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
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.
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
