In reading through some threads recently, here and on other forums, I find the comments some die-hard adherents to IMA make really interesting…
It seems that in the IMA community there are those that:
think Qi exists and can do magical things;
think Qi exists, but is simply “outdated, bogus science;”
think Qi is one thing, but are actually mistaking it for something else, most typically Jing;
think that you cannot really learn IMA unless you are Chinese (which is amazing, since the people most often making this comment aren’t Chinese, which seems to invalidate their entire practice outright…);
think that a teacher cannot teach IMA unless he/she is Chinese;
think that you cannot really learn IMA unless you learn in China;
think that their use of romanized Chinese makes them linguistic and cultural experts (and often they likely couldn’t tell the difference between two Chinese characters if you held them up in front of their faces), and able to correct other folks’ use of romanization;
and my absolute favorite,
that they can never really hope to learn how to do IMA anyway, ever, no matter who they study with, no matter how long they study, because the information is just so far beyond our mortal ken…
and the list could go on and on, but I think I’ve made my point for the folks that matter…
It makes me wonder why so many people even bother to study IMA in the first place, since it seems to be nothing more than a bed of controversial, allegedly false and incorrectly taught or understood styles of fighting… Wouldn’t it be so much easier for these people to go and study something else easier for them to grasp and understand?
Just an observation. Feel free to flame away… I’m wearing my asbestos jammies, so no worries…
Why "bother to study IMA in the first place, since it seems to be nothing more than a bed of controversial, allegedly false and incorrectly taught or understood styles of fighting… Wouldn’t it be so much easier for these people to go and study something else easier for them to grasp and understand? "
True, it would be easier if I stayed in karate - but my real passion and love is for taiji. There is a lot of crap out there and people that don’t have a clue, but there are others trying to piece this puzzle together. I’m doing things none of my previous tai chi teacher have ever taught…so I know none of my previous teachers really understood tai chi either. But they gave me pieces to the puzzle.
It can be disheartening, I call it the Dark Ages of Tai Chi, but there are some that are piecing it together and those willing to trade information and the portions they are working on. Taiji is great, to me. The deeper I delve, the more I find. It is often subtle. I can be nice or it can be devastatingly vicious - with little effort either way.
Not picking on your comment “it would be easier if I stayed in karate,” but…
Folks also seem to think that the internal arts have some quantum leap skills that are light years beyond the internal styles… Funny, but if you study a real karate style, not some *******ized, plagarized, “new and improved” mini-mall style newly created by some 20-something year old 8th degree black belt named “Master So-and-so,” you will find that they have many of the same goals that the internal arts have in their training, many of the same exercises, and produce much the same effect in their combative applications. They just take a slightly different route to get there…
All martial arts end up being really very much the same once you get to a certain point as far as what they are capable of doing. It is how they do what they do that makes them different from each other…
All martial arts end up being really very much the same once you get to a certain point as far as what they are capable of doing. It is how they do what they do that makes them different from each other…
Not to me, it’s the kind of shape your in when you get there that counts.
Tell us something about Yi Li Chuan?? Methods, training, use of chi:D
External and internal people move very differently. But the external does go towards internal in good schools, eventually. My old karate teacher (actually he’s quite good, not a mini-mall style) was getting excited over stuff that he discovered when a large group of black belts got together to study more advanced things. Actually what he told me was stuff I was doing in tai chi. This group was working towards internalizing their movements further. Of course most of them spent 10+ years to get where they were to start internalizing.
I like internal styles…learn the internalization first and then work your way up towards more weight and power. My preference is to come from the other direction.
But I must say the two years I spent in karate was easier than two years spent in tai chi. It is not easy to do it and is somewhat counter-intuitive. In karate I just had to learn forms, applications, and pressure points…and sweat profusely in the repititions. In tai chi, I have to learn to move correctly - it is not easy.
Two examples of karate practitioners who have VERY STRONG internal power are Sensei Oyata of Independence, Mo and Sensei Harril(sp) (Isshin Ryu) of Carson, Ia. A friend of mine trains under Sensei Harril and I have been able to see first hand a little of what he can do. These men are extremely impressive.
So to me, what it all comes down to is, if you can make what you do work and more importantly you enjoy what you do. All martial arts should be enjoyed together. They should not be seperated by the egos and attitudes that are oh so commonly seen in the community.
I knew I forgot something.
I forgot to say that while there are some differences in how they do things and the way we do things. The principles for the most part are the same.
It is always interesting to hear a purely external Martial Artist discussing the differences between Internal and External. My Kung Fu is internal. That doesn’t mean my training does not include external training.
I train everyday doing forms, strikes, kicks, bagwork, cardio work, etc. But on top of that, I do Ch’i Gung and other Internal exercises which build Ch’i and Ging.
No matter how much I do strikes and kicks, I will never build the internal by doing my external training alone.
Keep your mind open to what is out there. You may be pleasantly surprised to find something new.
It is always interesting to hear a purely external Martial Artist discussing the differences between Internal and External.
My art is comprised of Xingyi, Taiji and Bagua in combination… Not an “external” art at all…
However, it is always interesting to hear a purely internal Martial Artist discussing the lack of utility of external training… What is San Ti, or Standing, if not an external exercise? Sure, there are internal components, but it also trains the body (not just the qi). What are forms, especially in the very beginning, if not external training?
Based on your comment:
My Kung Fu is internal. That doesn’t mean my training does not include external training.
I suspect you intended your post to apply in generalities, not specifically to me or my training. It is good to see an internal MAist acknowledge what their training really does consist of… nearly equal parts of internal and external.
You hit the nail on the head. Why limit yourself. If you are lucky enough to study an Art with both Internal and External, you get the best of both worlds.
The two are not mutually exclusive. You can and should train both simultaneously if it is part of one system. Problem is that most of the internal has been lost from so many of the current systems because the people teaching were not taught the complete system(somewhere down the lineage line).
there a lot af good points made on this thread so i’ll put in my opinion,theres a maxim something to the point of from internal to external from external to internal. you don’t need to train different styles to get both, currently i study xing-yi and plan to stay with it for a long time,although its good to know about other styles their training methodoligies,its best to train one style if you look at your art carefully you will find a goldmine of things you never thought of i.e,chin-na,throws, dim-mak all from what you thought was pi-quan(in example) bruce lee had a point with his idea of simplifying your art insted of adding more perfect a few then you can realistically defend yourself sooner..well good training to ya
There is also a simplification principle in traditional arts as well, not just JKD. While Bruce did some very interesting things in his approach, there is really nothing that he did that had not been done previously…
In some Okinawan karate schools, as an example, students were only ever encouraged to “master” one form. Not all the forms, or dozens, or even handfuls. Just one. It was thought that by “mastering” one, the others would open themselves up for understanding…
And in an Isshin-ryu school run by Sherm Harrill in Carson City, IA, there used to be a poster with a story about two men meeting, one a thug and one a karateka. The karateka explains very simply that he has no weapons, only his Empty Hands, but if the thug insists on attacking him, he will use the only weapons he has available, his Empty Hands… Below that story was a quote that asked the question “what are advanced, complicated techniques made from? Basics.”
Gotta love how similar all these allegedly vastly different martial arts really are…
In the late 60’s i began my training in a hard Japanese style (which will go unnamed and you will see why). As i approached testing for my black belt, one of the schools’ best kept secrets was revealed to me (under severe penalties for ever revealing).. The ceremony for receiving a black belt was only attended by other black belts… the secret was this.. until the aspiring black belt could reach green belt status in two other styles, no belt would be awarded. I thought Sensei was nuts, he was not.. a simply brilliant manuever to weed out insincere or unfaithful students, and a great way to gain insights into other arts.. (yes, i got my belt)..
Now, some30+ years later, it is amazing to see how insecure styles have become. They often put down other styles, degrade other practicioners, but.. seldom have the knowledge or competency to adequately support their own styles through articulate discussion. Comparisons made in the spirit of enhancing the MA experience are welcome and refreshing.. sabre-rattling and chest-beating only lend credence to the perception of violent ape-like clans disguised as Martial Arts Schools.. Most evident, whenever i am teaching applications of Tai Chi technique, is the influence of “ego”.. i instruct the partners move slowly at first to get the rythmn and flow down.. it is amazing to watch people speed-up to avoid the appearance of having lost the advantage in an exchange.. then, as i explain that the mismatched speeds hurt the training process, denial of the obvious is passionate and excuses abound.. i sense that too few are willing to “invest in loss” to find their own real rewards..
Internal/external?.. is just a path of choice.. in simpler terms, i sense that it is the character of the student that seeks a particular path.. and the character of the teacher that makes that path worthwhile or not.. The student will find their own heart, their own “truth”.. some external students will “internalize” it.. some internal students will never move beyond the choreography.. Those that have found their “truth” best demonstrate it by the life lived, by the principles evident in their character.. and by the sincerity with which they motivate their students to be better than themselves.
We can do two things with stones.. throw them at others, or.. make our own house stronger…
