Internal in external fighting systems

[Kung Fu Wang]

My background is in a very hard, external style, for which I spent close to a decade training in. ...

Just wondering anyone's thoughts on how pursuing what's categorically seen as an "external" style can lead to the same place as an internal..

As long as it's not "force against force", it can be "internal". Does your hard external style has any

- throwing art in it? All throwing art utilize the internal principles such as borrow, yield, sink, sticky, follow, ...
- block/grab/pull? All block/grab/pull also utilize the internal principles such as jam, guide, tuck, ...

 

[windwalker099]

Just wondering anyone's thoughts on how pursuing what's categorically seen as an "external" style can lead to the same place as an internal..

Depends....on what the practice is based on....
What place does one want to go to


Most have seen this image

Master Cheung demonstrating
the mighty Iron Palm.

THE ION PALM MASTER

No Summary

sifuofkungfu.tripod.com

Example of internal practices augmenting the body,,in what would be classed as an external practice..Iron Palm
If ones practice is not based on Chinese methods developing internal skill.
Chances are that this type of "external" skill can not be realized.

Some of his history

Ku Yu Cheung could not stand the arrogance of this man and his constant insults of the Chinese people, so he accepted the challenge.

He took his position on the ground, and focused his internal power (Chi). The horse, ridden by Kalik, kicked out with its hind legs but missed. On the second kick, the hind legs struck their target, Ku Yu Cheung’s stomach.
To the surprise of Kalik and the onlookers, there was no affect on Master Ku! Master Ku was not finished, and he proposed that since the horse had kicked him, it would be only fair to have the horse receive a blow from him in return.

This was agreed upon, and as Kalik rode past Master Ku, he struck the horse with his palm.

The horse immediately fell to the ground, dumping his rider, and died a short time later! Master Ku Yu Cheung had used the ‘Swallow’ principles to absorb the power of the horse’s kick. He had used the Iron Palm technique in hitting the horse, a technique that is known to only a few modern masters.

Named a general in the nationalist military, Ku Yu Cheung fought the bloody struggle of the Sino-Japanese War and survived such atrocities as the rape of Nanjing to retire from military service to teach kung fu in the new capital Nanjing. He continued his study of the internal arts, such as Sun Style Tai Chi with Sun Lu Tang and died in what was believed to be his late fifties in 1952. So ends the final chapter of another of the truly great Grandmasters of the Chinese Martial Arts. Even today, Ku Yu Cheung is considered to be one of the greatest of all the Northern Shaolin Style practitioners.

 

[O'Malley]

Okay, I have been pondering this for... awhile now, and I'm wondering if someone can provide some clarity on it.

The oft-used quote that training in external/internal leads to the same place... I LOVE this idea... but I truly can't fathom how this manifests...

My background is in a very hard, external style, for which I spent close to a decade training in. It did not lead me anywhere close to an internal sense, but quite the opposite. Better at the external. My current style I am definitely exploring more internal components and it's only now (last few years actually) I am truly feeling this more.

Just wondering anyone's thoughts on how pursuing what's categorically seen as an "external" style can lead to the same place as an internal..

Trying to pull off a Kenji Yamaki, huh? Matsuoka and Yamaki: The Power of Cross-Training – Aikido Journal

Although we have different backgrounds, my hunch is similar to yours. Aikido was originally an internal art (the daito ryu curriculum is actually divided into jujutsu, internals and jujutsu-with-internals) and the techniques were specifically selected to be a vehicle for the type of spiraling movement found in Asian internal arts (like taijiquan, baguazhang, bajiquan, xingyiquan, yiquan/taikiken and a bunch of koryu). We even have exercises designed to isolate or reproduce internal skills in a more understandable way and these are supposed to be the core of our practice. However, the overwhelming majority of aikidoka I've touched (a couple of them were very highly ranked) used regular muscle strength. They might be efficient and powerful but, even after decades, they just have strong jujutsu and they don't feel much different from other people I've touched who do kickboxing, muay thai, MMA, taekwondo, etc.

Among the people I've met or that I know of, inside and outside of aikido, the only ones who have demonstrated the type of unusual heaviness and soft strength which is associated with internal arts had done specific training. In other words, I know of no person in history who had internal skills and hadn't spent hours working on intent and body connection (e.g. by doing zhan zhuang / ritsu zen, and knowing what he's doing).

I think the phrase "training in external/internal leads to the same place" was either misinterpreted or coined by someone who had no idea about internal arts. Perhaps someone from internal arts who had no clue and was trying to reassure his students that, even though they suck now, they'll eventually fight like the "external" guys. Or, more likely, an external guy who watched/touched internal practitioners and found that they had nothing special.

 

[_Simon_]

As long as it's not "force against force", it can be "internal". Does your hard external style has any

- throwing art in it? All throwing art utilize the internal principles such as borrow, yield, sink, sticky, follow, ...
- block/grab/pull? All block/grab/pull also utilize the internal principles such as jam, guide, tuck, ...

Hmm ah okay interesting... thanks KFW.

My old art had barely any of that. My current art has all of that

 

[_Simon_]

Trying to pull off a Kenji Yamaki, huh? Matsuoka and Yamaki: The Power of Cross-Training – Aikido Journal

Although we have different backgrounds, my hunch is similar to yours. Aikido was originally an internal art (the daito ryu curriculum is actually divided into jujutsu, internals and jujutsu-with-internals) and the techniques were specifically selected to be a vehicle for the type of spiraling movement found in Asian internal arts (like taijiquan, baguazhang, bajiquan, xingyiquan, yiquan/taikiken and a bunch of koryu). We even have exercises designed to isolate or reproduce internal skills in a more understandable way and these are supposed to be the core of our practice. However, the overwhelming majority of aikidoka I've touched (a couple of them were very highly ranked) used regular muscle strength. They might be efficient and powerful but, even after decades, they just have strong jujutsu and they don't feel much different from other people I've touched who do kickboxing, muay thai, MMA, taekwondo, etc.

Among the people I've met or that I know of, inside and outside of aikido, the only ones who have demonstrated the type of unusual heaviness and soft strength which is associated with internal arts had done specific training. In other words, I know of no person in history who had internal skills and hadn't spent hours working on intent and body connection (e.g. by doing zhan zhuang / ritsu zen, and knowing what he's doing).

I think the phrase "training in external/internal leads to the same place" was either misinterpreted or coined by someone who had no idea about internal arts. Perhaps someone from internal arts who had no clue and was trying to reassure his students that, even though they suck now, they'll eventually fight like the "external" guys. Or, more likely, an external guy who watched/touched internal practitioners and found that they had nothing special.

First of all, AMAZING article, and I had no idea Kenji Yamaki Sensei changed his trajectory like that! His 100 man kumite is amazing haha.. but yeah honestly that mirrors my journey alot! From Kyokushin to training with karate infused with aiki principles and Goju Kensha. It's definitely where my journey has evolved..

Very well said; yeah I just can't understand how you can develop the internal aspects without devoting time to that specifically. Unless it's within the "higher levels" of external arts that you start to explore and tie in internal practices within the whole arc of your training up to now...

 

[mograph]

Old saying in CMA, also heard my Yang Shifu say it too

Internal, external, both end up in the same place if trained correctly.

I have also heard Internal goes to external and external goes to internal, if trained properly

My friend Ling likens this to two paths up the same mountain, both leading to the summit.

One is a gentle slope early, then a steep slope later.
The other is steep slope early, then a gentle slope later.

 

[O'Malley]

My friend Ling likens this to two paths up the same mountain, both leading to the summit.

One is a gentle slope early, then a steep slope later.
The other is steep slope early, then a gentle slope later.

I think either I'm missing something or we are discussing different things entirely. Could you (and others with similar views) please elaborate on this? What is the difference between the two and how, in your opinion, do they eventually rejoin?

 

[JowGaWolf]

I think either I'm missing something or we are discussing different things entirely. Could you (and others with similar views) please elaborate on this? What is the difference between the two and how, in your opinion, do they eventually rejoin?

They join at the end. For example if my goal is to punch your face, Then it ends at my fist. If my goal is to throw you then they bother end at the throw.

 

[mograph]

I think either I'm missing something or we are discussing different things entirely. Could you (and others with similar views) please elaborate on this? What is the difference between the two and how, in your opinion, do they eventually rejoin?

Fair question.

Keeping in mind, my earlier post, "all models are wrong, but some are useful ..."

Assumptions of this model:

• the name of each path (internal vs. external), is derived from the first slope the student encounters while climbing the mountain.
• external "arts" follow a gentle slope first, then steep slope, but internal "arts" follow a steep slope first, then a gentle slope.
• conceptually speaking, the internal segment is more difficult to grasp and practice to a point of utility. It's not better or worse, just less aligned with our daily experiences and expectations of a martial art. So the internal path is steep at first (hard to "get") then easier later on as the student applies the internal learnings to external actions that are easier to grasp conceptually. (You do zhan zhuang before punching, for example.) While the external slope is conceptually more gentle, these methods still take a lot of effort and sweat.
• Conversely, the external segment (gentle slope) is easier to understand: we can see it (usually), and success and failure is more apparent. However, to get to the top, the external student needs to learn internal methods later in the training (punch first, then do zhan zhuang). It's possible that external arts always included an internal segment, but students didn't get it (or it was boring, or hard to evaluate), so it dropped off many "external" curricula.
• This model assumes that if a martial artist sticks it out long enough to become a master, they will pass through both internal and external methods, or segments, no matter the art, no matter the path up the mountain.

 

[Xue Sheng]

My friend Ling likens this to two paths up the same mountain, both leading to the summit.

One is a gentle slope early, then a steep slope later.
The other is steep slope early, then a gentle slope later.

I like that.

 

[Oily Dragon]

Fair question.

Keeping in mind, my earlier post, "all models are wrong, but some are useful ..."

Assumptions of this model:

• the name of each path (internal vs. external), is derived from the first slope the student encounters while climbing the mountain.
• external "arts" follow a gentle slope first, then steep slope, but internal "arts" follow a steep slope first, then a gentle slope.
• conceptually speaking, the internal segment is more difficult to grasp and practice to a point of utility. It's not better or worse, just less aligned with our daily experiences and expectations of a martial art. So the internal path is steep at first (hard to "get") then easier later on as the student applies the internal learnings to external actions that are easier to grasp conceptually. (You do zhan zhuang before punching, for example.) While the external slope is conceptually more gentle, these methods still take a lot of effort and sweat.
• Conversely, the external segment (gentle slope) is easier to understand: we can see it (usually), and success and failure is more apparent. However, to get to the top, the external student needs to learn internal methods later in the training (punch first, then do zhan zhuang). It's possible that external arts always included an internal segment, but students didn't get it (or it was boring, or hard to evaluate), so it dropped off many "external" curricula.
• This model assumes that if a martial artist sticks it out long enough to become a master, they will pass through both internal and external methods, or segments, no matter the art, no matter the path up the mountain.

I read your entire post in Sir Bedevere the Wise's voice.

 

[Oily Dragon]

I think either I'm missing something or we are discussing different things entirely. Could you (and others with similar views) please elaborate on this? What is the difference between the two and how, in your opinion, do they eventually rejoin?

The best place to really understand the differences (which are incidental but interesting) is to train an art that contains both wei gong and nei gong traditions. Basically, some of the big names in CMA history already looked into this and combined internal and external training methods into singular systems.

There are quite a few, whether or not you can find legit teachers is iffy but not impossible depending on where you are.

Off the top of my head, all five southern family styles, some related ones (Jow Ga, Choy Li Fut), Five Ancestor boxing (wuzu). Even the modern forms of TCC and Xing Yi have at least Ming era Shaolin connections, making the distinction between the two schools even blurrier. Most Shaolin Qigong are old Daoist exercises with Buddhist flavor that are today used as nei gong methods. It's far from black and white.

The really old stuff (like Xing Yi's legendary connections to spear training) go all the way back to legendary folk generals like Yue Fei, similar to how Shaolin staff fighting methods go back to Song Dynasty years (~1000 AD).

Yue Fei - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Our style is exactly that mix. Doing each practice separately they each eventually combine to a third thing that is distinct, not visually, but experientially. The object being that the option to switch and combine different parts of the body in both soft and hard ways simultaneously. I am not skilled at articulating this idea, so please forgive my primitive explanation.

 

[Oily Dragon]

Our style is exactly that mix. Doing each practice separately they each eventually combine to a third thing that is distinct, not visually, but experientially. The object being that the option to switch and combine different parts of the body in both soft and hard ways simultaneously. I am not skilled at articulating this idea, so please forgive my primitive explanation.

I think Shahar has a good chapter on the intermixing of wei and nei gong in and around the epicenters of various arts, including the Wudangquan, and how Buddhist monks would share with layman, layman would train with Neijia scholars, bring stuff back to Shaolin etc (which by that time has already been developing weapon forms for a thousand years). I'll dig up some quotes later if I have some time.

It's always nice to read the scholarly point of view after you've experienced both a decent amount. For others at least it provides a sort of mental bowling bumper, harder to gutter the ball if you get me.

Right now I'm working on the internal aspects in the Five Animal Fist that I didn't learn the first go around (about 10 years ago), because I wasn't advanced enough, I learned it in a very external way. But past learning the Iron Wire's nei gong method, now I can back and expand on the internal animal aspects of Ng Ying's Dragon, Snake, and Crane.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

I think Shahar has a good chapter on the intermixing of wei and nei gong in and around the epicenters of various arts, including the Wudangquan, and how Buddhist monks would share with layman, layman would train with Neijia scholars, bring stuff back to Shaolin etc (which by that time has already been developing weapon forms for a thousand years). I'll dig up some quotes later if I have some time.

It's always nice to read the scholarly point of view after you've experienced both a decent amount. For others at least it provides a sort of mental bowling bumper, harder to gutter the ball if you get me.

Right now I'm working on the internal aspects in the Five Animal Fist that I didn't learn the first go around (about 10 years ago), because I wasn't advanced enough, I learned it in a very external way. But past learning the Iron Wire's nei gong method, now I can back and expand on the internal animal aspects of Ng Ying's Dragon, Snake, and Crane.

Great post. It took me 10 years to start to REALLY feel the supple listening touch. It took my gung fu practice to new heights once the soft clicked in. My teachers were expert in teaching me something without me knowing consciously what was being taught. I had to surrender to the process in order to let it happen. Over the years I have had some epiphany regarding things I didn’t realize I already knew. I found some things during hard training, others I found during spar or pressure testing. I hope this reads the way I intend. (The bottom moves the top, the back moves the front, the inside moves the outside).

 

[windwalker099]

For those mentioning the "internal"

What can you do "now" that you couldn't do before.

Can you still move in the same way, or use the same approach before
developing what some have mentioned as "internal"

What effect would others mention or say as to a distinction between it and other methods
that they felt from it being applied...

Asked out of curiosity,

In answer to my own questions, a lot of my work involves working with, understanding, developing a working
knowledge ,part of an over all approach based on and usage of "kong jin"
In doing so, no longer able to use or move in the same way in some of the CMA styles I've trained in before...


Not interested in debating, validating or proving my own practice or of others working on the same things as in some of the clips of teachers posted showing their work...

Can share some thoughts, and findings... for inquiries

 

[mograph]

For those mentioning the "internal"

What can you do "now" that you couldn't do before.

Recruiting more muscles, and aligning/distributing effort over more of the structure, I suppose. Being more aware of pushing from the ground. Being more aware of the finer functioning of my body: refining interoception.
Also, just being more ... "zippy." Having more energy available. They called me "rabbit" on the squash court.

This is based on Zhan Zhuang.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

For those mentioning the "internal"

What can you do "now" that you couldn't do before.

Can you still move in the same way, or use the same approach before
developing what some have mentioned as "internal"

What effect would others mention or say as to a distinction between it and other methods
that they felt from it being applied...

Asked out of curiosity,

In answer to my own questions, a lot of my work involves working with, understanding, developing a working
knowledge ,part of an over all approach based on and usage of "kong jin"
In doing so, no longer able to use or move in the same way in some of the CMA styles I've trained in before...


Not interested in debating, validating or proving my own practice or of others working on the same things as in some of the clips of teachers posted showing their work...

Can share some thoughts, and findings... for inquiries

Balance, posture, coordination, expansion, extension, transportation, explosion. That is creating the structure, then moving it in virtuous harmony.

 

[mograph]

Balance, posture, coordination, expansion, extension, transportation, explosion. That is creating the structure, then moving it in virtuous harmony.

Yes. Unity and harmony.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Yes. Unity and harmony.

Also, the art of stacking and folding.