# Internal art observation



## Hendrik (Jan 9, 2015)




----------



## Hendrik (Jan 9, 2015)




----------



## Hendrik (Jan 9, 2015)




----------



## tshadowchaser (Jan 9, 2015)

I found these videos to be informative thanks for posting them. 
I'll need to listen to them again to understand them a little more.  Yep I can be slow at times.


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 10, 2015)

Yeah I echo that Hendrik. Basically I do struggle with accents, but I enjoying you're insight immensely. Keep them coming please


----------



## Eric_H (Jan 10, 2015)

Obviously I disagree with much of what Hendrik presents, but I'm still waiting to see any sort of application against a resisting partner to see if there's a grain of truth in all this hogwash. That ever going to happen?


----------



## Kwan Sau (Jan 11, 2015)

Eric_H said:


> ...but I'm still waiting to see any sort of application against a resisting partner...



I'm with Eric on this one. 
There is no doubt that in his own mind, Hendrik thinks he has discovered/uncovered something unique in his world of wing chun; but all we continue to see are examples of it being used in an unrealistic fashion.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 11, 2015)

Kwan Sau said:


> I'm with Eric on this one.
> There is no doubt that in his own mind, Hendrik thinks he has discovered/uncovered something unique in his world of wing chun; but all we continue to see are examples of it being used in an unrealistic fashion.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I listened to Hendrik for a long long period but then finally gave up.


----------



## wtxs (Jan 12, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I listened to Hendrik for a long long period but then finally gave up.



I did as you, but I really didn't give up ... did however woke up with the key board imprinted on my face.

An good sleep aid for sure, might try watching it with an tablet in bed.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 12, 2015)

wtxs said:


> I did as you, but I really didn't give up ... did however woke up with the key board imprinted on my face.
> 
> An good sleep aid for sure, might try watching it with an tablet in bed.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A broken clock can be correct twice a day.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 12, 2015)

I am a Taijiquan guy who dabbles in Wing Chun so take this for what it is worth

I will say I enjoy your videos and it is interesting to hear this applied to Wing Chun, although I do not completely agree with everything you are saying from the internal perspective

Video 1

"form is emptiness emptiness is form", I interpret that differently than you do as it applies to Martial Arts but that is the stuff of another post. For the most part I agree with the meridian discussion on video one. But there is a difference between locking flow , which is done with over use of muscles (tenseness) and blocking meridian flow and not done if things are at the proper angle.

Video 2

Internal vs external. First all arts if done properly end up the same place they just start in differently; Waijia trains to increase natural human ability and Neijia trains to change rather than increase natural ability. But in the end they both end up in the same place

I disagree with judging internal vs external by the amount of movement if for no other reason yi, qi, li. Mind moves qi and qi moves muscle and there is no range limitation on that, just watch a Chen style form, Loajia Yilu and look for the fajin and it is all internal and can cover some serious distance. Look at bagua and Xingyi as well and you can see great distances covered and they are all internal.

I do agree internal comes from the root and goes to where her you want it (power comes form the root, is controlled by the waist and is directed to the extremities.

Video 3

Wing Chun people may not like what I am about to say, but I tend to look at Siu Lim Tao as one of the best Qigong exercises I have ever done and it is very good a internal, external and fajin training, or at least that is my approach to it, but what do you expect I'm a Taiji guy that also does a little qigong.

My Taijiquan Shigong said the same thing about practicing in the cold but he was more concerned about after training, not during. You need to dress warmly after training in could weather so you do not get chilled

Again yi, qi. li; the mind controls the qi and qi controls the muscles so you need to think, but thinking to hard can hurt more than help because you cannot force it, as soon as you try to force it...you fail.

I think I understand what you are saying now when you say locked wrist and I agree with that as it applies to flow, that is if I understand what you are saying and you are talking about flexing and tensing. But I am a bit confused at something you said, I think you meant to speak about muscle tension but you said intension and there are many many teachers but present and past in Taijiquan who would disagree with you if you are saying do not use intension for this.

I do agree that you should not work with qigong without a teacher


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 13, 2015)

SLT trains you-period. Both external and internal.
I didn't get that from Youtube!


----------



## Danny T (Jan 13, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> Internal vs external. First all arts if done properly end up the same place they just start in differently...
> 
> Wing Chun people may not like what I am about to say, but I tend to look at Siu Lim Tao as one of the best Qigong exercises I have ever done and it is very good a internal, external and fajin training, or at least that is my approach to it, but what do you expect I'm a Taiji guy that also does a little qigong.


SLT is very much an internal training aspect of wc.
Like Vajramusti stated SLT trains you-period. 
There is a very strong gigong element within SLT and should be maintained as one progresses into other aspects of the system. Unfortunately many do not spend the amount of time in SLT to truly learn it. They quickly move onto CK never really learning SLT. They know the what the movements and positions are but never understand their bodies or what creates the movements and what the particular positions are used.
You will not find it on youtube but can with a knowledgeable instructor and time actually doing it.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 13, 2015)

Danny T said:


> SLT is very much an internal training aspect of wc.
> Like Vajramusti stated SLT trains you-period.
> There is a very strong gigong element within SLT and should be maintained as one progresses into other aspects of the system. Unfortunately many do not spend the amount of time in SLT to truly learn it. They quickly move onto CK never really learning SLT. They know the what the movements and positions are but never understand their bodies or what creates the movements and what the particular positions are used.
> You will not find it on youtube but can with a knowledgeable instructor and time actually doing it.


-------Agree. Unfortunately people just learn the sequence of motions without understanding slt.It's real problem with the spread of wing chun


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 13, 2015)

Vajramusti said:


> SLT trains you-period. Both external and internal.
> I didn't get that from Youtube!



I didn't get that from YouTube either


----------



## zuti car (Jan 13, 2015)

Internal, external , there is no difference , with a lot of training any given art will become internal . Using Chinese terminology and taoist and Buddhist proverbs to describe  "internal" practice is just a way to make things more confusing and present yourself as a holder of some special, secret knowledge . "Internal" is just a way to describe a level of someone's skill , how well someone controls and uses his own body , that is all . Western boxing can be internal as well as any Chinese art and that is easy to see in a way how experienced boxers generate power for their punches , it is a form of Fa Jinn or whatever you want to call it , and it is just maximized efficiency in using certain way for power generation and maximized control of the body , that is all . There is no secrets , no special powers and like someone said it is designed  to be used in a fight , if i does not work, then , it is a waist of time


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 14, 2015)

zuti car said:


> Internal, external , there is no difference , with a lot of training any given art will become internal . Using Chinese terminology and taoist and Buddhist proverbs to describe  "internal" practice is just a way to make things more confusing and present yourself as a holder of some special, secret knowledge . "Internal" is just a way to describe a level of someone's skill , how well someone controls and uses his own body , that is all . Western boxing can be internal as well as any Chinese art and that is easy to see in a way how experienced boxers generate power for their punches , it is a form of Fa Jinn or whatever you want to call it , and it is just maximized efficiency in using certain way for power generation and maximized control of the body , that is all . There is no secrets , no special powers and like someone said it is designed  to be used in a fight , if i does not work, then , it is a waist of time


---------------------------------------------------------------------Problems with two different posts-
1. Hendrik spams endlessly  with his perspectives which cherry picks through known wing chun  conceptrs and sells it with his own labels- snake body, prior,
force flow etc. again and again and again... making a laughing stock out of wing chun in many circles..
2. Zuti car's last post has some problems for me. Good movement can have
external and internal elements fused together. At one point taiji, baqua and
hsingI folks claimed they were the true internal art and others were external.
But if one avoids nationalism-several other arts also have a great deal of internal work. Lots of confusion exists on this point.Not a matter of secrets-
actually quite conceptual and empirical.
But not possible to cover it in short internet posts.

External work often begins with muscle and at some point people realize that it is not enough and begin to get internal. Some karate masters have been learning taichi for that reason-Kanazawa and others.

Internal work deemphasizes muscle work at first. With sufficient mastery of the internal- weapons work in taiji, baqua and hsing I -add additional strength .

Good wing chun has much internal work--dummy work, kwan and bjd are added only later. The YGKYM standing and one legged standing is wing chun equivalent of standing tree in taiji and yoga. And good wing chun training first involves control of the gravitational path and bio electrical energies in the first section of the slt.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater in internal/external discussion.


----------



## zuti car (Jan 14, 2015)

Definition of "internal" can cause a lot of confusion , different people have different ideas what is "internal" (and they all think they are right and others are wrong ) . From my point of view "internal " is just a term that describes biomechanical efficiency , certain way of using a body to achieve some goal (hit , kick , throw) . To put it simple ,the very basic idea of 'internal" means specific alignment of the skeleton and specific order in muscle contraction .This idea is foundation on which are built all other parts of "internal" arts , and each style has some specific approach and method of training , but basic idea is the same for everyone , and when i say idea i really mean idea , i am not saying that different arts are built on the same foundation . External is relying on pure muscle strength , body mass and inertia , like boxing , Japanese karate (with some exceptions) , ect .
Historically , before 1920's  external vs. internal classification didn't exist just like  "Wudang" vs. "Shaolin"  classification didn't exist .


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 14, 2015)

I haven't got involved with any "internal vs. external" discussion for a long time. Since this is 2015, I'll just add my 2 cents into this discussion.

The force vector can go in different directions in the 3D space. Most "internal" guys like to talk about forward force vector. How about

- backward  force vector? How will you use "internal" to pull such as to drag your opponent forward?
- upward force vector? How will you use "internal" to lift such as to lift your opponent off the ground?
- downward force vector? How will you use "internal" to press such as to drop your knee on top of your opponent's chest while he is on the ground?
- rotation force vector? How will you use "internal" to twist such as to throw a more powerful roundhouse kick?

When you apply those different force vectors, can you truly be able to tell whether you are using "internal" or "external"? What should an "internal" lift suppose to look like?


----------



## wtxs (Jan 14, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I haven't got involved with the "internal vs. external" discussion for a long time. Since this is 2015, I'll just add my 2 cents into this discussion.
> 
> *The force vector can go in different directions in the 3D space. Most "internal" guys like to talk about forward force vector. How about
> 
> ...



Partial quote from Zuti Car post ... bio-mechanical efficiency.

As to what should an "internal" lift supposed to look like, that's another can of worms ... as what does WC look like in most of REAL fights ... another can of worms.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 14, 2015)

There are multiple definitions of what constitutes an internal art as opposed to an external that range from a type of training to religions based on alleged Taoist Origin as compared to Shaolin origin.... it has also been used as a political statement against the Qing (see Epitaph for Wang Zhengnan. 1669)

One of the best defintions I have come across is "Waijia trains to increase natural human ability and Neijia trains to change rather than increase natural ability"...but if you really look at what that means...they are the same...if you increase you change if you change you also increase

Basically it is not all that important a discussion, they all end up the same place it trained properly so the only real answer to such things is shut up and train


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 14, 2015)

The issue often  is people who has zero internal training likes to play expert as know it all Internal master

Nope internal and external practice in Chinese martial art doesn't end up in the same place.

The western cardio type of training and the Chinese sink qi to Dan Dian type training are two totally different type of training and development


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 14, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> The issue often  is people who has zero internal training likes to play expert as know it all Internal master
> 
> Nope internal and external practice in Chinese martial art doesn't end up in the same place.
> 
> The western cardio type of training and the Chinese sink qi to Dan Dian type training are two totally different type of training and development


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
True!!!


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 14, 2015)

Spams?

Lol


I am presenting the facts of ancient Chinese martial art so that people like you who obviously doesn't know the topic can no longer mislead others.

Face it you don't know what I am talking about and never have the training.

Stay on topic . You would not like it if I have to pull out your utube or photo to analyze them in the open forum to show what it has and what it doesnt

I have given you face since kfo trying to be nice please not push my limit.





Vajramusti said:


> ---------------------------------------------------------------------Problems with two different posts-
> 1. Hendrik spams endlessly  with his perspectives which cherry picks through known wing chun  conceptrs and sells it with his own labels- snake body, prior,
> force flow etc. again and again and again... making a laughing stock out of wing chun in many circles..
> .


----------



## Eric_H (Jan 14, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> people like you who obviously doesn't know the topic can no longer mislead others.



Hello Kettle, I understand you are also black.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 14, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> Spams?
> 
> Lol
> 
> ...


-------------------------------------------------

A strange post.


----------



## zuti car (Jan 14, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> Spams?
> 
> I am presenting the facts of ancient Chinese martial art so that people like you who obviously doesn't know the topic can no longer mislead others.
> 
> .


What "ancient" Chinese martial art did you train and how long? I am practicing real Chinese internal arts , Chen Tai Chi and Zonghe Quan (and wing chun for a long long time), nothing you say is new, original, not even high level . Anyway , what about that museum address ? Your friend Jim refuses to answer although you said he knows the address and he will share it


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 14, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> The issue often  is people who has zero internal training likes to play expert as know it all Internal master
> 
> Nope internal and external practice in Chinese martial art doesn't end up in the same place.
> 
> The western cardio type of training and the Chinese sink qi to Dan Dian type training are two totally different type of training and development



I am talking specifically Chinese marital arts, (think Shaolin vs Wudang as an example) ..not western boxing so talking specifically CMA



Hendrik said:


> Nope internal and external practice in Chinese martial art doesn't end up in the same place.



You are wrong, they end up in the same place after years of training in Chinese Martial Arts


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 15, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> You are wrong, they end up in the same place after years of training in Chinese Martial Arts



This tell me exactly you have never being train in Qi and Jin


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 15, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> This tell me exactly you have never being train in Qi and Jin



This tell me exactly you don't understand Qi and Jin..... and sadly, for a minute there, I thought you did, based on your videos...


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 15, 2015)

1. You told me I was wrong. And I reply you never being train in Qi and Jin .  That is not insulting you but state my point of view.

2. What did I based on to make that comment? Chinese classic writing  in internal art. You certainly not train that way ,
otherwise you would not say  internal and external end up in the same place .

3. There are common denominator on internal Kung training on ancient China martial art, be it wck from the south or xing yi from the north. There are clear technical signature differences which could be traced. Thus, lineages, the name of grandmasters, who is ones sifu , how long one train .....Doesn't replace the facts or content of training.


----------



## zuti car (Jan 15, 2015)

Let me give you a hint about something you obviously do not understand , "internal" can be "hard" and "soft"


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 15, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> 1. You told me I was wrong. And I reply you never being train in Qi and Jin .  That is not insulting you but state my point of view.



And you are wrong there too, I have been trained. But I fully believe you do not understand Qi or Jin



Hendrik said:


> 2. What did I based on to make that comment? Chinese classic writing  in internal art. You certainly not train that way ,otherwise you would not say  internal and external end up in the same place .



I told you in the PM how I came to that, and that it was training, with teachers, and a TCM Doctor and translations of classical writings too as well as study of the history of it. And you certainly may have read some books, but you do not understand what you read. If you did you would see the silliness of the delineation and the elitism you seem to have about Neijia is nothing new, I had it once too, early on in my training, believe me, you will get over it.



Hendrik said:


> 3. There are common denominator on internal Kung training on ancient China martial art, be it wck from the south or xing yi from the north. There are clear technical signature differences which could be traced. Thus, lineages, the name of grandmasters, who is ones sifu , how long one train .....Doesn't replace the facts or content of training.



There are common denominators in internal trained but those show up later in external training too. You talk of Chinese classical writings, ok here is one for you from classical Chinese writing...internal goes to external and external goes to internal.... this is ONLY if trained properly and most do not train it properly. But none of this does not replace the fact that you are incorrect about it in some places.

You have not address any other statement or question I have asked in a public post or in PM you have only addressed this one. You have said that difference between internal and external is based on distance of movement and that is plain wrong you have talked about angle of joint being an issue you have said intent is bad and absolutely all of this is wrong but I wanted to discuss it, not argue not out right tell you how far off the mark you are I even tried this in PM in order to avoid a public response but you brought it here. You views on this are interesting and at times refreshing but in places you are simply not right and I am basing this on your videos.

Joint angle all by it self, is not an issue. Tenseness in the muscle and the joints is an issue. The issuing of fajin is not limited in it range, intent is INCREDIBLY important in all of this, thinking is important in all of this, to much thinking is a hindrance this is why I have, in multiple posts brought up Yi, Qi, Li and you ignored those and only came back at this point.

I was on your side at the beginning of this, trying to understand and some made since. some didn't and some was just plain wrong.

Is Wing Chun an internal art....who cares...shut up and train... I simply do not get where the need to be a neijia art had anything to do with it. Heck look at the history of internal vs external and you will see it does not even become a major issue until the Epitaph for Wang Zhengnan (1669) and it had much more to do with a political statement against the Qing than anything else and it did not even mention taijiquan, Baguazhang, Xingyiquan or for that matter Wing Chun. GO further forward in Chinese history to Chen Fake and he did not even care if you called it taijiquan, all he knew was it was his families style and he was darn good at it

Is Wing Chun a Neijia art..... who cares, shut up and train..... but by all definitions form classical Chinese study of it, including the history of Neijia and Waijia...it is not

Do I see a lot of internal in (小念头) Siu Nim Tao, heck yeah, to me it is one of the best forms for teaching the proper use of Qi and issuance of fajin.... there is that pesky yi, qi. li again with a side of Sandao (not sanda or sanshou but sandao)

Next I could list all those that disagree with you on this if you like and all are classically trained in CMA, some published and some still alive... but frankly I see no point in going further, you don't want to discuss, you want to tell us all about it and we are not to question....

再见


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 15, 2015)

Why made a simple question complex ?

Just describe what is Qi and Jin training and development with clear definition. That's all

You can continuous the I believe you don't know type of  ego stuffs forever and it never goes anywhere. 









Xue Sheng said:


> And you are wrong there too, I have been trained. But I fully believe you do not understand Qi or Jin
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 15, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> Why made a simple question complex ?
> 
> Just describe what is Qi and Jin training and development with clear definition. That's all
> 
> You can continuous the I believe you don't know type of  ego stuffs forever and it never goes anywhere.



Not ego my friend, I honestly believe you don't really understand, I believe you are working on it, but your not there quite yet.

And what simple question have I made complex? Please enlighten me, since you have not yet answered any of the simple questions I previously asked you


----------



## Kwan Sau (Jan 15, 2015)

zuti car said:


> Let me give you a hint about something you obviously do not understand , "internal" can be "hard" and "soft"



hahaha....I love it! Well said Zuti!  
I guess it stands to reason then, that "external" can be "soft" and "hard" also!?  

All you dudes are way more knowledgeable than I am; however, IMHO, knowing how your body moves, understanding simple physics, ranges of motion of the joints, how the joints/tendons/ligaments/muscles function in the development of martial attributes such as speed, power, force, pushing, pulling, etc...and...most importantly...one must completely understand Yin and Yang and how it applies to their personal expression of combat art. PS: do let us know what you get that museum address!


----------



## zuti car (Jan 15, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> Why made a simple question complex ?
> 
> Just describe what is Qi and Jin training and development with clear definition. That's all
> 
> You can continuous the I believe you don't know type of  ego stuffs forever and it never goes anywhere.


Can you give a clear definition of" Qi" . What is"qi" exactly ?


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 15, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> Not ego my friend, I honestly believe you don't really understand, I believe you are working on it, but your not there quite yet.
> 
> And what simple question have I made complex? Please enlighten me, since you have not yet answered any of the simple questions I previously asked you




1. Anyone can have their believe . That got nothing to do with facts.

2. Anyone who train in internal art knows it can't be external training.

3. You and I are not the standard reference. Ancient Chinese documents and  practice are.  Your description on internal and external doesn't fit the traditional practice.


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 15, 2015)

zuti car said:


> Can you give a clear definition of" Qi" . What is"qi" exactly ?




You live in Taiwan and let news paper there interview you as expert Chinese martial artist. You are the hot shot , so  tell me .


----------



## zuti car (Jan 15, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> You live in Taiwan and let news paper there interview you as expert Chinese martial artist. You are the hot shot , so  tell me .


Like usual ,  same tactics in order to avoid giving an answer . I asked you a very simple question , what is "qi", there is no right or wrong answer to this question, just your opinion . I am interested how you explain "qi" to your self, if you actually have an explanation . It is totally  ok, this kind of behavior clearly shows level of your knowledge .


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 15, 2015)

Folks,
Keep it friendly and courteous before some Moderator type has to deal with this.  You can disagree without being rude or insulting about it.


----------



## Danny T (Jan 15, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> Nope internal and external practice in Chinese martial art doesn't end up in the same place.


I don't claim to be all knowing of things external or internal however, I do know that Neijia training came from high level Waijia training. Neijia came from Waijia and they have the same goals long term even though the path and method of getting there is different. If the goal is the same and one came out of the other then they must end up in the same place.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 16, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> 1. Anyone can have their believe . That got nothing to do with facts..



And that is what I am saying  you are dong, you believe you are right, and on some points you are, but on others you are way off. If in fact in the 3rd video, where you commented on "intent": and said it was not good. If you actually meant to say "intent" you are very wrong.



Hendrik said:


> 2. Anyone who train in internal art knows it can't be external training..



And anyone who has read my posts knows I never said that, I never said they were the same, I said they end up in the same place. I will assume you do not understand what that means due to a language barrier so I will explain. They start differently they are trained differently in the beginning, but as time goes on and as one trains them and if they train  them properly they end up the same, meaning the person that trains them. And I will also add I have never understood some peoples obsession Neijia or the need to be associated with it.



Hendrik said:


> 3. You and I are not the standard reference. Ancient Chinese documents and  practice are.  Your description on internal and external doesn't fit the traditional practice.



I never said I was the standard and you keep referring to the Ancient Chinese documents that I think you feel you have exclusive right to read. But here is the thing I told you "I have read some of them" My teachers have studied them and they taught me. And all of this leads me to saying some of what you are saying, not all, but some of what  you are saying is just not right

So other than rehashing the same things over and over again do you have anything else because this is getting tedious


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 16, 2015)

Me, this thread is a little flamey now it would seem to me


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 16, 2015)

Let me see if I can redirect this to a more positive conversation.

I mean no insult by this but it is possible that you do know what you are talking about but you don’t know what you are saying. I deal with this every single day in my house; the use of the wrong English word or words or the misunderstanding of the English word by a native Chinese speaker that absolutely changes everything. I also deal with the reverse of that but then that is my poor Chinese and me mispronouncing or misunderstanding.

I can’t watch the videos again at the moment; I shall do it later and go from there and ask a few clarification questions and see if this is the case or not


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 17, 2015)

And that is what I am saying  you are dong, you believe you are right, and on some points you are, but on others you are way off. If in fact in the 3rd video, where you commented on "intent": and said it was not good. If you actually meant to say "intent" you are very wrong. ---------


I adress facts. Not believe.

Right or wrong is not up to you. Can you evoke the Qi and lead it? if yes, make a utube and share. If not why keep play expert when you are not?



And anyone who has read my posts knows I never said that, I never said they were the same, I said they end up in the same place. I will assume you do not understand what that means due to a language barrier so I will explain. They start differently they are trained differently in the beginning, but as time goes on and as one trains them and if they train  them properly they end up the same, meaning the person that trains them. And I will also add I have never understood some peoples obsession Neijia or the need to be associated with it.--------

They never end up in the same place. Anyone who has developed it knows. 



I never said I was the standard and you keep referring to the Ancient Chinese documents that I think you feel you have exclusive right to read. But here is the thing I told you "I have read some of them" My teachers have studied them and they taught me. And all of this leads me to saying some of what you are saying, not all, but some of what  you are saying is just not right -------


If you don't use yourself as a standard, why are you keep saying this wrong and that wrong?


----------



## zuti car (Jan 17, 2015)

Hendrik, how about your definition of Qi. For constructive discussion it would be good to establish starting point , to be clear on how you define Qi and what do you exactly consider internal. When we have good understanding of that maybe we can have some discussion which can go in the right direction


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 17, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> And that is what I am saying  you are dong, you believe you are right, and on some points you are, but on others you are way off. If in fact in the 3rd video, where you commented on "intent": and said it was not good. If you actually meant to say "intent" you are very wrong. ---------
> 
> 
> I adress facts. Not believe.
> ...



Hendrik

I was going to respond to this but I am still trying to redirect this back to a positive discussion

I will try this one last time..... please read my post #45.... it is directly beneath this post

                       Please read this








Xue Sheng said:


> Let me see if I can redirect this to a more positive conversation.
> 
> I mean no insult by this but it is possible that you do know what you are talking about but you don’t know what you are saying. I deal with this every single day in my house; the use of the wrong English word or words or the misunderstanding of the English word by a native Chinese speaker that absolutely changes everything. I also deal with the reverse of that but then that is my poor Chinese and me mispronouncing or misunderstanding.
> 
> I can’t watch the videos again at the moment; I shall do it later and go from there and ask a few clarification questions and see if this is the case or not


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 17, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> I mean no insult by this but it is possible that you do know what you are talking about but you don’t know what you are saying. I deal with this every single day in my house; the use of the wrong English word or words or the misunderstanding of the English word by a native Chinese speaker that absolutely changes everything. I also deal with the reverse of that but then that is my poor Chinese and me mispronouncing or misunderstanding.



Goodness knows we have enough misunderstandings between American English and British English without adding another language into the mix!


----------



## dlcox (Jan 17, 2015)

For those following that may not know, here are the 3 basic categories:

1. Qi (Energy)
2. Li (Strength), aka; Li Qi
3. Jin (Power)

1. Movement of Qi (Energy) is solely directed by the Yi (Mind) not the body. This is basic Neijia (Internal Family) type training and is further defined by several categories such as Jing (Essence), Shen (Spirit) and type specific Qi (Energy). Anytime energy is mentally projected or moved solely by use the Yi (Mind) this can be called Qi.

2. Li (Strength) is when muscle is supported by Qi (Energy). Any Qi (Energy) use that requires more than mental use or projection in order to implement is considered Li (Strength). Since muscle was required for functional use it can no longer be called Qi (Energy) and is classified as Li (Strength). This is a generic description of Qigong (Energy Work).

3. Functional use of Li (Strength) is called Jin (Power). There are various methods of facilitation depending upon the art employed, but this is essentially a coordination of Qi (Energy) and Li (Strength) as directed by the Yi (Mind) to a single point. This is basic Waijia (External Family) type training and is further defined by several classifications of Jin (Power). 

You can get very in-depth with the various classifications of and types of Qi, Li & Jin, but IMO this isn't really necessary beyond description of type specific action. Generally it is semantics similar to the descriptive actions of how specific movements are expressed, such as the difference between Zhong Bang (Middle Wing), Da Bang (Big Wing), Gai Zhou (Covering Elbow) etc. Same "Shape" being employed up, across, inward etc. The energy doesn't really change but the intent does. Focus affects force utilized. This can be strengthened through Qi (Energy) development and cultivation but does not occur solely because of it, all 3 methods are required. Generally when it comes to martial arts, Qi (Energy) is often grossly misused, functional use of energy is called Jin (Power) of which there are many types.


----------



## Danny T (Jan 17, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> If in fact in the 3rd video, where you commented on "intent": and said it was not good. If you actually meant to say "intent" you are very wrong.


Intent is a very very important part of Qi. I question the statement also.



Hendrik said:


> Right or wrong is not up to you. Can you evoke the Qi and lead it? if yes, make a utube and share.



Hmm, and you can show Qi? 
Interesting, Never have seen Qi; felt the effects it, but never seen it.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 17, 2015)

Hendrik said:


>



I actually agree with much of this video but I do have a few questions.

First angles in Fook Sau and Wu Sau angles, I am getting the impression you are talking muscle tenseness and locking joints and that will block flow but

1) Are you saying sharp angle and saying that is locked and using to much muscle, or are you saying any sharp angle?

2) what about an angle that is relaxed as you find in the posture Single Whip (Dān biān, 单鞭) of Taijiquan







3) Internal movement: Are you saying it is only internal if you don’t have to move much or is it possible to still be internal and move a greater distance?


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 17, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Goodness knows we have enough misunderstandings between American English and British English without adding another language into the mix!



Wonder if anybody would understand a scouser on here. I think the biggest gripe is the the OP subject matter has been posted on another forum and been debunked. At least that is what I believe. The OP username and some others are the same. If that is indeed the case, it is a bit naughty. Newbies like me want transparency and a bit of honesty, in that I mean don't post somewhere else, then do the same around here. Information exchange should evolve the subject matter, not let loose a barrel of crap that looks genuine. My two cents!


----------



## wtxs (Jan 17, 2015)

Transk53 said:


> Wonder if anybody would understand a scouser on here. I think _*the biggest gripe is the the OP subject matter has been posted on another forum and been debunked*_. At least that is what I believe. The OP username and some others are the same. If that is indeed the case, it is a bit naughty. Newbies like me want transparency and a bit of honesty, in that I mean don't post somewhere else, then do the same around here. Information exchange should evolve the subject matter, not let loose a barrel of crap that looks genuine. My two cents!



You nailed it.

He's correct when he claim he wasn't banned from the other forum(s), in reality he had been shunned.   An lesson he hasn't, unable or unwilling to learn.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 17, 2015)

The term "internal CMA" came from a tomb stone written by a famous Chinese scholar 黄宗羲Huang Zong-Xi at the end of the Ming dynasty. Hwang was a great scholar, but he knew nothing about CMA. Since then the "internal vs. external" issue have been argued over and over.

In Chinese, the term "external" has a meaning of "look down on somebody" as if "I know something but you don't". No wonder whenever there is any "internal" discussion appear, there will always be some argument.

In some CMA tournaments, the "internal" judges would always walk in the front followed by the "external" judges, and then followed by the "Sanda/Sanshou" judges.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 18, 2015)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The term "internal CMA" came from a tomb stone written by a famous Chinese scholar 黄宗羲Huang Zong-Xi at the end of the Ming dynasty. Hwang was a great scholar, but he knew nothing about CMA. Since then the "internal vs. external" issue have been argued over and over.
> 
> In Chinese, the term "external" has a meaning of "look down on somebody" as if "I know something but you don't". No wonder whenever there is any "internal" discussion appear, there will always be some argument.
> 
> In some CMA tournaments, the "internal" judges would always walk in the front followed by the "external" judges, and then followed by the "Sanda/Sanshou" judges.



The _Epitaph for Wang Zhengnan_ (1669)... and there was no mention of taiji, xingyi or bagua, just the art of Wang Zhengan. And it seems it was more of a political statement against the Qing than anything else

And I have never understood the whole Neijia Elitism thing


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 18, 2015)

wtxs said:


> You nailed it.
> 
> He's correct when he claim he wasn't banned from the other forum(s), in reality he had been shunned.   An lesson he hasn't, unable or unwilling to learn.



I've been looking around the web and you are correct, it appears he has been around


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 19, 2015)

1. Movement of Qi (Energy) is solely directed by the Yi (Mind) not the body. --------

This is not true at all in ancient Chinese practice.



Qi is just a common name of

Biochemical , bio electrical, bio thermal...etc energy in the human body.

Qigong is just the practice of handling these bio energy.





This is basic Neijia (Internal Family) type training and is further defined by several categories such as Jing (Essence), Shen (Spirit) and type specific Qi (Energy). Anytime energy is mentally projected or moved solely by use the Yi (Mind) this can be called Qi.-------


This is misleading and not accord with traditional Chinese medicine.

The above type of description shows one really don't know what it is but s speculation based ideas.



2. Li (Strength) is when muscle is supported by Qi (Energy). -------


Li is simply Muscle force.



Any Qi (Energy) use that requires more than mental use or projection in order to implement is considered Li (Strength). Since muscle was required for functional use it can no longer be called Qi (Energy) and is classified as Li (Strength). This is a generic description of Qigong (Energy Work). --------


This is just made complex simple thing. And also an indication of it is just speculation not practice .

How can the person make all these myth know what it is a practice it in real life?






3. Functional use of Li (Strength) is called Jin (Power). --------

Again, another speculation.

When one doesn't know what it is, one will not be able to develop it. Thus become all kind of myth and create all kind of gurus or experts because everyone of them think their interpretation is the truth but none can bring it to the physical world. Because they don't know what it is.
And they have no way to know what is what


There are various methods of facilitation depending upon the art employed, but this is essentially a coordination of Qi (Energy) and Li (Strength) as directed by the Yi (Mind) to a single point. --------

This is saying a lot but saying nothing.


Jin is just simply force projection or  handling with trajectory.
No need to mytify things.



This is basic Waijia (External Family) type training and is further defined by several classifications of Jin (Power).  ------

Again, more general speculation without mean anything.




You can get very in-depth with the various classifications of and types of Qi, Li & Jin, but IMO this isn't really necessary beyond description of type specific action. Generally it is semantics similar to the descriptive actions of how specific movements are expressed, such as the difference between Zhong Bang (Middle Wing), Da Bang (Big Wing), Gai Zhou (Covering Elbow) etc. Same "Shape" being employed up, across, inward etc. The energy doesn't really change but the intent does. Focus affects force utilized. This can be strengthened through Qi (Energy) development and cultivation but does not occur solely because of it, all 3 methods are required. Generally when it comes to martial arts, Qi (Energy) is often grossly misused, functional use of energy is called Jin (Power) of which there are many types. ----------



One can keep writing a millions books on these stuffs , make more mysterious and woo woo, but not touching what it is.

It is like those who never taste Apple keep writings about the taste of Apple. But never present what is the taste of Apple.

Most so called internal book or YouTube in the west are exactly doing these.


I am not trying to put down or insult anyone, but address the reality of it is time to wake up.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 19, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> 1. Movement of Qi (Energy) is solely directed by the Yi (Mind) not the body. --------
> 
> This is not true at all in ancient Chinese practice.
> 
> ...



all that and you didn't answer a single question I asked you in post #54, you did however say a lot of things no one has asked you about

Here, please allow me to ask them again. All are directed at the first video you posted

*1) Are you saying sharp angle and saying that is locked and using to much muscle, or are you saying any sharp angle?

2) what about an angle that is relaxed as you find in the posture **Single Whip (Dān biān, 单鞭)** of Taijiquan 

3) Internal movement: Are you saying it is only internal if you don’t have to move much or is it possible to still be internal and move a greater distance?*


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 19, 2015)

Please view the videos carefully. Details has been described in the videos.



Xue Sheng said:


> all that and you didn't answer a single question I asked you in post #54, you did however say a lot of things no one has asked you about
> 
> Here, please allow me to ask them again. All are directed at the first video you posted
> 
> ...


----------



## zuti car (Jan 19, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> all that and you didn't answer a single question I asked you in post #54, you did however say a lot of things no one has asked you about


You will never get a straight answer to any question from hendrik . He will completely ignore questions or say something totally unrelated . I am asking him for a very long time one simple question, to give me a museum address where is supposedly kept a very old book which proves his theories. To this day he wasn't able to write simple address , every time I ask about it he simply ignores me . I asked his partner Jim Roselando  same question and still no answer . So I decided to write to national museum of history in Taipei and ask some of the historians there is such a book really exist , they would know because  books from 12th century  are extremely rare and valuable historical artifacts . We will see what historians have to say about it . I did the same whit his "original" 19th century  document ,I have asked some Taiwanese friends to check that document and not only that language on that document is  modern Chinese language which do not even resembles to 19th century Cantonese but due to the lack of knowledge  author of that document put some simplified characters in the text and we all know simplified characters are invented in the end of 1950's and started to be commonly used in the mid of 1960's .


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 19, 2015)

I have made three videos above to adress clearly what I mean. If you can't understand what I mean. I suggest you go get a teacher who can teaches you the basic.

You like to keep go off topic on unrelated stuffs. Why should I answer you?



zuti car said:


> You will never get a straight answer to any question from hendrik . He will completely ignore questions or say something totally unrelated . I am asking him for a very long time one simple question, to give me a museum address where is supposedly kept a very old book which proves his theories. To this day he wasn't able to write simple address , every time I ask about it he simply ignores me . I asked his partner Jim Roselando  same question and still no answer . So I decided to write to national museum of history in Taipei and ask some of the historians there is such a book really exist , they would know because  books from 12th century  are extremely rare and valuable historical artifacts . We will see what historians have to say about it . I did the same whit his "original" 19th century  document ,I have asked some Taiwanese friends to check that document and not only that language on that document is  modern Chinese language which do not even resembles to 19th century Cantonese but due to the lack of knowledge  author of that document put some simplified characters in the text and we all know simplified characters are invented in the end of 1950's and started to be commonly used in the mid of 1960's .


----------



## dlcox (Jan 19, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> 1. Movement of Qi (Energy) is solely directed by the Yi (Mind) not the body. --------
> 
> This is not true at all in ancient Chinese practice.
> 
> ...


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 19, 2015)

that just indicate you have never train in the subject.

Btw, yi is not mind but just an aspect of mind.


----------



## zuti car (Jan 19, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> I
> 
> You like to keep go off topic on unrelated stuffs. Why should I answer you?


You don't have to give me an answer ,on the other hand no answer is an answer as well , sometimes stronger than anything else you may say .I almost forgot , I had a good talk with Wayne Yung , he is really nice person and polite person ...


----------



## dlcox (Jan 19, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> that just indicate you have never train in the subject.
> 
> Btw, yi is not mind but just an aspect of mind.



Ok, whatever, please tell me what system(s) of Qigong you have trained in, are qualified to teach and from whom you learned it. I certainly claim to be no expert, but have trained in Zhineng Qigong under Chen He Guan whom studied under the founder Pang Ming, in Bai He Qigong under Kuang Zui Han whom learned it from Wu Jian Hua whom learned it from the Bai He Pai ancestor Huang Lin Kai, and Shen Qi Gui Yuan Fa Qigong as passed on by Ruan Ji Yun. I have satisfied all the necessary requirements and have been given permission to pass on all. Also, in case you aren't aware Bai He Pai is considered an "Internal" method as well as is Yong Chun, both of which I am qualified to teach whether you agree or not. Your passive aggressive attitude and ethnocentrism aren't appreciated. Simply because I'm not Chinese doesn't mean I ignorant of the concept of "Qi". It is a worldly phenomenon known in various cultures as Prana, Pneuma, Vital Force, Ki, etc.and is not a unique concept known only to the Chinese. By the way, Yi is thought, concept, idea and is commonly used as a reference to the mind in TCMA. Also, what's the name of that museum again and the address? Certainly that book could clear up and put to rest all of this nonsense.

Have a good day Hendrik, I really am in no mood to argue semantics and play games. By all means continue to pass yourself off as an expert in all facets of the MA and promote your silliness, it was a simple informative post not directed towards you. The fact that you took offense to it and felt compelled to defend yourself speaks volumes about your insecurities and perceived inadequacies. I wish you well in your endeavors, god bless.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 20, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> Please view the videos carefully. Details has been described in the videos.



I have viewed it carefully ..... twice now and I have the same questions and the "detail" and answers to those questions is not there. I will attempt to make this a productive discussion one last time

*1) Are you saying sharp angle and saying that is locked and using to much muscle, or are you saying any sharp angle?

2) what about an angle that is relaxed as you find in the posture **Single Whip (Dān biān, 单鞭)** of Taijiquan 

3) Internal movement: Are you saying it is only internal if you don’t have to move much or is it possible to still be internal and move a greater distance?*


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 20, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> I have made three videos above to adress clearly what I mean. If you can't understand what I mean. I suggest you go get a teacher who can teaches you the basic.
> 
> You like to keep go off topic on unrelated stuffs. Why should I answer you?



But I am not off topic on unrelated stuff so why shouldn't you answer?


----------



## wtxs (Jan 20, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> I have made three videos above to adress clearly what I mean. If you can't understand what I mean. I suggest you go get a teacher who can teaches you the basic.



The above post should have been written as:

*"I have made three videos above to address clearly what I mean.  If you all have problem of understand what I mean, may be because you all don't have the Chinese/oriental mentality."*

That would surely pissy off lot more people ... it's not like you haven't done so.

BTW,  I'm Chinese, born in china raised in the US.  Like majority  of the people here, we have been in MA for more than 40 years.   I don't know what you're going on and on and on about 99.9% of the time.


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 20, 2015)

What I adress is common internal art basic of ancient internal martial art. Not the type like zhineng qigong which is similar to a religion like and Bai He Pai a Tibetan type of art

As for who I train with , I don't like to drop name.

But, I adress the above issue in the video based on wck 1840 writing on internal wck,  as evidence it link to emei 12 zhuang and has been verified by the gate keeper of emei 12 zhuang


And the following is one of my late sigung. Since i practice many internal art







So do I qualify to speak on internal art or qigong?


I hope people keep the discussion on technical instead of qualification .





dlcox said:


> Ok, whatever, please tell me what system(s) of Qigong you have trained in, are qualified to teach and from whom you learned it. I certainly claim to be no expert, but have trained in Zhineng Qigong under Chen He Guan whom studied under the founder Pang Ming, in Bai He Qigong under Kuang Zui Han whom learned it from Wu Jian Hua whom learned it from the Bai He Pai ancestor Huang Lin Kai, and Shen Qi Gui Yuan Fa Qigong as passed on by Ruan Ji Yun. I have satisfied all the necessary requirements and have been given permission to pass on all. Also, in case you aren't aware Bai He Pai is considered an "Internal" method as well as is Yong Chun, both of which I am qualified to teach whether you agree or not. Your passive aggressive attitude and ethnocentrism aren't appreciated. Simply because I'm not Chinese doesn't mean I ignorant of the concept of "Qi". It is a worldly phenomenon known in various cultures as Prana, Pneuma, Vital Force, Ki, etc.and is not a unique concept known only to the Chinese. By the way, Yi is thought, concept, idea and is commonly used as a reference to the mind in TCMA. Also, what's the name of that museum again and the address? Certainly that book could clear up and put to rest all of this nonsense.
> 
> Have a good day Hendrik, I really am in no mood to argue semantics and play games. By all means continue to pass yourself off as an expert in all facets of the MA and promote your silliness, it was a simple informative post not directed towards you. The fact that you took offense to it and felt compelled to defend yourself speaks volumes about your insecurities and perceived inadequacies. I wish you well in your endeavors, god bless.


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 20, 2015)

You like to twist my word that is your problem. 

Go get a sifu to study what you don't know. Thar simple, got nothing to do with Chinese / oriental or not.

And don't get this thread into racist direction



wtxs said:


> The above post should have been written as:
> 
> *"I have made three videos above to address clearly what I mean.  If you all have problem of understand what I mean, may be because you all don't have the Chinese/oriental mentality."*
> 
> ...


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 20, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> I have viewed it carefully ..... twice now and I have the same questions and the "detail" and answers to those questions is not there. I will attempt to make this a productive discussion one last time
> 
> *1) Are you saying sharp angle and saying that is locked and using to much muscle, or are you saying any sharp angle?
> 
> ...




Seriously,

Please get a sifu to explain to you what I mean in my videos. There are many things in it. If you can't understand my video. How can writing explain things better since word in writing is not as good as video


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 21, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> Seriously,
> 
> Please get a sifu to explain to you what I mean in my videos. There are many things in it. If you can't understand my video. How can writing explain things better since word in writing is not as good as video



You want to go here when I'm trying to make this a productive conversations but you prefer condescension and arrogance... ok... so be it.

I have had a sifu, more than one actually on this and I know for a fact I know more about this than you do and I am not master on the topic. I was trying to take the high road here and see if there was a missunderstanding based on a language issues but I see the issue is your arrogance and lack of knowledge on the topic that is the issue.

You have been around the web Hendrik and on every single web forum you have been on you have received the same response and you have responded with the same arrogance and had the same resistance to answering questions. You don't understand the views you are peddling and your respond, in all cases the same, with some reference to classical documents. But when there is someone else who has read them or understands the topic more than you pops up....well then you get defensive and start responding by attacking, telling them they need to get a teacher to explain and accusing them of being a self professed master, which is exactly the same thing you are doing... claiming to be a master, but you are not ...... I am not a master and I don't consider myself one but the one thing I am sure of is that I know more about the topic than you do, I was willing to discuss this to see if there was a misunderstanding but there isn't.

So please get a sifu to explain to you what you mean in your videos. There are many things in them you don't understand in your video......seriously you need to get a proper sifu on the topic, stop trying to teach yourself by reading books and get over yourself and maybe, just maybe you'll learn something.

Now you are wasting my time and you are not worth it


----------



## wtxs (Jan 21, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> You like to twist my word that is your problem.
> 
> Go get a sifu to study what you don't know. Thar simple, got nothing to do with Chinese / oriental or not.
> 
> And don't get this thread into racist direction



Implication of racism is your doing.

In order to understand the ancient Chinese or WC internal aspects, you first have to learn from an knowledgeable person, he/her knowledge is taught by he/her teacher.  Trace the lineage back through time, the founder is not an occidental.

Bites of knowledge get left out or lost over time is an fact, what you and others (with exceptions) know is fragmented.  To know and understand the real stuff is hundreds of years back in time ... possible that you are an time traveler?

Telling people here to look for an "qualify Sifu" to learn from means looks for an old Chinese mummy ... all can you learn is that the "internals" are long gone.


----------



## dlcox (Jan 21, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> What I adress is common internal art basic of ancient internal martial art. Not the type like zhineng qigong which is similar to a religion like and Bai He Pai a Tibetan type of art
> 
> As for who I train with , I don't like to drop name.
> 
> ...



I believe you are very misinformed concerning the Qigong methods I have studied, Zhineng is medical, health maintenance and healing Qigong, Bai He Qigong covers martial, religious, health maintenance and healing. Shen Qi Gui Yuan Fa is for health maintenance.

Could you please explain to me in simple, straight forward terms exactly what is common internal art basic of ancient internal martial art? How does older Qigong and "Internal" art differ from their modern counterparts? Is it simply because they are supposedly older and therefore correct? 

I do not want to delve too deep into the Emei 12 Zhuang issue and the manipulation of Fu Wei Zhong concerning the forged Quan Jue, best not to bring that up as authentication of your "Theories". It's a rabbit hole that will quickly degrade the conversation and no one here will tolerate the banter or deception.

I did watch the video and seen some very interesting things, such as the very obvious and repeated use of the 6 basic exercises of Naropa & Niguma as propogated in Trul Khor of Tibet and Yantra Yoga of India. These are very ancient exercises. Interesting that you would denounce the Tibetan methods as incorrect for sustaining your "Theory" yet post a video of a Qigong method that was very obviously influenced by it.

Could you also explain to me how non-martial Qigong increases martial abilty better than martial Qigong? I don't seem to grasp your logic.


----------



## Vajramusti (Jan 21, 2015)

Xue Sheng said:


> You want to go here when I'm trying to make this a productive conversations but you prefer condescension and arrogance... ok... so be it.
> 
> I have had a sifu, more than one actually on this and I know for a fact I know more about this than you do and I am not master on the topic. I was trying to take the high road here and see if there was a missunderstanding based on a language issues but I see the issue is your arrogance and lack of knowledge on the topic that is the issue.
> 
> ...


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sooner or later  reasonable people have come to similar conclusions.


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 21, 2015)

Why is it telling the truth is arrogance?

Or may be it is your ego which cannot accept the fact you don't have the training.


For example, you claim you study Taiji...etc.

However, you ask the question on single whip. Isn't it clear that what I mention in my video consistence with what Chen Man Ching wrote in his book on wrist and the hand of beauty?

Those are basic stuffs. If you are not expose to it. Then, you need a teacher who know to teach you. It is that simple . Even me I still study with different sifus to get educated.

If you think I am being arrogant , may be it is because you don't face reality of one needs a sifu to study





Xue Sheng said:


> You want to go here when I'm trying to make this a productive conversations but you prefer condescension and arrogance... ok... so be it.
> 
> I have had a sifu, more than one actually on this and I know for a fact I know more about this than you do and I am not master on the topic. I was trying to take the high road here and see if there was a missunderstanding based on a language issues but I see the issue is your arrogance and lack of knowledge on the topic that is the issue.
> 
> ...


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 21, 2015)

It is in my YouTube above. That is the common denominator of ancient Chinese internal art.


As for your trying to link things with tibertian art, I don't think the tibertian art has the same practice with the Chinese based on evidence. 


This is Tibetan art mixing some Chinese art. It is not the same design as ancient Chinese art which deal with the Chinese 12 medirians









dlcox said:


> I believe you are very misinformed concerning the Qigong methods I have studied, Zhineng is medical, health maintenance and healing Qigong, Bai He Qigong covers martial, religious, health maintenance and healing. Shen Qi Gui Yuan Fa is for health maintenance.
> 
> Could you please explain to me in simple, straight forward terms exactly what is common internal art basic of ancient internal martial art? How does older Qigong and "Internal" art differ from their modern counterparts? Is it simply because they are supposedly older and therefore correct?
> 
> ...


----------



## Hendrik (Jan 21, 2015)

One always can study historical records from multi sources and direction to find out what is likely.

Nothing come out of thin air.


I never bring up race but you. 



wtxs said:


> Implication of racism is your doing.
> 
> In order to understand the ancient Chinese or WC internal aspects, you first have to learn from an knowledgeable person, he/her knowledge is taught by he/her teacher.  Trace the lineage back through time, the founder is not an occidental.
> 
> ...


----------



## tshadowchaser (Jan 21, 2015)

People please respect others opinions.  Right or wrong we all have a right to them.
Helpful dialog instead of everyone say the other guy has no knowledge would be nice.
This could be an interesting thread to those that do not do internal arts if individual ideas where discussed.
Once again PLEASE PLAY NICE


----------



## Dirty Dog (Jan 21, 2015)

Allow me to echo what tshadowchaser has said. This is MartialTalk. A place for FRIENDLY Martial Arts discussion.
If you can't keep the conversation polite, respectful and professional, threads get locked. Moderators get overworked.
People get suspended. Or banned.
Let's not go there, ok?

Mark A Cochran
Dirty Dog
MT Senior Moderator


----------



## dlcox (Jan 21, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> It is in my YouTube above. That is the common denominator of ancient Chinese internal art.
> 
> 
> As for your trying to link things with tibertian art, I don't think the tibertian art has the same practice with the Chinese based on evidence.
> ...


 
Having watched your video I did not see where it was clearly stated what the common denominator, as you put, was mentioned. I fail to connect your thoughts to anything tangible, perhaps if you were to cross reference to an existing method based upon the ancient Chinese internal art, we all would have a clearer picture.

No disrespect here, but your reference of the Mian Li Zhen Quan is not the standard for representation of the 6 exercises. The exercises consist of 6 movements performed 3 ways, and there are many interpretations based upon the different lineages of Bon, Lama, Mizong, Dao and Chan that passed them on. These exercises are considered by many as the well spring from which Qigong, as we know it today, was formulated, they themselves more than likely having a foundation in Yoga. Typically weaved into a method of Yuan Gong that can clearly be seen in arts such as Bagua Zhang, Taiji Quan, Rou Quan, Luohan Quan etc. These exercises are generally basic training, not unlike how Ba Duan Jin is used, commonly taught to initiate monks of the Buddhist, Daoist, Bon and Hindu faiths. The history is long and detail spanning several thousands of years. If you have the time please look into it, I think you'll find it interesting.

As far as the meridians, again that is dependent upon the lineage that passed it on. The Bagua, Wu Xing, Taiji, Jiu Men etc. theories vary greatly in interpretation depending on the faith and lineage. Rarely have I seen two the same from different lineages. It is all very interpretive IMO otherwise there would be more regulation and standardization. Funny thing is all the different approaches seem to work, clouding things even further. In order to come to an understanding and a consensus I think further detail, clearly illustrated and explained with references to existing accepted theory would be helpful, do you agree?


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 21, 2015)

Look, folks... I can understand that there is a lot of passion in these topics, and strongly held beliefs.  That's cool.  Discuss and debate them with an attitude of mutual sharing, not mutual combat.  In case multiple hints haven't been clear:

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:*

*PLEASE KEEP THE CONVERSATION POLITE AND RESPECTFUL.*

*jks9199
Administrator*


----------



## zuti car (Jan 21, 2015)

Are there any evidence that "Emei 12 Zhuang" existed before republican period ? Or WWII? I mean real historical evidence ,like verified documents, books , stone carvings , anything that directly and without any doubt proves such system existed before second part of 20th centyry


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 21, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> Why is it telling the truth is arrogance?
> 
> Or may be it is your ego which cannot accept the fact you don't have the training.
> 
> ...



I have a sifu that is by far more knowledgeable than you, there are many reasons for questions and I was asking the questions to see what your response was, I do not need you to teach me, you cannot, you do not have the knowledge to do so. It was a test to see if you knew and your refusal to answer shows me you do not know and therefore you failed the test. You do not answers to questions put to you and you return condescension because you do not know, you refuse to answer and tell others they are beneath you out of arrogance and lack of knowledge.

And it is your continued belief that you are above reproach and that what you speak is truth is beyond any shadow of doubt pure hubris.... you are incredibly arrogant and yet though denial and transference you accuse others of what you are guilty of....you have nothing to say that is of any use or importance.. you are wasting my time, others time and space on this site and others.....our conversation is done


----------



## wtxs (Jan 22, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> One always can study historical records from multi sources and direction to find out *what is likely*.
> 
> Nothing come out of thin air.
> 
> I never bring up race but you.



Studying historical records/sources only reveals what is "likely" ... and likely does not equates to 100% concrete proof, those documents are written by mere human ... and we know we have our flaws, prejudice and bias.

I did not accuse you any thing.  However you do go on and on about ancient Chinese internal this and WC (Chinese) internal that, you did put Chinese/oriental/ Asian (race) on the forefront.   Not once have you consider the possibility of other cultures may have the similar practices but in different form.

I have to ask, did even notice that I use the word "implication"?





wtxs said:


> *Implication* of racism is your doing..


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 22, 2015)

I try to stay away from those threads that don't have

- What's your opinion on this?
- any comment?
- Your thought?
- ...

When I start a thread, I like to collect different opinions. My own opinion is not important at that moment (I don't need to tell myself what my own opinion is). I pretty much put myself into "listen mode". When someone starts a thread that only has a clip, it's very difficult to know what the OP's intention for that thread.

Should I

- put my 2 cents in?
- just put myself into "listen mode"?
- ...


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 24, 2015)

Another thread descended into something not desirable. Please people, lets be nice and disagree on a intellectual level, rather than testosterone. Please


----------



## geezer (Jan 24, 2015)

wtxs said:


> ... you did put Chinese/oriental/ Asian (race) on the forefront.   Not once have you consider the possibility of other cultures may have the similar practices but in different form.
> 
> I have to ask, did even notice that I use the word "implication"?



Let it go. I don't think Hendrick is racist at all. He just wants us all, regardless of race, _to agree with him._ Sadly I do not. But no big deal. 

@Hendrick: By the way, if you don't mind sharing, what is your ethnic backgound (not that it matters)? I'm just curious, since you obviously have Chinese roots and speak, read and write Cantonese. Yet the name "Santos" sounds Spanish or Portuguese. Do you have family in Macao or the Philippines?


----------



## zuti car (Jan 24, 2015)

I've spoke with some friends from Hong Kong and some friends here on Taiwan as well . Problem with "Emei Snake" is ,such a thing didn't exist before modern times. Unfortunately , Emei arts were lost over time and this is very well known fact in China. Today , Chinese are trying to revive Emei arts by mixing modern wushu with other known internal systems like Tai Chi , Ba Gua ect. And it is working , more and more westerners are coming to learn "Emei" kung fu and "Emei masters" are going around the world and teach their art .


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Jan 28, 2015)

I think we have killed this this thread. How? I truly don't know.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 28, 2015)

we weren't blind followers


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 28, 2015)

Hendrik said:


> What I adress is common internal art basic of ancient internal martial art. Not the type like zhineng qigong which is similar to a religion like and Bai He Pai a Tibetan type of art



Um... Bai He is generally in reference to the Fujian white crane method.

Bak Hok is the Tibetan white crane method.

While they are both "White Crane", they are not the same thing.

I just wanted to point that out to you.


----------



## dlcox (Jan 28, 2015)

Flying Crane said:


> Um... Bai He is generally in reference to the Fujian white crane method.
> 
> Bak Hok is the Tibetan white crane method.
> 
> ...



In this instance he was correct in his reference to Bai He Pai. I use Mandarin, and he was commenting on my post about Tibetan Qigong. I don't believe dialect dictates style. Also, having studied Tibetan White Crane for 30 years from various lineages I would argue that Fujian and Tibetan Crane share more than many realize. So much more to the art than the basic long fist methods that most have been exposed to. Every technique and methodology in Yong Chun (Wing Chun) can be found in Bai He Pai and then some. The lineages of Fujian and Tibetan Crane also stem from the same source, another little known fact. Wu Zhao Zhong (Ng Siu Jung) method of White Crane is relatively new in it's construction. Many forget that he altered the art and tried to standerdize it before his death. His branch also became the most popular and became recognized as the "Gold Standard", unfortunately like Linjia Hong Quan (Lam Family Hung Fist) this is a biased opinion. There are many "Village" branches of Hongjia that have a more direct route to Hong Xi Guan than Linjia Hong Quan just as there are other lineages of Bai He Pai that do not descend from Wu Zhao Zhong such as Wu Jian Hua who was a direct disciple of Huang Lin Kai. Wu Jian Hua's art is very different from Wu Zhao Zhong's, all cross pattern sets and lots of short hand, internal work etc. Whats more is also a different origin story than is commonly told.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 28, 2015)

dlcox said:


> In this instance he was correct in his reference to Bai He Pai. I use Mandarin, and he was commenting on my post about Tibetan Qigong. I don't believe dialect dictates style. Also, having studied Tibetan White Crane for 30 years from various lineages I would argue that Fujian and Tibetan Crane share more than many realize. So much more to the art than the basic long fist methods that most have been exposed to. Every technique and methodology in Yong Chun (Wing Chun) can be found in Bai He Pai and then some. The lineages of Fujian and Tibetan Crane also stem from the same source, another little known fact. Wu Zhao Zhong (Ng Siu Jung) method of White Crane is relatively new in it's construction. Many forget that he altered the art and tried to standerdize it before his death. His branch also became the most popular and became recognized as the "Gold Standard", unfortunately like Linjia Hong Quan (Lam Family Hung Fist) this is a biased opinion. There are many "Village" branches of Hongjia that have a more direct route to Hong Xi Guan than Linjia Hong Quan just as there are other lineages of Bai He Pai that do not descend from Wu Zhao Zhong such as Wu Jian Hua who was a direct disciple of Huang Lin Kai. Wu Jian Hua's art is very different from Wu Zhao Zhong's, all cross pattern sets and lots of short hand, internal work etc. Whats more is also a different origin story than is commonly told.


I am curious to know about the lineages under which you have studied and trained.  Thx.


----------



## dlcox (Jan 29, 2015)

Flying Crane said:


> I am curious to know about the lineages under which you have studied and trained.  Thx.


 
PM me, I will do my best to answer any questions you have.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jan 29, 2015)

dlcox said:


> PM me, I will do my best to answer any questions you have.


I'm trying to figure out how to send a pm.  Since they restructured the forums not long ago, I'm having difficulty finding it. Directions?


----------



## dlcox (Jan 29, 2015)

Flying Crane said:


> I'm trying to figure out how to send a pm.  Since they restructured the forums not long ago, I'm having difficulty finding it. Directions?


 
Created thread in Chinese Arts General forum to discuss this art.


----------



## Minghe (Jan 30, 2015)

Baihe Pai is not a "religion"


----------

