missing in "internal" training, you just can't say that you don't need it because you train "internal".

The label of "internal" doesn't give you any right to not train certain skill. "Internal" does not equal to "complete".

 

[Wing Woo Gar41]

Your opponent sweeps your lower leg. So, you move your lower leg. When you do that, your hip is not moving.

I think you are missing my point.

 

[Wing Woo Gar41]

I am envisioning two separate flowing streams - one of "external" water and the other "internal" water. When they join together to form a river (combat) you cannot scoop a bucket of water from it and say which stream that water came from - they cannot be differentiated. Is this close to your meaning?

This argument always just becomes an argument over what color the sky is. I see orange but you see blue, but we are looking at the same sky from two different locations. We are both correct in our observation and both incorrect if we contradict the experience of the other which we cannot verify.

 

[windwalker099106]

We are both correct in our observation and both incorrect if we contradict the experience of the other which we cannot verify.

True to a point…

What can be verified are the training methods, the theory behind them, and the demos people use to show their results.
That part isn’t just “personal perception” — it’s what the system actually trains and produces.

To study CMA and not look at this has always seemed a little strange to me.

It’s also worth noting that the question is almost always:
“Why don’t internal stylists do X, Y, Z?”

It’s almost never those asking:
“Demonstrating they can do the things they’re asking about.”

The unspoken assumption, it must be fake or exaggerated — or simply that “they haven’t met anyone who could do it to them,” etc.

A lot of people who were looking for something different found it through direct interaction with teachers who genuinely had those skills — through friendly testing, introductions, or simply when the teacher asked, “Do you want to feel it?”


Hands-on experience changes the conversation, because the method feels very different from how it looks on the outside.

In CMA there’s a saying: 內外合一 (nèi wài hé yī) — internal and external become one.
This only works after someone has developed the internal side enough that it can guide the external. Without that foundation, there’s really nothing to “combine.”

That’s why I asked earlier:

If internal skill is internal, how can a form have “missing movements”?

For me it comes down to the engine behind the movement.
When the internal engine is there, certain strategies naturally appear.
When it’s not there, internal and external can look the same — because the internal part simply isn’t built yet.

A lot of people trying to understand “internal” go searching for it through external means — adding techniques, polishing form, or focusing on what’s visible. Happens all the time. But it takes attention away from the qualities that actually matter in internal development.

 

[Wing Woo Gar41]

True to a point…

What can be verified are the training methods, the theory behind them, and the demos people use to show their results.
That part isn’t just “personal perception” — it’s what the system actually trains and produces.

To study CMA and not look at this has always seemed a little strange to me.

It’s also worth noting that the question is almost always:
“Why don’t internal stylists do X, Y, Z?”

It’s almost never:
“Can the people asking actually do what those internal practitioners are showing?”

The unspoken assumption, it must be fake or exaggerated — or simply that “they haven’t met anyone who could do it to them,” etc.

A lot of people who were looking for something different found it through direct interaction with teachers who genuinely had those skills — through friendly testing, introductions, or simply when the teacher asked, “Do you want to feel it?”


Hands-on experience changes the conversation, because the method feels very different from how it looks on the outside.

In CMA there’s a saying: 內外合一 (nèi wài hé yī) — internal and external become one.
This only works after someone has developed the internal side enough that it can guide the external. Without that foundation, there’s really nothing to “combine.”

That’s why I asked earlier:

If internal skill is internal, how can a form have “missing movements”?

For me it comes down to the engine behind the movement.
When the internal engine is there, certain strategies naturally appear.
When it’s not there, internal and external can look the same — because the internal part simply isn’t built yet.

A lot of people trying to understand “internal” go searching for it through external means — adding techniques, polishing form, or focusing on what’s visible. Happens all the time. But it takes attention away from the qualities that actually matter in internal development.

I very much agree with you. Wing Woo Gar is both external gung fu practice and training but is also separately internal Yang Long Tai Chi Chuan. Most students who trained, only trained one or the other. The few of us who were serious and able to engage the full system in our training eventually get that third thing you spoke of. Internal guides the external. The whole basis of our system is in the diagram. Both iron wrapped in silk and also silk wrapped in iron. Tai chi legs with southern gung fu arms. Most will say it can’t work. For most, this is true. Most will say this is inefficient training. For most, this is also true depending on your reasons for training. In my experience, not many feet fit this shoe. I often don’t have the language to engage in discussion on certain ideas and concepts that I can identify with. I appreciate these discussions on many levels. Often picking up quite a bit lately. Thanks.

 

[windwalker099106]

A lot of people trying to understand “internal” go searching for it through external means — adding techniques, polishing form, or focusing on what’s visible. Happens all the time. But it takes attention away from the qualities that actually matter in internal development.

I should also mention that there are a lot of cautions in CMA about trying to mix different methods too early — by those feeling they can having arrived at some small understanding

This was reinforced for me personally. I spent about five years trying to combine some of my past training in Tibetan White Crane with Taiji — trying to create a kind of fusion of both.

It didn’t work out.
More importantly, it deepened my understanding of why it didn’t work, although it took time to realize it.
Some people might be able to do it… I wasn’t one of them.


Until someone reaches a certain level, they often can’t recognize what they’re looking at.
After they do reach that level, the differences between their own method and another method they may have dismissed earlier become much clearer.

even among arts that are all considered “internal.”


A good example of this kind of “difference in method” is Master Wei Shuren, before he met Master Wang Yongquan.

" Before that meeting, Master Wei was already a respected Chen-style Taiji teacher. He felt he had reached a high level and didn’t believe there was anything more for him to learn. A friend told him about an old master with remarkable skill and urged him to go meet him. Master Wei basically said he was satisfied with what he already knew.

The friend persisted. Some two years later a reluctant Master Wei stood before Master Wang who was sitting down in a rattan chair. Master Wei was skeptical and it must have shown on his face. Master Wang waved Master Wei over.

Leaning back in his chair Master Wang asked Wei to extend his middle fingers. Master Wang grasped both of Wei's middle fingers by the tips, showed Wei that it would not be easy if not impossible to fajing him in this manner.

In the next instant, Wei was thrown back with a look of complete surprise.
For all his Chen-style accomplishment, he knew immediately he had nothing close to what Master Wang had just demonstrated.

So, on the wrong side of fifty, Master Wei put aside everything he thought he knew and started again from Master Wang’s method. "

it’s worth noticing that Master Wang didn’t fight him, wrestle him, or “test” him in any competitive way.
He simply demonstrated something that Wei could not do himself — a method he had been completely skeptical about before meeting Master Wang.

That one moment was enough for Wei to realize the difference.

 

[windwalker099106]

"If Internal Skill Is Internal, How Can a Form Have “Missing Movements”?

Some teachers, wanting to make the art more accessible for modern students, modified how they taught and created shorter forms in the process.

They didn’t shorten the forms overnight.
It took decades of teaching experience for them to understand what the essential movements were, and how to simplify the curriculum without losing the underlying principles.

Many also felt the traditional long form wouldn’t survive modern life because of the demands on people’s time, they created shorter versions to preserve the core ideas while still making the practice manageable.

Master Wei followed this same pattern.

As his students increased, he created a shorter 22-movement form that busy practitioners could complete in less time. Later, he introduced a 37-movement intermediate form. On paper this made things more organized, but it also ran the risk of students getting hung up on forms and “levels” instead of focusing on what really matters:

mastering the principles.

In the early days of the 22 form it was said that practicing it was equal to practicing the essence of the long 108 form — the version passed down by Yang Jianhou and now considered the advanced form.

The idea of “missing movements” doesn’t really apply.
Short forms were built around principle, not choreography.
If the internal skill is there, any form expresses it.
If the internal skill is not there, no number of extra movements will supply it.

 

[Kung Fu Wang106]

“Why don’t internal stylists do X, Y, Z?”

What's your explanation on this? Do you believe if you train "internal",

1. you will know how to do X, Y, Z by default? or
2. you think X, Y, Z is not important from "internal" point of view? or
3. you think X, Y, Z are important, but it's against your "internal" principle?

MA is used to solve problems. Those problems are giving by your opponent. You don't have any choice which problem that you want to solve, and which problem that you don't want to solve.

 

[windwalker099106]

What's your explanation on this? Do you believe if you train "internal",

1. you will know how to do X, Y, Z by default? or
2. you think X, Y, Z is not important from "internal" point of view? or
3. you think X, Y, Z are important, but it's against your "internal" principle?

MA is used to solve problems. Those problems are giving by your opponent. You don't have any choice which problem that you want to solve, and which problem that you don't want to solve.

You’re reframing what was said into your own set of questions.
None of those points (1, 2, or 3) reflect what I wrote or what the discussion was about.

Before jumping into your list, it would help if you explained what you’re actually trying to get at.
What answer are you looking for?

Right now you’re moving the topic away from the original point and into something different. If you want to have that discussion, that’s fine — just state it directly instead of recasting other people’s posts into a different argument.

 

[Kung Fu Wang106]

Right now you’re moving the topic away from the original point and into something different.

This tread is talking about "missing movements". You claim "internal" has no missing movements. I give examples that "internal" does have missing movements.

It's your thread. If you don't want any further discussion on this, that will be fine with me.

 

[windwalker099106]

This tread is talking about "missing movements". You claim "internal" has no missing movements. I give examples that "internal" does have missing movements.

It's your thread. If you don't want any further discussion on this, that will be fine with me.

I’ve clarified my point twice now.
You seem to be responding to something different than what I wrote, so we’re not discussing the same topic.
Let’s leave it here.

 

[Wing Woo Gar41]

I should also mention that there are a lot of cautions in CMA about trying to mix different methods too early — by those feeling they can having arrived at some small understanding

This was reinforced for me personally. I spent about five years trying to combine some of my past training in Tibetan White Crane with Taiji — trying to create a kind of fusion of both.

It didn’t work out.
More importantly, it deepened my understanding of why it didn’t work, although it took time to realize it.
Some people might be able to do it… I wasn’t one of them.


Until someone reaches a certain level, they often can’t recognize what they’re looking at.
After they do reach that level, the differences between their own method and another method they may have dismissed earlier become much clearer.

even among arts that are all considered “internal.”


A good example of this kind of “difference in method” is Master Wei Shuren, before he met Master Wang Yongquan.

" Before that meeting, Master Wei was already a respected Chen-style Taiji teacher. He felt he had reached a high level and didn’t believe there was anything more for him to learn. A friend told him about an old master with remarkable skill and urged him to go meet him. Master Wei basically said he was satisfied with what he already knew.

The friend persisted. Some two years later a reluctant Master Wei stood before Master Wang who was sitting down in a rattan chair. Master Wei was skeptical and it must have shown on his face. Master Wang waved Master Wei over.

Leaning back in his chair Master Wang asked Wei to extend his middle fingers. Master Wang grasped both of Wei's middle fingers by the tips, showed Wei that it would not be easy if not impossible to fajing him in this manner.

In the next instant, Wei was thrown back with a look of complete surprise.
For all his Chen-style accomplishment, he knew immediately he had nothing close to what Master Wang had just demonstrated.

So, on the wrong side of fifty, Master Wei put aside everything he thought he knew and started again from Master Wang’s method. "

it’s worth noticing that Master Wang didn’t fight him, wrestle him, or “test” him in any competitive way.
He simply demonstrated something that Wei could not do himself — a method he had been completely skeptical about before meeting Master Wang.

That one moment was enough for Wei to realize the difference.

This blend of Wing Woo Gar was my Sigungs system. His life’s work. I didnt know any different and was willing to accept the training as it came. I was fortunate. Only some of the students got this. Most trained either one or the other to exclusion.

 

[Wing Woo Gar41]

This tread is talking about "missing movements". You claim "internal" has no missing movements. I give examples that "internal" does have missing movements.

It's your thread. If you don't want any further discussion on this, that will be fine with me.

I don’t believe internal or external owns any movement to exclusion. I think that’s silly. If fist meets face the face won’t care if fist got there using internal or external.

 

[isshinryuronin]

All of the above posts are the reason I don't put much importance of internal/external or hard/soft concepts - it takes more energy to talk about it than to actually do it. One does not fight internally or externally. I think internal principles are expressed/manifested externally. As I see it, it's all part of the same thing. Perhaps I'd be a poor CMA student having such a simple outlook. The Okinawans are a simple people (that's why they have long lifespans).

 

[Same Trick51]

"If Internal Skill Is Internal, How Can a Form Have “Missing Movements”?

Some teachers, wanting to make the art more accessible for modern students, modified how they taught and created shorter forms in the process.

They didn’t shorten the forms overnight.
It took decades of teaching experience for them to understand what the essential movements were, and how to simplify the curriculum without losing the underlying principles.

Many also felt the traditional long form wouldn’t survive modern life because of the demands on people’s time, they created shorter versions to preserve the core ideas while still making the practice manageable.

Master Wei followed this same pattern.

As his students increased, he created a shorter 22-movement form that busy practitioners could complete in less time. Later, he introduced a 37-movement intermediate form. On paper this made things more organized, but it also ran the risk of students getting hung up on forms and “levels” instead of focusing on what really matters:

mastering the principles.

In the early days of the 22 form it was said that practicing it was equal to practicing the essence of the long 108 form — the version passed down by Yang Jianhou and now considered the advanced form.

The idea of “missing movements” doesn’t really apply.
Short forms were built around principle, not choreography.
If the internal skill is there, any form expresses it.
If the internal skill is not there, no number of extra movements will supply it.

If the short form is only to be done once/practice session then the very important ingredient - timeframe- is missing, and the form is reduced to be a mere information on “external” technical matter .

 

[Kung Fu Wang106]

One does not fight internally or externally.

internal = pure blood.
external = muggle (mud blood)

There is a huge prejudice involved here.

I hope someone can answer my following question and give me a straight and honest answer. Please don't say that "internal" people don't train technique.

I want to develop a good

- hook punch.
- roundhouse kick.
- head lock.
- hip throw.

Can "internal" training help me to do it better? If the answer is

- yes then why boxer, MT guy, wrestler, and Judo guy don't train "internal"?
- no then why should I care about "internal" training?

I would expect Mike Tyson should come to China and trains "internal". It hasn't happed yet. Why?

 

[Wing Woo Gar41]

internal = pure blood.
external = muggle (mud blood)

There is a huge prejudice involved here.

I hope someone can answer my following question and give me a straight and honest answer. Please don't say that "internal" people don't train technique.

I want to develop a good

- hook punch.
- roundhouse kick.
- head lock.
- hip throw.

Can "internal" training help me to do it better? If the answer is

- yes then why boxer, MT guy, wrestler, and Judo guy don't train "internal"?
- no then why should I care about "internal" training?

I would expect Mike Tyson should come to China and trains "internal". It hasn't happed yet. Why?

It’s odd that you don’t care or believe in it yet you always come into these discussions to ask the same questions that you apparently already know the answers to…

 

[Wing Woo Gar41]

All of the above posts are the reason I don't put much importance of internal/external or hard/soft concepts - it takes more energy to talk about it than to actually do it. One does not fight internally or externally. I think internal principles are expressed/manifested externally. As I see it, it's all part of the same thing. Perhaps I'd be a poor CMA student having such a simple outlook. The Okinawans are a simple people (that's why they have long lifespans).

Interesting, but not a surprising take from a pure karateka, which is a purely external art. Nothing wrong with any of that. Perhaps you haven’t found someone that can demonstrate the differences. To be sure, there are differences, whether you have experienced them or not. It’s not a case of Bigfoot or Loch Ness. Many people do not believe in parthenogenesis because they have not seen it or heard of it. It has been documented in Varanus komodoensis.