# Internal training in systema



## SilatFan

Can you please describe, in detail, the type of internal training systema offers.  Is there anything like "golden bell/shirt", brick/board breaking, chi kung, etc, etc.....

I know that there seems to be a lot of good work regarding sensetivity but how about the "chi/qi" side of internal training.

Thanks!


----------



## Ironman

well, from the very little experience i have i would only guess. Systema has heavy influnces from Christianity (Russian Orthodoxy in this case) and so it doesn't contain Chi/Ki since that originates from Eastern philosophy, however we do meditate in class breathing and such. The class i go to doesn't have any religious teaching which is really unfortunate but i'm a christian so i meditate myself. The meditation primarily used by Budhists, although not common to many Christian groups (i.e Catholism), is familar to Orthodoxy (i guess they were a little smarter than the rest ).

i hope someone can answer your question with greater detail.


----------



## TheLady

Actually, Mikhail told us not to meditate - at least not in the "empty your mind" kind of meditation. Instead we should pray. He didn't make it specific to any religion.

No brick/board breaking that I've seen. As a military art, one of the important concepts is that you don't damage yourself doing "the work".

From the little I know about internal training, I'd say we don't do it - or maybe we just use different terms. What does your style do?

Janice


----------



## RachelK

For what it's worth, my Systema teacher once told our class that it's an internal martial art. He has also told us that Systema just happens to be a martial art, that Systema is no martial art, and that Systema is a way of life. Of course these statements were all in the context of the teaching, so the way I've written it seems more confusing than it actually is. From my humble perspective, it is an internal system. But I'm new to Systema and I've never studied another martial art.
SilatFan, you may want to pick up the _Russian System Guidebook_ which offers some detailed descriptions of Systema training. You can buy it online at http://www.russianmartialart.com/catalog/default.php?cPath=21
Maybe some more experienced Systema students will offer additional insight.
Best wishes,
Rachel


----------



## Jerry

> Can you please describe, in detail, the type of internal training systema offers.


I suppose the short answer to this would have to be "no". I've no interested in writing a book for the benifit of a stranger on the internet who does not wish to simply seek out the higher-level instructors and find out.



> Is there anything like "golden bell/shirt", brick/board breaking, chi kung, etc, etc.....


 Yes. (mind you, they don't seem to be taught readily, as it's only very advanced systema people (Vladimir, Michael, some of their russian students and some students with Neijia backgrounds) I've seen this from.

There are two passive and one active that come to mind:

Firstly, while weighting a good deal like Taiji, Systema focuses heavily on the dropping/rooting energy to deliver and dissipate power. While systema does not use the same body connection that you see in the Neijia arts (offensive work tends to send energy out rather than to the ground), the rooted connection carries much of the same iron-body that you'll get from Taiji.

Secondly, Systema has excellent breath work (tied very heavily into the above mentioned aspects). You'll find similar-effect breath work in golden-bell qigongs (the golden-gorilla, or lion's roar sound in Tibetian arts), with similar iron-body effects.

Finally, though again tied to my initial point, systema teaches directly absorbing and retransmitting force. The "thake the hit and cycle it out" drill comes to mind. While a more active iron, this is also intended to ingrane the quality and behavior.



> I know that there seems to be a lot of good work regarding sensetivity but how about the "chi/qi" side of internal training.


 Different path, same destination... somewhere between Yang Taiji and Five-element Xingyi.

I know a couple Systema instructors with a fondness for the internal aspects... where in the country are you?


----------



## mscroggins

What is golden bell/iron shirt training?


----------



## Pervaz

Why limit yourself to thinking internal or external ??

All MA have a combination of both - Systema has a combination of internal (ranging from shock absoration to "controling" people) and external (from "pressure points" to biomechanics)) - all it requires is dedication, blood, sweat and tears (especially when doing pressups !!)


----------



## Jerry

> What is golden bell/iron shirt training?


 Qigong.



> Why limit yourself to thinking internal or external ??


 Because otherwise all questions become "do you do stuff?".


----------



## BoxANT

Jerry said:
			
		

> "do you do stuff?".



a lil bit.




in systema you get hit.  and for the love of god you better learn how to take those hits.  otherwise your systema will be a much more painful one than mine.

the good news is that if you listen and do the work, you should be ok.


----------



## Jerry

Is that directed at me or to the world _et al_. If the former, I think you missed what I was saying.


----------



## Arthur

The beginning of wisdom is the definition of terms. Without defining the terms of the discussion, my guess is no one will truly benefit.

Arthur


----------



## Furtry

SilatFan said:
			
		

> Can you please describe, in detail, the type of internal training systema offers.  Is there anything like "golden bell/shirt", brick/board breaking, chi kung, etc, etc.....
> 
> I know that there seems to be a lot of good work regarding sensetivity but how about the "chi/qi" side of internal training.
> 
> Thanks!


There is no internal training, such as 'golden bell, iron shirt, or what ever you want to call it'. There is no understanding of chi or qi or what ever term you want to use. There is psychological and physiological conditioning.
Learning to deal with strikes is done by getting hit. When you are hit you learn what happens psychologically, as in you get a new perspective on life, and you learn what happens physiologically, as in proper breathing helps you to deal with it and recover quicker.
No meditation is used, unless you become very focused on what you are doing but you are doing something, rather than meditating.


----------



## Jerry

So when Michael puts people to sleep with intent, that's not energetic? "A hit that makes you think" isn't either? It's interesting that you are running contrary to the heads of the system, have you even seen their "psycic energy" stuff?

Let's compare expderiences. I've got Neijia (internal Chinese arts) experience, and have done qigong and qi work in them. I've then watched and met some of the people in upper-level systema (though my instructor has far more time with them than I do), and seen and felt and learned some of the internals they have.

You, obviously, have not noticed / learned that.

Your "I've not seen it so it doesn't exist" is rather non-compelling. It will appeal to those who dismiss energy-work because they simply don't believe in it; and I suspect that may be why you are dismissive of it as well.


----------



## mscroggins

Read closely what Furty wrote because the answers are there.

"you learn" "you get hit" "you pay attention" "you get a new perspective" "you deal with it" "you recover" "you are doing"

What can upper level Systema people do? Plenty, but how useful is that question? In my opinion, not very. People can be calmed by close attention. That is hardly news or magic. Spend a little time around someone with asthma or a panic disorder and you can easily see how a reaction can heal or hurt them.

Another name, and in my opinion a better one, for the system is know yourself. What can you do?


----------



## Jerry

I read it, he claimed there was no qigong. He's incorrect.

Now, if you choose to dismiss qigong and argue that all internal arts are "imaginary", that it's basic physiology, then it's really a different thread.

The question is whether there's internal training in Systema, this presupposes that internal training is a real thing and asks only it's in this system. Micheal has no-contact hitting, he has hitting for qi disruption, he has healing work, he has rooting work, the sinking is remeniscent of Xing-yi, etc. I cannot speak to how or how overtly it's taught in Systema. I've met many practitioners who didn't know it was there, but it certainly is. 

I'm happy to discuss this further, but find "there's no such thing as qi" off-topic and "I haven't seen it, so it's not there" to be fallacious (specifically, an appeal to ignorance)... and thus have no further to go with those two lines.


----------



## NYCRonin

Jerry,
  I believe that Furtry was stating that in 'Systema', we do not study chi to do no contact work...and Ryabco would be VERY much in agreement. Furtry, as you may not know, Is an instructor of Systema - certified by BOTH Vlad and Misha....and as such, I do beleive he was referrencing from a very experienced System-ists position...not as an attack on what you might do in your chosen arts.

Quotes: "Micheal has no-contact hitting, he has hitting for qi disruption, he has healing work, he has rooting work, the sinking is remeniscent of Xing-yi, etc.">>>From another Systema 'teachers' point of place (and also one that has a background in numerous m.arts) I can say the points you recognize from your experience in your arts - are done differently in The System. And I also add, Furtry does these things also as does VV and MR (and many others) BUT - the training does not develop whatever you see congruent to your views. 

" I cannot speak to how or how overtly it's taught in Systema.">>>Furtry CAN speak about this from his years experience as a personal student of Vlad and Misha as well. Hence, as we are speaking about Systema, his statements, out of respect; do carry a great deal of weight re: this subject as it relatates to Sytema training and viewpoint. 

"I've met many practitioners who didn't know it was there, but it certainly is."
<<And out of respect for you, Jerry...I will  also state that many people from different arts 'see' things that are 'true' - to their point of view, using their dictionary or vocabulary of training experienced. This is a very common thing to Systema folks. After all, by nature; when a person sees something - they attempt to relate it or catagorize it to what they already know. In Systema, there are some very well versed Chinese system m.artists - such as Arthur Sennot or Larry Wall (amongst others) -- that can relate to what Systema presents and make comparisons to thier CMA training. I have a fair bit of Ba-Gua in my past, and 'see' many things apparently as similar to B-G. BUT - having done Systema under VV, MR and a few others - I KNOW that these are semming similarities from my previous training that have nothing at all, really; to do with Systema as it is passed on. MR, in particular; would be very direct to state that chi has nothing at all to do with his abilities...and although many who do believe in chi still chose to believe they are correct, and disregard Mishas personal beliefs. Some say in conversations I have had that "He and Vlad dont know that they are doing - chi, prana, cyclic life energy, whatever - But they ARE doing it"! THAT is born of the filter one has for what one sees.
Misha could just as easily watch, let us say; a B-Gua master..and through Mishas eyes, say: "Look how he moves with Gods grace in his heart"! Out of respect for the teachers of Systema, when we 'speak' of the art - it is natural to attempt to express ourselves in their teaching base. If we were speaking of Silat - I would have to respect those who actually did this, from Silats language and base of teaching; and maybe point out similarities..but not say they were doing something but did not know why.

Let us not quibble over terminolgy - for Furtry or myself are not as fluent in CMA/Silat terms as you might be...nor are you as experienced in Systema as we may be.
The similarities are far more important than differences in beliefs, training or terminology, are they not? Still, if we speak of these similarites, and they occur to arise from different places - we can discuss mostly the superficial appearences.

(And Furtry, my friend, please excuse me for attempting to answer for 'you'.
I encourage you to correct me if I assume too much...and hope to read your views on this subject.)

mscroggins last post is correct in content, from where I sit.


----------



## Furtry

> So when Michael puts people to sleep with intent, that's not energetic? "A hit that makes you think" isn't either? It's interesting that you are running contrary to the heads of the system, have you even seen their "psycic energy" stuff?


 LOL... yap, first hand so to say.

This post, by Jerry and a few others I've red, is in my opinion the starting point of the dilution of Vlad and Michaels teachings. This is a case of People who insist on conforming reality to their beliefs instead of their beliefs to realty.

Ive red a book, recommended by a friend, on survival that basically stated; those who can recognize the reality of their situation and adapt to it the quickest have the best chance of surviving. And since Systema is all about living and surviving it has taught me what the author discovered in his own journey, and is propagating to the readers.

Final point; I have studied B-G and am aware of what is internal, chi/qui, golden bell and iron shirt, and Systema doesn't teach that. Systema teaches how to recognize the real situation so that one may adapt and survive.

***side note*** I remember some kind of a joke/urban legend about an African healer giving some warriors an ointment that would protect them from bullets. The guys shot each other to test the ointment. When it didn't help the survivors shot the medicine man. Just to prove to the healer that it didn't work  .


----------



## NYCRonin

Well Dima, I wont go as far as to say this is the first step to dilution of Systema. As long as there are competant sources trained from the deep well, the water will remain clean. Comparison is something we are used to, arent we?
Humans seek 'patterns'. We do so all the time.We compare any new 'this' to a previously known 'that'....and we both know how, in Systema training; many of our previously accepted 'thats' turned out NOT to be 'this'. 
We both had much previous m.art experience before 'this' - and let us look at one shared. B-Gua. If one looks at 'deflection' demonstrated in a B/G mans movement....we would see some superficial similarities (at times) to a Systemists deflections. Having done both arts - we know that they are NOT really similar at all. There is a HUGE difference in the feel and flow of the two arts. 
One can theorize and try to say that they know why 'this' works -- but unless one ACTUALLY has been trained in Systema, they are making an assumption that has no experience behind it. Much as Jerry assumed you had never seen psy-work done, although we both have done this with VV and MR, in person.
It is a fact that your statements are the ones not contrary to the heads of Systema, for you are a personal friend and student of them. THEY would not at all agree with Jerry's viewpoints and opinions as to what is being done.

Jerry, would you tell the leaders of Systema that they dont know the 'wherefores' of what their art is about? And since Furtry is one of the respected senior members of the Systema in N.America, he is VERY well qualified to post with authority about all of 'this'. In this case, you may think you 'know' what you see in Systema.....but experience must win this discussion, hands down.

Dima, as long as there is a community of those authorized by VV and MR to pass along what we study and live by, this water will remain pure and clean...and the seekers will find what they need to survive. I do expect that to remain true for at least as long as we live. 

It is going to be those that watch a few tapes and think they can add on other things from other arts, see the System from their personal filters, BELIEVE they know what its about without extensive real time work with the experienced...that will attempt to take the water, add sugar, carbonation and caramel coloring to make soda pop. It is pretty much inevitable, for that seems so common in the m.art community. 

Such a soft drink might even be successfully marketed. It will not be Systema though and the buyer beware. We are very privaledged to live in the time when the well is still available to supply the pure water. 
It will be up to the next generations of Systema practitioners to see to it that it remains clean. I am confident that the future will always provide the seekers with a clean source. 

I see many posters above that are writting about what 'this' is correctly, and recognize the names as having trained with the sources.
Oh well, 'what can you do'? You can lead a horse to water...but... :idunno:


----------



## Furtry

Rob, but that's exactly my point... VV and MR have never advocated or taught "iron shirt" or "golden bell", they simply explained how to take a punch by utilizing the basic fundamental principles with out the hocus pocus that my sifu put me through. So when I read Systema practitioners saying; "yes we do" I get an itch to speak up, as that is not true. These people may have trained with VV and MR, maybe even more with MR that I, but I've asked the men directly about it (in Russian) they both laughed at me. Then asked me to show them... then crushed me like an empty pop can!
In the end; let each do what they want but Systema does not filter well, one looses all the flavour when utilizing filters on Systema.


----------



## Paul Genge

I agree with Furtry's comments on this one.  The other danger is instructors adding in principles or explanations from their original styles to fill in the gaps in their own knowledge.   
The answer is simple.  If you don't know don't teach or preach it.

Paul Genge
http://www.russianmartialart.org.uk


----------



## NYCRonin

I think we are filtering right now.
No instructor of Systema should add on anything and say "This is Systema".
If you have previous martial experience - you might pass that along to a friend. BUT - its to be made clear that it is NOT Systema. To a general student, dont do so in any class - for it is easy for a beginner to miss the origins.

Comparisons for discussions sake are necessary. Dima, you and I know that many times just the difference between Russian words spoken and translated into english...kinda modifies what was best expressed in the native tongue of the speaker.
Subtle meanings and nuances lost in translation.

It is amasing to listen to Vlad sometimes struggle with the essence of what he is trying to convey in english - and so often it is his facial or subtle body english that imparts the 'feeling' of what he is saying.

If a person comes to me and says "This is goldenbell iron sweatpants" and its just like what you do in taking a punch....I will ask to punch him - just to see what he is trying to demo. Then he can punch me and I absorb our way.
I know I can see where the differences lay, and might even..maybe...find a certain similarity on a few points. BUT - they are not the same and never will be.

Maybe I seem too 'liberal'...but I have never found any difficulty in keeping my previous m.art types seperate. I can still do a round kick from ShotoKan, or Moo Duk Kwan, or Muay Thai, or even Savate. They are not the same - but are roundhouse kicks just the same...but not the same kick at all.
I can deflect a strike with a B-G 'turning fan' or a Systema deflection. They both deflect - but are NOT the same thing.

Paul, I cant envision when an instructor could fill in any gap by adding another arts principles to Systema. That would not be Systema anymore. I dont personally know any teachers of Systema that do this gap filling. I have met many students that attempt to do so, though. When I am contacted, for example; to teach a seminar - I speak to the host about what they want to present. Sometimes it is pure Systema, other times - they want a mix of Systema and my other life experiences. In the former - it is Systema as I was taught it - chapter and verse. In the latter, I might include - say, a something out of my personal bag of experience. An example might be how to use a thumb jab to break a person out of a bear hug...and pulling his shirt up over his head as recoils from the thumb. The first was learned from Hatsumi, the second - from inmates fighting on Rikers. (Dima - its alot like the way hockey players use their opponents shirt against them). Now, these things were not directly specifically taught to me - chapter and verse - by Vlad. But they fit nicely into the dynamics of The System. Would you feel I was bastardizing Systema when I demo this and teach it? OR - are we attempting to be so exact that we try to be Vladclones? If so, we will fail. Misha and Vlad hardly move alike. But the principles of Systema are very clear in their differing movements. But, I digress.

Perhaps I am more speaking about a language. In communicating with others who have m.a. language/movements different than ours...one can explain certain things superficially. If you speak more than one language, and are fluent in it - then you can converse more fully.

Back to Furtry - Dima, when I travel around Brooklyn, I sometimes meet a person originally from Russia...maybe asking directions, for example. I know that they are speaking Russian in their minds...and trying to communicate with me, using a mix of russian and english. I think about what they ask - and in my poor mix of russian and english - we both eventually get the message across. It does not change the purity of their Russian, nor my Brooklynese.
In fact, we might have exchanged a few words new to each other. 

If anyone thinks I am advocating inclusion of another arts methods to ours, then we ARE filtering here. The System needs no inclusion. THATS WHY I GAVE UP OVER 30 PLUS OF PREVIOUS MARTIAL STUDY TO 'DO THE WORK', as best as I can.

As said previously, I have little concern that Systema will be corrupted. We have the source alive TODAY. REAL Systema is there for anyone who is willing to do whatever they must to find it.
If a person buys a tape of Vlads - and trys to punch it into the dynamics of whatever art they study - that is simply not Systema....but even a few things added from Systema can help round out their experience of martial movement. 

By the flip side, it doesnt corrupt your understanding of Systema to see what other arts contain, if you wish. Anyone I know as certified in Systema has always shown the ability to filter very well. I would suspect that it is one with less real time experience that says "yes, we do" - when we "dont, at all".

On forums, the posters are usually unknown to each other in real time. A guy could easily write about the "yes we do" - and not know Vasilieve from vasaline. ANY reader has to take any post from a person they do not know...with a shaker of salt.

Including all reading this that do not know me.

BUT, Dima. You and I DO know each other. And I feel I understand what you are saying, and although I agree in Systema staying and being expressed in the purest of terms....we cannot do anything but comment when someone is way off base. If we choose to.

REAL Systema understanding is available....forums comparisons to anothe rart will allways happen. ONLY real time experience is the yardstick.

And be thankful that we are doing 'this art' now. In time, it is just inevitable that it will find those that will attempt to alter it -- maybe soon, maybe in a hundred years..but that happens to all m.arts, it seems. Even then, I still feel real Systema will still be available to those that seek it out.

Enough of our time -- I have to go change my filter. LOL!


----------



## BobP

Just a quick repsonse form the perspective of a former CIMA student..I've had exposure to different types of external and internal iron shirt, qigongs, neigungs, "energy" work (encompassing things from massage and dim mak through to "no touch" and "transmission) as all the usual CIMA training methods.

To my mind you can't draw many comparisons between them and the System. Different paradigms, different cultural expressions, different methods and theories. In fact in some ways they conflict quite fundamentally. So to say, for example, that MR is using "chi power" just doesn't hold water.

cheers


----------



## mscroggins

The problem here is reading comprehension and critical thinking.

The question was: Is there internal training in Systema?

Furty supplied the answer:



> There is no understanding of chi or qi or what ever term you want to use.



This answer is clear. Systema contains no ideas or concepts relating to chi or qi, or methods promoting them. 

Knowing that there is no concept of "internal training" in Systema, claiming there is internal training is Systema is as absurd as claiming: "My dog has a transmission". In another conceptual model, your dog may have a transmission.... but to most ears that statement is as meaningless as "Michael has hitting for qi disruption" is in the context of systema. 

I'm not saying "internal training" is false or meaningless in the proper context, only that, as Furty pointed out, in the context of systema it is without meaning. Neither true, nor false, but without meaning, and therefore useless.


----------



## Jerry

Well, I don't know about "dilution" of Systema, but it does appear to me that a straw-man is being propped up in terms of the discussion itself. While other arts / material was brought up as a comparison (it's in the original question), I don't believe anyone has claimed that the specific material exists in Systema (IOW, no one said that Systema has LoHan in it). 

I'm not interested in sitting an comparing crediential size... and take some umberage at the appeal to authority running around in response. While I would be happy to discuss my experiences, and compare-contrast them with those of others, comments like "Jerry, would you tell the leaders of Systema that they dont know the 'wherefores' of what their art is about?" are hardly a discussion of material and experience. Good luck to you all.


----------



## SonnyPuzikas

I don't think anybody is throwing any authority "weight" around here, Jerry.
Simple fact is that Dima has been directly training under Vladimir for years and has been Systema instructor before your instructor attended his first Systema seminar... Comments made by others are true to some degree- some (including some instructors) do try to fill in certain gaps with their knowledge shaped through the prizm of understanding some issues from other arts perspective. Most do that to some degree- yours truly as well (guilty as charged... artyon: ). Yet some stay there and present those personal interpretations as THE way, and others go to the sources with their questions and concerns.
There are many ways to get to the other side of the wall...
Bash your head upon it untill that wall gives (hopefully before your brain bucket gives...)
Try to climb over the top of the wall...
Walk along the wall untill you find the opening...
Or ask yourself- why am I in front of this wall- maybe I was heading in the wrong direction to begin with?


----------



## Furtry

Rob, there is nothing wrong with drawing parallels to explain a concept. But if you're doing chikung and calling it Systema you are not doing Systema.

Jerry, _you_ said that Systema has all those things that are CMA.

Sonny, kak dela? vsevo dobravo semay.


----------



## NYCRonin

Hells bells, I agree with you, Dima!
NEITHER you nor I would 'teach' a triangle choke from BJJ and call that Systema..although full movement might give that to a person in defence. We might demo it for a reason. cause it is a good eeffective thing - but not state that its "A Systema thing" - its just a good move....and give credit to BJJ or JJJ as an origin. 
THATS more a personal thing of wide experience though. 
YOU have such experience...and I know  that, as a teacher of self protection; you, I, Sonny, et al - we desire to pass along the effective things we know work. 
We can do and quote Vlad as 'chapter and verse'. Can take a movement like a backfist and twist it to fit the System - although Vladdy might never have taught any 'classical backfist' move.

I MUST Agree with you, my friend. 
"Rob, there is nothing wrong with drawing parallels to explain a concept. But if you're doing chikung and calling it Systema you are not doing Systema."

Nothing wrong with seaking a terminolgy of parallels to EXPLAIN as best as one can. And if one is doing chikung and calling it Sytema - then one is only fooling oneself. 

Well, my filters are cleaner than ever.
Thanks to all posted above.

Hey Dima - why must I go to babelfish when you speak Pa-ruskie?
Oh, i know why. 
Ya ess Shswa, nyet gavaroo pa-russkie. 
Ya nye panimyoo. 
Spaciba Dima.
(pardon my fractured Russian, moy druk)
I do envy your skill in communicating with our teachers, though.


----------



## BobP

Furtry said:
			
		

> Rob, there is nothing wrong with drawing parallels to explain a concept. But if you're doing chikung and calling it Systema you are not doing Systema.


I quite agree and I wouldn't do that. To be honest I wouldn't even draw parallels there. The only time I might do that from a CIMA perspective is in the area of sensitivity or body softness - and even then there is divergence from the idea of rooting or groundpath. 

Also the only time I might find that useful are times, such as last Sunday for example, when I'm teaching a CIMA group who have expressed an interest in the System. It might help give people a reference point they are comfortable with and help us move on into the work. As long as it helps rather than hinders and is seen purely as a reference point. The danger is - and I've seen or heard this quite often - that people assume familiarity with a principle or concept and it prevents them exploring that to its full They already "know" it because "yeah, we have that in our style". Then it acts as a barrier to the work.

cheers


----------



## Jerry

Qigong simply means "energy work". So the question is not technique based, but whether there is energy work in Systema. In my perception / experience there is. Obviously, others here disagree.



> The only time I might do that from a CIMA perspective is in the area of sensitivity or body softness - and even then there is divergence from the idea of rooting or groundpath.


 Differences are, themselves, useful to draw parallels from. The "normal" CMA tendancy to push energy to the ground as contrasted with Systema's tendancy to expell it out (out the back of the forearm in the most classic hit, though the "let the hit you got move through out and come back out in your hit drill" does more advanced work with it.

BTW, that drill can be "tightened up" to the point that you never come out of contact with your partner. At this point, the movement is almost entirely internal and the effect is a lot like some forms of push-hands.


----------



## RachelK

_de-lurks_
Hi,
There is also "energy work" in walking down the street or for that matter, typing at a computer. Energy and movement are fundamental aspects of human biomechanics. Drawing a single breath is a form of movement, and it would not be possible without energy. 
I'm a novice Systema student but I'll add to the fray. If there is internal work in Systema, there must be is external work, as well. But I've never heard any of my teachers make this distinction between internal and external. The work is all the same. Perhaps there are principles yet unrevealed to this novice, but I would be surprised to discover a contrast between internal and external in Systema.   
*Vsego nailuchshego* (best wishes),
Rachel
_re-lurks_


----------



## BobP

Jerry said:
			
		

> Qigong simply means "energy work".


True, but it can also simply mean "breathing" or non-simply can mean a lot more than that. It's actually a fairly recent term to describe a very wide range of Chinese practices, from simple breathing work through to spiritual rituals, (predominantly buddhist and daoist).


----------



## Arthur

See... I was right... without first defining terms, you just end up with a big mess, and conflict that might actually be agreement if terms were first defined.

Be that as it may... a couple of thoughts since I have a rare moment of internet time.

Any art whether it be Systema, Ba Gua, Skin Diving, or Ms. Martinez's style of basket weaving is what it is... and if students pay a teacher of that art to teach them that art... then the teacher should indeed teach them THAT art. 

On the other hand teaching is an art in and of itself... and if someone can best convey ideas, concepts and even movements by refering briefly to another art... the approach should be considered. I can certainly teach Systema without ever mentioning another art... however occasionally you get a student who can learn something twice as fast by making a given analogy. I thinkI would be shirking my responsibility as a teacher if I didn't attempt to make use of that analogy.

Of course when ever there is a second hand... there is usually a third (a sort of trinity shot of analysis;-)) And while making analogies to other arts is sometimes useful, more often than not... erradicating analogies to other arts is the most useful thing for most students.

If someone drives a car, and making ananalogy to driving a car can help them learn then the teacher should do it, likewise if a poerson does Hung Gar and making an analogy to it can help them learn, they should do that too, IMO.

I have a few students who badger me regularly to show more CIMA or Israeli stuff, but I always tell them... people i this class pay me to teach them Russian Martial Art, not Chinese, Israeli, Indonesian or anything else.

They are welcome (as long as I don't think it will mess up their RMA) to schedule appointments to learn about other arts  I know, but RMA is always taught pure. 

Jerry Said:


> Qigong simply means "energy work". So the question is not technique based, but whether there is energy work in Systema. In my perception / experience there is. Obviously, others here disagree.



Qi Gong indeed means energy work. Being a stickler for definition though... I can't help but wonder iof that point would have been better understood if a foreign language (IE Mandarin) had been refrained from.

BobP Said:


> True, but it can also simply mean "breathing" or non-simply can mean a lot more than that.



I have to disagree. It really does mean "Energy Work". Thats precisely what it means. Yes people ascribe other meanings to it... but it is again because of a lack of proper and common definition.


Rachel Said:


> If there is internal work in Systema, there must be is external work, as well.



A mighty fine point IMO!


Rachel also said:


> But I've never heard any of my teachers make this distinction between internal and external.



Rachel may not have heard it but it has definately happened. In Toronto 2003 Mikhail Ryabko Specifically and directly taught a section on what he defined as internal work. There were specific drills given to be practiced. Perhaps of an interest to this thread I should mention they were the same drills and practices my CIMA instructor gave for what he termed "internal work". As they say in Disney world, I guess its a small world afterall;-)

Arthur


----------



## kage110

Jerry,

I can see where you are coming from when you say you can see energy work in Systema because I see it too. However when I look at CIMA from a Russian perspective I see a whole lot of stuff that is termed as 'energy' work that I can now explain in terms of biomechanics and tension. I do not normally write for Systema - I do something else which stems from the same source - but I would say that there is no overt teaching of energy work or even recognition that it exists in the sense you are aluding to. And I get that from my teacher who had 18 years in Systema in Moscow and who I have talked a great deal with about energy work. However friends of mine who do a lot of energy work recognise my teacher as having abilities in that directions and that even I can do things to them they can only explain in terms of chi. The fact that I can explain it in other terms sometimes baffles them!

As Rachel says, energy is everywhere and in that context it is certain that it is in Systema. It may also be true that the breathing exercises and the ability to relax and move that stem from Systema training are very good methods for developing chi in the way that you recognise but that is not to say it is part of the system. Mind you, for those who want to say that because MR or VV don't mention it then it can't exist I would say 'don't be so sure and keep your mind open!', but I don't think that applies to any of those who have posted here before me.

Hugh


----------



## Franc0

Arthur said:
			
		

> Rachel may not have heard it but it has definately happened. In Toronto 2003 Mikhail Ryabko Specifically and directly taught a section on what he defined as internal work. There were specific drills given to be practiced. Perhaps of an interest to this thread I should mention they were the same drills and practices my CIMA instructor gave for what he termed "internal work". As they say in Disney world, I guess its a small world afterall;-)
> 
> Arthur



Which IMO, is why sometimes it's a good thing to teach the similarities between systems, even if it is just the terminology, as opposed to teaching it in the context of it being solely referred to any specific art or system. Arthur can see that the above mentioned drills were the same as the CIMA drills, because of his vast knowledge of various systems (U da man Art  ). But there could be those with less experience that would be led to beleive that those drills were a product of Systema only. To some it doesn't matter where "it" comes from as long as "it" works or helps, regardless of the name attributed to "it". To some detractors though, it could be fuel for their diatribes against them. Who cares? No one maybe, some possibly.
I agree 110% Arthur, when it comes to the martial arts, it truly is a small world. :ultracool 

Franco


----------



## mscroggins

Learning requires, at least on some level, a suspension of belief. You must be willing to let go of what you think you know in order to learn something new. I find mixed metaphors and analogies distracting.

In my opinion, learning to tone down the analytical part of your brain is the most important factor in learning anything physical. If you cannot do this, then the motor skills you  are practicing will never come easily enough to be used. The point of learning whatever style you study is to let it sink into your body and permeate your daily life. Otherwise, it is just entertainment. 

Comparison is all about analysis, but analysis has nothing do to with learning and shouldn't be introduced during training.


----------



## Jerry

> I can see where you are coming from when you say you can see energy work in Systema because I see it too. However when I look at CIMA from a Russian perspective I see a whole lot of stuff that is termed as 'energy' work that I can now explain in terms of biomechanics and tension.


 Ahh yes. There is a great deal termed "energy work" which is, in fact, not. Whether it's structural, or intent-based, or simple biomechanics.



> but I would say that there is no overt teaching of energy work or even recognition that it exists in the sense you are aluding to. And I get that from my teacher who had 18 years in Systema in Moscow and who I have talked a great deal with about energy work.


 Well, to quote another poster:

"In Toronto 2003 Mikhail Ryabko Specifically and directly taught a section on what he defined as internal work. "​


----------



## erich

> In my opinion, learning to tone down the analytical part of your brain is the most important factor in learning anything physical. If you cannot do this, then the motor skills you are practicing will never come easily enough to be used. The point of learning whatever style you study is to let it sink into your body and permeate your daily life. Otherwise, it is just entertainment.


Amen Master Scroggins

IMO - analysis and comparison is best done over beer after physical training if at all.  While training you have to give yourself over to your teacher and to the movement.  This is why the teacher is, in general, more important than the style and is certainly more important than the language and analogies used to describe this or that.

Jerry said:


> Ahh yes. There is a great deal termed "energy work" which is, in fact, not. Whether it's structural, or intent-based, or simple biomechanics.



definitions again.  What exactly to you mean by energy?  Mass in motion is energy, mass held inert requires energy, from my perspective all martial arts is energy work.  There is certainly a scale of subtelty and refinement, but it is all energy work.

Arthur & Franco - i just had to make an appearance on this thread with you guys for old times sake.  Fun!


----------



## Franc0

mscroggins said:
			
		

> Learning requires, at least on some level, a suspension of belief. You must be willing to let go of what you think you know in order to learn something new. I find mixed metaphors and analogies distracting.
> 
> In my opinion, learning to tone down the analytical part of your brain is the most important factor in learning anything physical. If you cannot do this, then the motor skills you  are practicing will never come easily enough to be used. The point of learning whatever style you study is to let it sink into your body and permeate your daily life. Otherwise, it is just entertainment.
> 
> Comparison is all about analysis, but analysis has nothing do to with learning and shouldn't be introduced during training.



If you want to keep your training/learning at the beginners level, I would agree. Once you become an advanced practitioner or instructor, there are times when you need to analyze movements, especially when referring to biomechanics. You can't just show someone a movement, then expect them know exactly what you've done and then do it without explaining some of the finer nuances of the mechanics behind the movement. If that were the case, then everyone could just learn via video.
Hey Eric! Good to hear from ya man :asian: I've trained (and drank) with EricH and Arthur over the same weekend at my place, and even if they don't agree with my statements, I can hopefully say they understand where I'm coming from. We shared knowledge AND analysis without any disagreements.

Franco


----------



## Jerry

> definitions again. What exactly to you mean by energy?


 I mean qigong. If you don't have a general understanding of the material in question you should, perhaps, start a thread in one of the appropriate forums.



> Mass in motion is energy, mass held inert requires energy, from my perspective all martial arts is energy work. There is certainly a scale of subtelty and refinement, but it is all energy work.


 At some level of abstraction almost all terms can be used to describe all things. This is an entirely useless level of abstraction as it means no discussion is possible.

You also find this in a discussion of proofs, as every claim comes back to a worldview argument of presuppoitions. I could as easily assert that nothing at all is proven energy work as you cannot prove reality exists... but that would be just as silly.

For your all-inclusive use of the term "energy work", where everything is energy work, you agree with me systema has it... a simple discussion indeed.


----------



## Furtry

This thread started as a question if Systema had "iron shirt/golden bell" type of internal training, to which the answer is no. 

Next point; Systema does have an 'internal' aspect to it. From trying to move a person or their strikes with out contact to trying to sense some ones presence with out the pervious knowledge of when and where they will be approaching from. All of which requires that all parties involved be conscious and aware of what is happening. This constitutes maybe one tenth of the whole pie and is developed as one goes along with their everyday 'tedious' training. But that is not some kind of Chinese qigong or what ever. That is the development of sensitivity, which comes out of one of the main principles; Relaxation.

I'll be speaking with Mikhail in two weeks to clarify this further, but as far as my knowledge goes Systema does not have an understanding or belief or theory of chi/qi or what ever else you want to call it. There is only the human soul.

The only exercise that Mikhail had us do, when he was teaching the 'internal' part of Systema was push-ups with breathing, more than most could do mind you, but only push- ups :lol:. And form his explanation this was done so that people would stop being so combative and physical with each other, and start to be more aware, in tune, and relaxed when doing the work.

Side note; some guy walked in late for the start of that session, so he hadnt done any of the warm up and didnt really know what we were trying to learn. Somehow he ends up my partner in front of a small crowd. I tell him to hit me in the face so that I may try to make him miss by guiding/leading the punch with out contact. So he swings and does his thing, I do my thing bamb rite in the kisser. Crowed laughs, I end up with a fat lip, and he feels silly for punching me in the teeth. To this day I cant do that trick. :idunno:


----------



## RachelK

Hi,
I want to clarify that I'm a *novice* student of Systema. I have been training only for a year-and-a-half. I've never studied another martial art. Please keep that in mind as you read my earlier post. I don't think I'd even recognize internal or external work unless it was presented to me specifically as thus. My teacher told our class that Systema is an internal martial art. Considering that I'm one of the more experienced students in our class of mostly beginners, it's not implausible that we've never learned the internal aspects of Systema, just the external ones, whatever those may be. Then again, my teacher does not talk a great deal during class. He usually demonstrates, then answers any general questions, such as this one, at the end of class. But no-one has ever asked him this question. Since all practitioners have a unique approach, Systema may be an internal martial art to my teacher, but internal and external to another instructor.
Despite my enthusiasm for Systema, I'm pretty new to it, and to martial arts in general. And so I can't compare it to another style that is purely external or purely internal or both or neither. So far, I haven't learned about external and internal Systema practice, but that's no barometer for what any other student of the System is learning. I trust my teacher's guidance in these matters and perhaps one day I will learn Systema "inside and out." But for now, I have more than enough to practice without worrying about which exercises fit into which categories. Maybe in ten or twenty years I will be able to identify the differences, but at this point, it's all the same to me.
Respectfully,
Rachel


----------



## Arthur

> Well, to quote another poster:


That would be me, and I have a name. Its Arthur, just like my screen name.



> "In Toronto 2003 Mikhail Ryabko Specifically and directly taught a section on what he defined as internal work. "


I quite specifically said "internal" and not "energy". Neither Mikhail nor my CIMA teacher ever refered to said exercises as "energy based". They each refered to them as "internal".

EricH Said:


> Arthur & Franco - i just had to make an appearance on this thread with you guys for old times sake. Fun!


 :ultracool 

Masterfinger:


> I've trained (and drank) with EricH and Arthur over the same weekend at my place, and even if they don't agree with my statements, I can hopefully say they understand where I'm coming from.


Well... personally, I'd have to say I agree with everything you've said in this thread 100% But I think we are distinctly in the minority  :idunno: 

Mscroggins said the following:


> Learning requires, at least on some level, a suspension of belief.


On the contrary, in many cases it needs exactly the opposite. People need to have faith that the training and the movements and ideas will work. If someone suspends their belief in the material I hardly think they be particularly succesful at learning or employing it. 

That belief/faith can come blindly, through testing, through analysis, through getting the crap beaten out of you with it, through trust, or another means, but ultimately one has to have belief in the material.

One of the teachers jobs is to get a student to begin trusting in the material so he CAN let go and just feel. Every student is unique and what one needs to be able to let go is often quite different from what another needs. 



> You must be willing to let go of what you think you know in order to learn something new.


You sure as heck need to keep from letting it get in the way. Sometimes a teachers use of metaphors about other arts, are specifically to help a student put some of those beliefs aside. 



> I find mixed metaphors and analogies distracting.


What you find distracting is sort of irrelevent. A teachers job isn't about just you. Its about teaching everyone in a class and their may well be someone in class who finds everything you find usefull to be "distracting". You both deserve top be taught, IMO.



> If you cannot do this, then the motor skills you are practicing will never come easily enough to be used.


I know plenty of analytical people, who are here to day because they used there art just fine.

Just because someone can see, it doesn't mean they can't listen or taste or smell. There is a roll for all parts of the brain in learning. For each individual there is often a perfect balance. The student has the luxury of keying into what works for them, the teacher has the task of knowing how to convey information in every combination and balance his student base requires.

Arthur


----------



## Arthur

PS A few posts came in while I was typing mine... so I thought I'd throw on an addendum.

Furtry Said:


> The only exercise that Mikhail had us do, when he was teaching the 'internal' part of Systema was push-ups with breathing, more than most could do mind you, but only push- ups


Furtry you may have been out of the room, but there was a serious of exercises that were more than pushups. The exercises revolved around what some other arts might call rooting exercises or Ground Force Vector training. Accepting pushes and directing the force into the ground to neutralize... neither yielding nor "resisting". Just "neutralizing".

Rachel Said:


> Since all practitioners have a unique approach, Systema may be an internal martial art to my teacher, but internal and external to another instructor.


I think thats a really fantastic point, and just wanted to say so.

Arthur
PS Perhaps one of the reasons people resort to using terms from other arts when speaking of Systema... is Systema's lack of terms for just about anything. Its very hard to have a conversation about something that doesn't allow terms, words or any other linguistic characteristic to anything about it. Just a thought.


----------



## Furtry

Arthur wrote;


> Furtry you may have been out of the room, but there was a serious of exercises that were more than pushups. The exercises revolved around what some other arts might call rooting exercises or Ground Force Vector training. Accepting pushes and directing the force into the ground to neutralize... neither yielding nor "resisting". Just "neutralizing".


:lol: Maybe that was when I was getting ice for my fat lip. :lol:

I know the exercise you're talking about, to me, it doesn't appear or seem to be one that I would call internal. But that is me.
I also remember people trying to push Mikhail over and him blowing them backwards when they made contact. That can also be called internal, I guess, but it is explained as doing/generating a body wave.
At any rate, no chi thingy involved nor mentioned when it was taught .


----------



## Arthur

> At any rate, no chi thingy involved nor mentioned when it was taught


I know. I never said qi thingy. I said "internal". Likewise, he specifically said "internal". That is my point and only point on the matter.

Arthur


----------



## mscroggins

Arthur said:
			
		

> Mscroggins said the following:
> 
> On the contrary, in many cases it needs exactly the opposite. People need to have faith that the training and the movements and ideas will work. If someone suspends their belief in the material I hardly think they be particularly succesful at learning or employing it.
> 
> That belief/faith can come blindly, through testing, through analysis, through getting the crap beaten out of you with it, through trust, or another means, but ultimately one has to have belief in the material.
> 
> One of the teachers jobs is to get a student to begin trusting in the material so he CAN let go and just feel. Every student is unique and what one needs to be able to let go is often quite different from what another needs.
> Arthur




This is almost the opposite of what I meant. I should have been clear earlier. Sorry.

Say I decide to study CIMA. I find a teacher, and he agrees to teach me. In order to learn from him I need to suspend what I think I know about CIMA and about martial arts, movement, and physics in general and simply accept what he has to offer. I don't suspend my belief in his material, or throw out what I already know, but rather put aside I have previously learned so I can learn from him without prejudgments clouding my mind.


----------



## Furtry

mscroggins said:
			
		

> This is almost the opposite of what I meant. I should have been clear earlier. Sorry.
> 
> Say I decide to study CIMA. I find a teacher, and he agrees to teach me. In order to learn from him I need to suspend what I think I know about CIMA and about martial arts, movement, and physics in general and simply accept what he has to offer. I don't suspend my belief in his material, or throw out what I already know, but rather put aside I have previously learned so I can learn from him without prejudgments clouding my mind.


Yap and those same preconceived notions are the largest hurdles for people to get over.
The other day a nice guy from Buffalo NY drove in to train. I worked with him allot, mostly trying to get him to try it out with out the stances and set techniques. At the end of the session he walked in to the change room and thanked Vlad for the class and said; 'I tried to empty my cup, and it seems I went to the point that I forgot to allow my body to move.'
Vlad looks at him, and says 'when you come here with an empty cup we fill it with vodka.'
The look of confusion on his face was priceless :lol:!

Arthur, then you and I agree about that thingy :ultracool .


----------



## BoxANT

Furtry said:
			
		

> 'when you come here with an empty cup we fill it with vodka.'



nominated for quote of the year  artyon:


----------



## Arthur

> This is almost the opposite of what I meant. I should have been clear earlier. Sorry.



Actually, that may have been my point. ;-)


Say I decide to study CIMA. I find a teacher, and he agrees to teach me. In order to learn from him I need to suspend what I think I know about CIMA.

Perhaps, If what you know about CIMA is incorrect you should put it aside... but what if your understanding is perfect? Should you discard an acurate understanding, should you discard a competent understanding of the reality within witch you train... just to make observers happy and maintain the party line?



> I don't suspend my belief in his material, or throw out what I already know,


To be honest previous statements would tend to lead me elsewhere.



> but rather put aside I have previously learned so I can learn from him without prejudgments clouding my mind.



IMO, You are contradicting your self. You've placed extreme faith in whoever your instructor is.... and are ignoring the desicions and issues your instructor had to confront to assume a position to guide you. Well my opinion anyway.

Arthur


----------



## mscroggins

Arthur said:
			
		

> Actually, that may have been my point. ;-)
> 
> Say I decide to study CIMA. I find a teacher, and he agrees to teach me. In order to learn from him I need to suspend what I think I know about CIMA.
> 
> Perhaps, If what you know about CIMA is incorrect you should put it aside... but what if your understanding is perfect? Should you discard an acurate understanding, should you discard a competent understanding of the reality within witch you train



That is a bit of a straw man. You are ignoring the fact that people get to choose who they train with and can make judgments about the quality of their instructors. If you don't like your instructor, or you think training with him is harmful, there is no obligation to return, or even bother training in the first place. You are free to walk away, or not train, at any time. 



> ... just to make observers happy and maintain the party line?



???



> IMO, You are contradicting your self. You've placed extreme faith in whoever your instructor is.... and are ignoring the desicions and issues your instructor had to confront to assume a position to guide you. Well my opinion anyway.
> 
> Arthur



You are mistaken. I don't place extreme faith in an instructor. But, I do recognize that my state of mind, and attitude toward the instructor, make a difference in my ability to absorb information, and I don't see any point in working against myself. I assume the instructor is trying in good faith to instruct me to the best of their abilities, and I return that sentiment by accepting in good faith what they are teaching. If I have doubts about an instructor, or the material while training, that is my fault for not doing my homework beforehand.

The proper place for doubt is before I decide to train with this instructor, or after the session is over. Analysis, as everyone seems to agree, is best done over a beer with Eric.


----------



## Franc0

mscroggins said:
			
		

> The proper place for doubt is before I decide to train with this instructor, or after the session is over. Analysis, as everyone seems to agree, is best done over a beer with Eric.



If there is doubt before you decide to train, does that mean you don't train with that instructor at all? Or do you go in with no doubt, then train with the instructor, and leave with the doubt setting in afterwards? And no, not everyone agrees it's best done over a beer. There's a difference between analysis of the material learned, and doubt. Doubt is just one of the conclusions of analysis, which usually happens AS you watch the material being taught. It only takes someone with standard intelligence to walk out of a seminar or class and be able to decide that what they just saw is either crap or good stuff, without having to spend time dissecting (i.e. analyzing) it afterwards. IMO, analysis afterwards is done to better understand the movements taught (better know as practicing), or to simply perform them as intended( also known as practicing  ).
When Eric, Arthur and I trained together we discussed (analyzed?) what we were doing AT THE TIME we were doing it, and spent our drinking time joking and laughing at Arthur for losing his wallet :uhyeah: . The only things said about what we trained with earlier as we drank was simply that it was good stuff we were doing, period. It's a simple human function to be able to immediately analyse something as you're learning it, especially for those with beyond average experience.


----------



## mscroggins

masterfinger said:
			
		

> If there is doubt before you decide to train, does that mean you don't train with that instructor at all? Or do you go in with no doubt, then train with the instructor, and leave with the doubt setting in afterwards?



This thread has wandered off into narrow definitions and taken some strange tangents, but let me return to my original point.

Learning requires the willing suspension of belief (sometimes you hear the phrase disbelief). Training for anything is in some respects artificial (even training for typing uses artificial drills and exercises) IMO, you must adopt this zenish attitude of beginners mind to learn something new, and that means suspending your disbelief and accepting the material for what it is, not for what you think is lacking, or what it could be. Recognizing that you do not have perfect knowledge of the instructors intentions or means. 

I think this is the best way to put aside complacency and move forward. Learning requires a transaction, and as a student, this is my half of that transaction. I try to approach everything I need to learn with this attitude. I often fail, but I aim to put mysef in the most efficient mindset. 

Learning isn't always immediate and you can never be sure at the time exactly what you have learned. There is also a delayed effect that must be considered - another reason I try to simply soak it all up, and not burden myself with overthinking.

With all of your experience your learning curve must be shorter, but for me, things take longer and I understand this and try to make it work to my advantage. So, I find the best instructor I can, then I take what they give and try simply to soak up all I can. If you believe this is the mark of a rank beginner, you are correct. I am a beginner at everything.


----------



## erich

two apologies:

1.  sorry for having dropped out of the discussion.  I was away on vacation
2.  sorry for reviving this thread

I think that we would all agree that though there is value in analysis and comparison there is greater value in movement and combative interaction.

I believe that in the context of a formal lesson or a class where there is a clear and valuable teacher/student relationship the student should give themself over to the teacher.  Learning is impaired if work is half-hearted because of doubt, paradigm conflict, or excessive analysis.  This is what I believe Jason was getting at.  

To Arthur's point, it need not be a matter of putting excessive faith in your teacher.  Trust but verify...

The opportunity to debate, analyze, compare and physically challenge assumptions outside of the context of a formal class or a lesson then this can be an extremely valuable extension to formal training whether it is done in conjunction with, or completely removed from physical training.  

I have been very fortunate to engage in the above process with a number of people on this thread but I have to confess...  

I thought that the reason we did so much valuable & enjoyable analysis at Frank's studio in Vegas was that we were too hung over to move much.  

Now will somebody tell me exactly what qi is?   :idunno:


----------



## jellyman

I thnk systema is internal in the sense that it opens a dialogue between you and your body, the "body under mental control" to borrow a phrase from Tim Cartmell. 

But that's just my definition. As Arthur said, if you don't define these terms, it's all meaningless.

As for qi/ki/prana/pneuma, those are all constructs of different cultures, Systema doesn't have these names. Is what we do the same thing? FWIW, I once asked a TJQ dude in Moscow what he thought, he thought it was a "whole different feeling" . Can't get more subjective than that! But it is a subjective question, IMO. I mean, go to any TCIMA board, and nothing gets the people riled like the definition of qi, or internal...


----------



## BobP

"FWIW, I once asked a TJQ dude in Moscow what he thought, he thought it was a "whole different feeling" 

That's interesting and very much my own take on it. A very different feeling indeed. In fact I was talking to an old TJQ buddy recently who has been moving "Systema-ward" and he said very much the same thing too. Very different feeling on a number of levels too.


----------

