Mastering internal arts

Many people seem to misunderstand when they hear the old quote, "It takes 5 years to master Hsing-I, 10 years to master Tai Chi, and even in an entire lifetime you can't master Bagua". They don't understand that 5 years of Hsing-I is only considered to put you in the mastery level when you actually practice hard. The same thing in Tai Chi and Bagua. If you don't practice hard, then the 5 and 10 years will become 10 and 20, 20 and 40 years.....People named these arts kung fu for a reason. And what does kung fu mean? "hard work". This is what I am thinking, please tell me if you think i am wrong, but if you are willing to say so tell me why.

I can be like one of those philosophers who hide everything in poems, but instead I can tell you the true secret of martial arts in one word:

PRACTICE!

In my opinion, it takes 10 years to master Ba Qua and you will never truely master Tai Chi, but you can certainly try. Hard work, yes. But 99% of the world doesn't know the meaning of the words anymore. The KF masters of ancient times were beyond comprehension physically because they had to work, it was a job. Just like in the military today, you have to have physical training, but even the military has gone soft. (but not the special forces). The point is, in todays age, people don't feel the need to be in shape. Cars take you where you want to go, machines do you're dishes, cook you're food, cut you're lawn. You buy food at the supermarket, not harvest and store it every year, protecting it from bandits and animals. The motivation isn't there, so the skill isn't there, simple as that.

ELFdisciple

Direct Disciple to the 37th Patriarch of Emperor's Long-Fist Kung-Fu

Practitioner of:
Internal Iron Palm
Genki Ryu Do Karate
White Crane and Spirit Dragon SCA combat

Perhaps we cannot hope to "master" any style because those styles are only tools to aid in the struggle for mastery of the self.

So in a sense, if your master a style, you actually fail to grasp the real goal.

I agree that we can't truly "master" a style. Yet, being a master is something different from being CALLED A MASTER. In a certain level of martial arts, everybody will start calling you master whether you feel like you are ready or not.

I can be like one of those philosophers who hide everything in poems, but instead I can tell you the true secret of martial arts in one word:

PRACTICE!

ELFdisciple: I'm curious about why you believe that Taiji cannot be mastered, but Bagua can in ten years..How come the opposite of the quote?

Perhaps I haven't been exposed to enough Ba Qua to know how hard it truely is. Don't misunderstand me, its EXTREMELY difficult. But my art is composed of 50% Tai Chi, 25% Hsing Yi, and 25% Ba Qua. And I find that the Tai Chi is the hardest thing for people to master in a combat situation. Throwing someone across the room without using muscle and doing it gently is seen as impossible. Getting the mind to understand that its not is the problem. The Ba Qua seems to be easier to understand on a fundamental level. But I have to admit, understanding and doing ARE two different things.

ELFdisciple

Direct Disciple to the 37th Patriarch of Emperor's Long-Fist Kung-Fu

Practitioner of:
Internal Iron Palm
Genki Ryu Do Karate
White Crane and Spirit Dragon SCA combat

Time is releative on person, and "master" is extremely subjective.

That said, I would consider Pagua the most difficult of the Neijia arts. If you are finding otherwise, I would imagine that the Pagua you are learning is deficient. (apologies in advance for whomever takes offence).

As to the assertation that the millitary has "gone soft except for the special forces". I can only conclude that you have not been in the millitary. I don't find that modern millitaries are less "hard" than their counterparts. And from a martial standing, most SpecOps are not terribly in advance of the general force.

on what basis exactly?

this'll just end up as a typical my art is better/harder/more effective than yours argument

10 years to master Taiji? My Sifu has been training for 30 years and yet when he saw his Sifu Ip Tai Tak a month ago he was still learning, as Ip is still learning.

I think what needs to be asked is how long does it take to understand everything you need to work on? Surely it is dependent on the student and his ability to learn and work.

I don't know about Baqua or Hsing-I, but Taiji is a lifetime of study and refinement. I would think they are as well.

I agree with Lyles statements - if all we are studying is a system of combat then we've missed the point.

We have enough arguments with the MMA's without it starting with the internal styles - please let's try and avoid it

"If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?"

Is there ANY style of Chinese Martial Art that is NOT a lifetime learning journey....

I wish no insult to the people who practice Ba Qua, I like the art and enjoy using it when sparring. Perhaps what I'm learning isn't everything Ba Qua is, it is only part of my art. I just find that Tai Chi seems to be more difficult, both to me and new students.

BTW, I spent four years in the military, its soft. Everything is 'PC' now, hell, they couldn't even cuss at us! I knew a Navy Seal, talk about going through hell for training!

ELFdisciple

Direct Disciple to the 37th Patriarch of Emperor's Long-Fist Kung-Fu

Practitioner of:
Internal Iron Palm
Genki Ryu Do Karate
White Crane and Spirit Dragon SCA combat

"this'll just end up as a typical my art is better/harder/more effective than yours argument"

Rolls only argues at the external forums.

"10 years to master Taiji? My Sifu has been training for 30 years and yet when he saw his Sifu Ip Tai Tak a month ago he was still learning, as Ip is still learning."

was it my quote? and 10 years is probably all you need to master Taichi. What you are talking about is life principles, and philosophy. The mastery of a neijia art is when you know all the forms, applications, fajing, and can use it in a real fight WELL. Particularly in tai chi, you need to be very very very relaxed and subdue your opponent without much effort.

I agree with Lyles statements - if all we are studying is a system of combat then we've missed the point.

I agree with both of you on this, but you must understand that in able to understand this martial art better you should be able to realize ALL aspects of it. Including the combat aspect, the forms, etc. Not just the philosophy.

I can be like one of those philosophers who hide everything in poems, but instead I can tell you the true secret of martial arts in one word:

PRACTICE!

great article on elements of a complete system:

http://www.emptyflower.com/xingyiqua...article01.html

i thought the site was bout Hsing-I, how come they use bagua as an example?

I can be like one of those philosophers who hide everything in poems, but instead I can tell you the true secret of martial arts in one word:

PRACTICE!

Amoung people who were at the fore front in IOnternal Arts, perhaps this saying was a guide to what is involved with each Art.

Hsing-Iis upright with many hands and steppings. Of the three Internal Arts, it closest resembles untrained stand-up fighting. T'ai Ch'i Ch'uan is wierder. There areflowing motions in wcihc there are not only strikes but also throws(I No_Know Hsing-I to be well known for it's throws). And Pa Kua just...really strange. You move around your opponent (more than the sometimes circling in a fight. Hsing-I and T'ai Ch'i Ch'uan seem to be more face to face Arts when applied). The strike that might be akin to Hsing-I, cure at least a little, yet still hit. There is flowing movement yet not as direct perhaps as in T'ai Ch'i Ch'uan.

This is from poeple who lived the stuf an made it when it was thriving-ish. So that your comprehension finds you working hard. Do not be dismaied. You'll do fine aslong as you keep doing. They had their understandings; you have yours. The quote could be correct for the date from which it was quoted. This is a different date. Perhaps they would agree with you if they were at this Here and this Now.

Very some such,perhaps might have been, likely say some, some not.

I'm talking about the form and movement

If John Ding still feels he has a ton of stuff to learn, and if Ip Tai Tak feels the same then how can anyone else say they have mastered Taiji in 10 years? Especially in combat/application terms (Ip is recognised by the family as the top Yang family disciple when it comes to combat and applications)

If we're going to discuss combat aspects of styles then I'm surprised you don't cite Taiji as a style that involves circular motion arond the opponent OR circular motion of the opponent. Taiji also uses straight, direct motion. Both are equally emphasised and are meant to blend together according to needs.

note: I can see two points of view here and I'm personally going for number 2, but only after I went through the first argument

ARGUMENT 1:

So Taiji requires mastery of both circular and straight motion - Hsing-I and Baqua require mastery of one of those. Obviously the depth of understanding is going to be deeper for specialists, but:

If Hsing-I masters straight, direct motion and Taiji proclaims the same, then surely the Taiji practitioner should aim as high as the Hsing-I practitioner? (and therefore train as long in that motion)

Equally, if Baqua masters the circular, evasive and unexpected motion and Taiji proclaims the same, then surely the Taiji practioner needs to aspire to the same level in that area (else it is not mastered)

Finally - having mastered both of those elements, the Taiji practioner must then learn to use them both fluidly.

On that basis would it not take a long time to master?

ARGUMENT 2:

Taiji is it's own style - mastery of an individual aspect is irrelevant as it is the blend of the two aspects that counts. Consequently the time taken to 'master' is longer than that of Hsing-I as there is circular and evasive motion to be learned, yet shorter than the time for Baqua as there is linear and direct motion within the system as well.

This isn't a dismissal of Hsing-I as a style - it just makes sense that it is quicker to learn direct motion as it can be understood immediately. Whilst circular motion is a lot harder to get your head around and so takes a longer time to develop.

My strong belief is that the level of ability is the same - we are talking more about understanding and application of the system and how long that takes.

At first I took the thread to be a critique on the level of skill in each art - now I see it differently.

"If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?"