Internal and External: There is a difference....

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Kung Fu Forum
1

There is a big difference between internal “strength” and normal strength. Notice “strength” is in quotations because it is really not strength in the normal sense of the word.

(And, BTW, I’m gonna take the word of my teacher on this who can demonstrate the difference to me in person vs. the words of people who I have never met and who’s actual skill level and level of experience is unknown to me.)

Internal strength uses the internal frame, the other uses the external frame.

Internal and external frame both use muscle, ligaments, tendons and bones. The WAY they are used is fundamentally different. The difference starts in the mind (relaxed vs. excited) and translates to the body.

External frame uses muscle based strength. Internal frame does not uses muscle based strength. In fact, it refrains from using strength at all. Force is something different than muscular
strength.

You can be forceful without using muscular strength. You can have muscular strength and not able to generate significant force.

Of course, some muscle is used in Neijia or else we would not be able to move. But the muscle is not used to generate the force. In Wai Jia this is fine, this is normal strength. But for Neiji something different is used most commonly referred to as Jin.

Good coordination of the external frame is not the same thing as coordination of the internal frame. Doing “whole body” external frame exercises (like powerlifting) will not help your internal frame. In fact it may hurt the development of the internal frame if you can’t not delineate the two.

Can you learn both?I believe so. That’s exactly what I’m trying to do. But through my inquiry into both I realize that they are very different, even though on the surface they may look similar. If you are going to learn both you have to realize the difference and learn to switch gears.

There are a lot of Nei Jia practitioners out there who practice their art using the external frame. They tell you, there is no real difference between the two. This is incorrect…it’s PC language.

Their art is weak because they can’t understand the difference. They give other real Neiji players a bad name by their ineffective use of the external frame for techniques that require internal frame movement. They then have to rely on pseudo-scientific hocus pocus because the art as they practice it does not work.

There is a real tangible difference. No one on this forum can tell you the difference. You have to find a good teacher who can show you the difference.

Peace. :smiley:

2

Re: Internal and External: There is a difference…

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
[B] I’m gonna take the word of my teacher on this who can demonstrate the difference to me in person vs. the words of people who I have never met and who’s actual skill level and level of experience is unknown to me

There is a real tangible difference. No one on this forum can tell you the difference. [/B]

I wonder what kind of ‘discussion’ one hopes to generate with such an approach?

3

Actually, Fu, you are using your teachers words to describe different levels of understanding and skill. Not a difference of internal and external. Many people on this forum can and have done better, using their own words and understanding. You have not done well to interpret or differentiate between frames or explain the “why’s” or “how’s” of your teachers assertions. For example, if internal frame is different from using muscles, than how is muscle development like various power lifting counter-productive to internal development? Do any systems strive develop one over the other? How, which, why?? Just to say “force is something different in the other” doesn’t help.

Ones on this forum that have experience can say in their own words. Others just repeat what they have heard or read. All you’re doing here is antagonizing forum members.:stuck_out_tongue:

4

Originally posted by count
Actually, Fu, you are using your teachers words to describe different levels of understanding and skill. Not a difference of internal and external.

Actually no I’m not. There are arts that use an external frame that work perfectly fine. In fact I practice one of them. They don’t need an understanding of “internal frame” to work. Its not a LEVEL of skill, it a totally different approach.

Many people on this forum can and have done better, using their own words and understanding.

You are entitled to your opinion.

You have not done well to interpret or differentiate between frames or explain the “why’s” or “how’s” of your teachers assertions.

Well I’ll leave it to you to flesh that out.

For example, if internal frame is different from using muscles, than how is muscle development like various power lifting counter-productive to internal development?

Because the movement is broken and not unified as a contiguous internal frame. It may be a contiguous external frame but that will not help in Neijia because a skilled Neijia player will find that “broken” spot and exploit it. My teacher does it to me all the time.

Do any systems strive develop one over the other?

Yes.

How, which, why??

If this is such a crummy post then why is it generating so many questions for you. You must already think you have the answers or it is giving you a real mental work out.

Just to say “force is something different in the other” doesn’t help.

Actually I said muscular strength is not necessary for Neijia.

Ones on this forum that have experience can say in their own words. Others just repeat what they have heard or read. All you’re doing here is antagonizing forum members.:stuck_out_tongue:

Actually I’m opening up a discussion based on what my teacher has taught me. Again, I don’t know you, haven’t met you and don’t know your skill level. I have met my teachers, pushed with him and his teacher and they can demonstrate the difference.

Do I have all the answers. No I don’t. Obviously learning MA’s is a process.

My point is that there is a significant difference between Wai Jia and Nei Jia and its not just a question of semantics.

5

Re: Re: Internal and External: There is a difference…

Originally posted by unkokusai
I wonder what kind of ‘discussion’ one hopes to generate with such an approach?

Is that a question or a statement.

6

um we need to make a thread to show the difference?

want to see a difference, look at tai chi, then look at nan quan. nuff said. both different ways of developing power.

7

Fu Pow,

I’m only pointing out that your post is creating more questions than it’s answering. And you are antagonizing others by stating, “Their art is weak because they can’t understand the difference.” and “No one on this forum can tell you the difference.”

But while you are debating the issue with yourself, I’m sure you’ll find some clarity. For example, Shaolinlueb has already pointed out that there are differences in the way power is developed or refined. I’m sure we can all agree that a complete method which incorporates all wei, nei and qi gongs is the best approach to refining power. Ones that isolate one or the other take longer to get results. But to say that “muscular strength is not necessary for Neijia” is false. I agree that over development of certain muscle groups can inhibit the opening and closing of specific areas critical to power issues in the so called internal arts. But I don’t understand why this might create some sort of break in the structure.:confused:

8

Originally posted by Fu-Pow
Because the movement is broken and not unified as a contiguous internal frame. It may be a contiguous external frame but that will not help in Neijia because a skilled Neijia player will find that “broken” spot and exploit it. My teacher does it to me all the time.

If the external frame is contiguous, then there isn’t a broken spot. By definition. Although it’s silly anyway to say contiguous in this context.

9

This is a good topic. I know I have a hard time putting into words the difference between external and internal energy, as well. But I can tell the difference in my performance , and other’s, when it is not being used. Or not used well.

The difference is like an open mic night at my favorite coffee shop. Some play well but there is no sizzle in the performance. But then this one lady comes up and just sings, no back-up or anything. It is so beutiful you want to cry.

The difference in my kung fu is just as easy to spot, once I learned to look for it. When I’m using internal energy effieceantly, everything feels almost effortless. Horse-stance stays low without draining me. I don’t get muscle cramps after holding a possition for a few minutes. There is an almost sureal feeling of completion when I do my forms. It feels more like I’m floating than fighting durring sparring matches. My body almost moves itself with little or no concious thought from my brain.

10

Fu Pow

Can you explain the “Three Connections” for us?

Can you explain the relationship between the hand and foot; elbow and knee; and shoulder and hip (ming man)?

I just need to see someone move and check their “three connections” and I know right away.

11

The pic below was taken at my last fight. I’m in the very bottom photo and on the right.

My back is pretty straight (compare to other guy) and I have a pushing angle. My knee is wedging the guy out while going in but my elbow should be plaining, too.

The hand touches and automatically it is backed by the entire body driven by the foot. Then the elbows plains in using the upper back/shoulder but fueled by the foot and whole body. At this time you are so close the knee should be used.

I need a lot of work on this. I do it well in line drills but as you can see, pulling it off in combat naturally is so, so. I’d give myself a c+ in that photo… just like my school days. Enough to pull off what I’m doing but not quite enough. I wound up gassing out in the 2nd round:mad:

12

Originally posted by Shaolinlueb
[B]um we need to make a thread to show the difference?

want to see a difference, look at tai chi, then look at nan quan. nuff said. both different ways of developing power. [/B]

No, I made a thread.

13

Originally posted by count
[B]Fu Pow,

I’m only pointing out that your post is creating more questions than it’s answering. And you are antagonizing others by stating, “Their art is weak because they can’t understand the difference.” and “No one on this forum can tell you the difference.”

Who am I antagonizing? You? Why? If you think I am wrong then state it. No need to make it a Fu-Pow vs. The Forum issue when it is a count vs. Fu-Pow issue.

I stand by what I said. If you try to do a Neijia art in a Waijia way, you end up with something totally ineffective. It goes the other way also.

If I’m antagonizing those people that propagate a junk art then so be it. They deserve it.

But while you are debating the issue with yourself, I’m sure you’ll find some clarity. For example, Shaolinlueb has already pointed out that there are differences in the way power is developed or refined.

Please post a link.

I’m sure we can all agree that a complete method which incorporates all wei, nei and qi gongs is the best approach to refining power.

No, I don’t agree with that.

Ones that isolate one or the other take longer to get results. But to say that “muscular strength is not necessary for Neijia” is false.

Disagree.

I agree that over development of certain muscle groups can inhibit the opening and closing of specific areas critical to power issues in the so called internal arts. But I don’t understand why this might create some sort of break in the structure.:confused: [/B]

It’s not so much creating a break in the structure as it is a creating a place that cannot change and therefore can have a force applied to it. A good Neiji pracitioner will find the place that cannot change and will use against you.

14

Originally posted by Tak
If the external frame is contiguous, then there isn’t a broken spot. By definition. Although it’s silly anyway to say contiguous in this context.

Please read my response to count for clarification.

15

Re: Fu Pow

Originally posted by EvolutionFist
[B]Can you explain the “Three Connections” for us?

Can you explain the relationship between the hand and foot; elbow and knee; and shoulder and hip (ming man)?

I just need to see someone move and check their “three connections” and I know right away. [/B]

Are you seriously asking me or are you trying to prove some kind of point?

16

Originally posted by EvolutionFist
[B]The pic below was taken at my last fight. I’m in the very bottom photo and on the right.

My back is pretty straight (compare to other guy) and I have a pushing angle. My knee is wedging the guy out while going in but my elbow should be plaining, too.

The hand touches and automatically it is backed by the entire body driven by the foot. Then the elbows plains in using the upper back/shoulder but fueled by the foot and whole body. At this time you are so close the knee should be used.

I need a lot of work on this. I do it well in line drills but as you can see, pulling it off in combat naturally is so, so. I’d give myself a c+ in that photo… just like my school days. Enough to pull off what I’m doing but not quite enough. I wound up gassing out in the 2nd round:mad: [/B]

What does this have to do with this thread?:confused:

17

Fu Pow

Yes, I am asking you … that’s why I put the (?) in there. I know what the three connections mean to me, I was curious as to what it means to you.

I don’t know what’s up with you lately but your attitude has been **** poor. Granted, I don’t look to have my MA wold turned upside when I come here, but I do get some links to good articles and interesting perspectives and hell, even got involved in a San Da league now through this site.

If you don’t like the site, don’t post. If you don’t like other’s to disagree with you don’t post something you are not secure about. I have folks disagree with me all the time. You know what? That’s fine. I won’t post about a technique, aproach, situation that I aven’t used, tested or been in. If someone doesn’t see the value, fine, I put my treasure back in my pocket … who loses out? Not everyone sees things the same way.

I can understand that you respect your teacher. But if you’re posting we need to hear from you. We need to know the hows and whys of the matter… footage is always apreciated.

At 6’7 and 200-something+ pounds you don’t need martial arts anyway … forget external vs internal. But most of all, chill out man. You’re becoming a crank and a bore. Every time I turn around you’re crying about something.

18

PS

Just saw your last post.

In the bottom pic the guy on the left is an external stylist. The guy on the right an internal stylists. Is there a difference in structure (check the spine). Is there a difference in pushing angles?

Isn’t this what we are talking about?

19

Oh heck. This one’s EASY.

“Internal is what I do so it’s better. External is what you do, so it sucks.”

Chris M’s definition is much better though.

20

Re: Fu Pow

Originally posted by EvolutionFist
[B]Yes, I am asking you … that’s why I put the (?) in there. I know what the three connections mean to me, I was curious as to what it means to you.

That was a serious question. The three external connections are just an external representation of whats going on inside. There is not always a direct correlation either. The models is just a general tool to teach beginners.

I don’t know what’s up with you lately but your attitude has been **** poor. Granted, I don’t look to have my MA wold turned upside when I come here, but I do get some links to good articles and interesting perspectives and hell, even got involved in a San Da league now through this site.

I admit I have not been as “logical” as I usually am. I was just “mirroring” the hostility shown to me by some posters on this site. That is going to change. In fact I’m gonna tear anything anyone writes down until they don’t know what the f they are saying anymore. I let too much slide by in the past. Now its time to get down to hard logic and rhetoric.

If you don’t like the site, don’t post. If you don’t like other’s to disagree with you don’t post something you are not secure about. I have folks disagree with me all the time. You know what? That’s fine. I won’t post about a technique, aproach, situation that I aven’t used, tested or been in. If someone doesn’t see the value, fine, I put my treasure back in my pocket … who loses out? Not everyone sees things the same way.

When I post to this site I am writing little essays. Little thoughts and ideas that have been going through my head. I don’t claim to be the authority on anything as some people have claimed. I’m a competent and forceful writer. Some people take this to mean I am claiming to be an expert. I don’t understand that. This forum is a dialectic. We challenge each other back and forth until we come to some understanding. Most for what passes as “well reasoned” logic is full of holes and inconsistencies. It basically boils down to who can bully who and make the other feel bad. That needs to change and it starts with me.

I can understand that you respect your teacher. But if you’re posting we need to hear from you. We need to know the hows and whys of the matter… footage is always apreciated.

Both of my teachers kick ass. One teaches internal frame, the other external frame. That’s how I know there is a difference. People immediately fall into the “either/or” trap. If I’m saying something good about “internal frame” martial arts then I’m automatically saying someing bad about “external frame” martial arts or whatever. That is an example of poor reasoning. Its so symptamatic of our PC culture. If you are saying something is “different” then one must be “better” or “worse.”

At 6’7 and 200-something+ pounds you don’t need martial arts anyway

That is faulty reasoning. I could make the same argument to you. Why do you do martial arts when you could just buy a gun. The quick answer is that we all have reasons we do martial arts and most of them, in this day and age, have little to do with self-defense.

… forget external vs internal.

It’s a important distinction and that’s what I’m getting at.

But most of all, chill out man. You’re becoming a crank and a bore.

Sorry you FEEL that way.

Every time I turn around you’re crying about something. [/B]

I don’t “cry” and I don’t “*****.” And the first guy that says either of those to my face gets popped. :mad: :wink: :stuck_out_tongue: