Why is Internal training fail?

[Edmund]

I am trying to understand your view.

You have very interesting combination here.

Could you please share the following?

What do you learn from Ma Hong's student? Was you told what Ma Hong's expertise is in?

also

What have you learn and attain from Li Jun Feng's Sheng Zhen society?
Do you believe in the following and the Qi Li Jun Feng mention?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgKFv...eature=related

Ma Hong's expertise is in Chen's Taiji! For someone who is learning Chen's taiji such as myself, he's got plenty of expertise in every aspect relative to my expertise.

Of course, I believe in Li Jun Feng's philosophy on qigong. It does not promise anything it cannot deliver. He always stated qigong is for relieving stress, one of the main causes of a lot of diseases.

He does not promise distance healing or extra strength for martial applications.

One will not be able to know what is Yiquan via Youtube, one needs to have a clear explanation from those who knows it well on what is going on because Yiquan is an abstract art which is formless but really simple and practical if one knows it.

I believe it's practical and simple. But I do *not* see anything in Yiquan videos that requires internal breathing exercises to perform.

GM Ma Hong has written very details thesis to explain what is Internal training and what you called INVISIBLE according to the Chen's Kuen Kuit... Actually, he heals himself and knowing internal art in very details, Yes, including Zhen Qi and fajing.

To be real honest, I would assume and expect you know these basic of internal training and "Invisible" details which is missing in most so called IMArtists since you learn from his student.

1. Your theories are nothing like Ma Hong's. I'm very clear on my details.

2. You've had *no* lessons from any student of Ma Hong so maybe you should be shutting your yap and listening to me about it rather than theorizing about what he's said. At least I've had lessons.

[Hardwork108]

Hendrik, I don't know why you waste your time with these people. Most of them have no idea about the internals and that is because they have no reference when it comes to genuine kung fu concepts and practices.

To make matters worse most of these guys don't even practice Wing Chun. What they practice is an incomplete hibreed version of Wing Chun that includes some external aspects but NO internal ones.

At the beginning they believe just learning quickly and incompletely will make them great fighters in a short time. Then they realize that what they are learning is not effective which then results in them cross training in Bjj, kickboxing and so on.

Sometimes when one has two eyes he will still find it difficult to explain things to the blind who have never seen them and have no reference.

[Yoshiyahu]

What does Tai Chi has to do with WC?

Please show the revelance

[Hendrik]

Ma Hong's expertise is in Chen's Taiji! For someone who is learning Chen's taiji such as myself, he's got plenty of expertise in every aspect relative to my expertise.

Sure, Ma Hong is very good.

Could you please share with us what is your expertise in Chen Taiji?

Of course, I believe in Li Jun Feng's philosophy on qigong.

It does not promise anything it cannot deliver. He always stated qigong is for relieving stress, one of the main causes of a lot of diseases.

He does not promise distance healing or extra strength for martial applications.

Great.

Could you please share what is your attainment on Qi cultivation practicing this type of qigong?

I believe it's practical and simple. But I do *not* see anything in Yiquan videos that requires internal breathing exercises to perform.

Where do you got the idea Yiquan requires Internal breathing to perform? and how can you see breathing? what do you expect to see?

1. Your theories are nothing like Ma Hong's. I'm very clear on my details.

Perhaps, Perhaps not.

2. You've had *no* lessons from any student of Ma Hong

so maybe you should be shutting your yap and listening to me


about it rather than theorizing about what he's said. At least I've had lessons.

here comes again the personal attack mode. is that neccesary?


my expectation or assumption is based on those who learned Ma Hong's 丹田內轉論 or the internal rotation of Dan Dien thesis will at least know what I am posting on Internal training to a degree.

So, may be I was wrong but that doesnt mean I deserve to be attacked with rude language.


Since you know all about Ma Hong,

could you please share with us here on Ma Hong's 《丹田內轉論》 or Dan Dien Nei Zhuan thesis or the internal rotation of Dan Dien thesis;
and 《周天開合論》 or Zhou Tien Kai He thesis or Cosmic cycle open and close thesis, and how are the practicing process for both?

It will be great if you also could share with us how is your progress after you learn Ma Hong's teaching.

[Hendrik]

Hendrik, I don't know why you waste your time with these people. Most of them have no idea about the internals and that is because they have no reference when it comes to genuine kung fu concepts and practices.

To make matters worse most of these guys don't even practice Wing Chun. What they practice is an incomplete hibreed version of Wing Chun that includes some external aspects but NO internal ones.

At the beginning they believe just learning quickly and incompletely will make them great fighters in a short time. Then they realize that what they are learning is not effective which then results in them cross training in Bjj, kickboxing and so on.

Sometimes when one has two eyes he will still find it difficult to explain things to the blind who have never seen them and have no reference.

I do these because I like to know what /how people think. That way I know their view and I understand where they come from. so I can communicate when it is needed.

As what is internal and what is kung fu, you see, if others praise me, my kung fu is not going to increase, if others slander me , my kung fu is not going to become less.

and If one knows one's subject, it doesnt matter what other said right?

[Hardwork108]

I do these because I like to know what /how people think. That way I know their view and I understand where they come from. so I can communicate when it is needed.

As what is internal and what is kung fu, you see, if others praise me, my kung fu is not going to increase, if others slander me , my kung fu is not going to become less.

and If one knows one's subject, it doesnt matter what other said right?

Very true Hendrik, very true.

[Edmund]

Sure, Ma Hong is very good.

Could you please share with us what is your expertise in Chen Taiji?

Great.

Could you please share what is your attainment on Qi cultivation practicing this type of qigong?

I don't even understand the question.

There is no attainment in Li Jun Feng's qigongs. It's not a test of any form.
They are exercises to relieve your stress.

Frankly you have ideas about qigong that do not relate to his. Hence you ask questions about attainment and talk about realizations... These have nothing to do with him.

You can have your own ideas but where it all fails is when you promise stuff you can't deliver. i.e. Internal mechanics in fights.

I learn Chen taiji like everyone else. Forms, applications, push hands.

The majority of practice is not worried about qi.
You are assuming it is, based on some books or something.

Where do you got the idea Yiquan requires Internal breathing to perform? and how can you see breathing? what do you expect to see?

I expect nothing. I just observe they are using no different mechanics from an external person.

here comes again the personal attack mode. is that neccesary?

my expectation or assumption is based on those who learned Ma Hong's 丹田內轉論 or the internal rotation of Dan Dien thesis will at least know what I am posting on Internal training to a degree.

So, may be I was wrong but that doesnt mean I deserve to be attacked with rude language.

Your assumption is based on your colourful imagination. Then you presume to tell me what I should have learnt in my lessons when you have had no lessons.

That's rude of you.

Since you know all about Ma Hong,

could you please share with us here on Ma Hong's 《丹田內轉論》 or Dan Dien Nei Zhuan thesis or the internal rotation of Dan Dien thesis;
and 《周天開合論》 or Zhou Tien Kai He thesis or Cosmic cycle open and close thesis, and how are the practicing process for both?

It will be great if you also could share with us how is your progress after you learn Ma Hong's teaching.

I never said I know all about Ma Hong. HOWEVER I HAVE HAD MORE LESSONS THAN YOU. I definitely learnt more than you because you are only reading from books. My progress is I've learnt forms, applications and push hands.

Your questions are talking about "high level" crap that frankly is not the majority of regular taiji practice. I never had to learn it once! So for you to ask about content in his *thesis* when you're a complete newbie is laughable.

The real lessons (for people who actually do taiji) are practical. They aren't concerned with any of that.

[Hendrik]

Thank you for sharing your view. I have a better understand on your view now.
Thank you and appreciate. Good luck on your journey!


The following is my response if you are interested.


--------------------------------

I don't even understand the question.

ok.

There is no attainment in Li Jun Feng's qigongs. It's not a test of any form.
They are exercises to relieve your stress.

Great!

As soon as it works for you that is good.

Frankly you have ideas about qigong that do not relate to his. Hence you ask questions about attainment and talk about realizations... These have nothing to do with him.

Ok

You can have your own ideas but where it all fails is when you promise stuff you can't deliver. i.e. Internal mechanics in fights.

I learn Chen taiji like everyone else. Forms, applications, push hands.

The majority of practice is not worried about qi.
You are assuming it is, based on some books or something.

Thank you for sharing your view.


I am used to

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0tLYajHBm8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KxjA8fOJZ0

I expect nothing. I just observe they are using no different mechanics from an external person.

ok.

Your assumption is based on your colourful imagination. Then you presume to tell me what I should have learnt in my lessons when you have had no lessons.

That's rude of you.

Assumption? imagination? rude?

The following is a sample of Chen Taiji basic instruction given by Ma Hong himself.

Perhaps you would like to check it out what is MaHong's Teaching and also verify does Ma Hong mention about Zhen Qi....etc?





Could some one who has a better english please translate the following ?


丹田内转，实质上是在意念导引下小腹内部内气以及各种脏器的多向蠕动。

这种蠕动，离不开腹肌、腰肌、髋关节、臀部、骨盆等多方面的配合

，离不开内呼吸(真气)的鼓荡作用。离不开意念力的导引作用。

但是，应该肯定，胸腰折叠必须以丹田内转为枢纽;还必须肯定，真气运行是胸腰折叠的能量流。所

以，必须是内外兼练。运之于内即丹田内转，真气运行，意念导引;形之于外则是胸腰折叠，周身运 化。

I never said I know all about Ma Hong.

HOWEVER I HAVE HAD MORE LESSONS THAN YOU. I definitely learnt more than you because you are only reading from books. My progress is I've learnt forms, applications and push hands.

Thanks for your sharing.

Your questions are talking about "high level" crap that frankly is not the majority of regular taiji practice. I never had to learn it once! So for you to ask about content in his *thesis* when you're a complete newbie is laughable.


The real lessons (for people who actually do taiji) are practical. They aren't concerned with any of that.

Thank you for your sharing.

Are you suggesting Ma Hong spending all this time writting Craps and teaching Craps?


Could some one translate the following so that those who is interested in knowing Ma Hong could have a different view compare to Edmund's view?

馬虹既是一名好拳師，也是一名好教師。他在傳拳中，幾乎對每個太極拳專用語，都有一篇精到別緻的論文。諸如 《陰陽相濟論》、《丹田內轉論》、《周天開合論》、《松話彈抖論》以及《關於太極拳的重心》、《關於太極拳 的纏絲勁》、《關於胸腰折疊》、《關於下塌外碾》、《關於襠走下弧》、《關於拳走低勢》、《關於四兩撥千斤 》、《關於八門勁別》等等，皆從人體生理學，人體力學、太極美學等不同角度追根尋源，立論深入淺出，不同凡 響。

　　馬虹在治學上有螺絲釘的鑽勁，他為了弄清人體生理、骨胳脈穴，專門到中醫專修班聽課求教，領悟中醫哲理 ，學習經絡學說。

同時，他結合運動生理學、心理學、人體力學、中國傳統醫學、兵學、易學，深入探討太極拳在現代人類生活中的 多種功能，從而取得了突出成就。

[Edmund]

I am used to

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0tLYajHBm8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KxjA8fOJZ0

Then you are in for a big change when you actually have some taiji lessons.

These aren't applications of taiji either by the way.

Assumption? imagination? rude?

The following is a sample of Chen Taiji basic instruction given by Ma Hong himself.

Was there anything about fighting applications? I don't think so.

I think you are under the assumption that a little theory quote is the same level of information as actual lessons. From my understanding, there's a lot more practical information given to beginners than what you have quoted.

Are you suggesting Ma Hong spending all this time writting Craps and teaching Craps?


Could some one translate the following so that those who is interested in knowing Ma Hong could have a different view compare to Edmund's view?
..
..

Err. What?
You are the one mis-characterizing his teaching style. It's not a book club...
That's some fairy's bio riding Ma Hong's jock.

You got no idea how he teaches.
You take writing and imagine what actual training is like. I don't need to.

It's not how you think. They do not worry about that stuff. It's mostly about martial applications of techniques. You can keep trying to discredit me if you like. But I've *had* lessons. You haven't.

Same goes for Li Jun Feng. You can pull out all the interviews you like. He still taught me, not you.

So when I say, "Max Chen looks pretty external to me", it's based on the experience I have which frankly is still more than yours no matter what you read.

You *also* have David Ross telling you he knows Max trains MT and San Shou.
Yet you still imagine that his taiji mechanics are making him successful.

[Hardwork108]

So when I say, "Max Chen looks pretty external to me", it's based on the experience I have which frankly is still more than yours no matter what you read.

Your "experience" of the internals, together with your "understanding" or more correctly, lack of, has been trickling through your own posts for months.

You *also* have David Ross telling you he knows Max trains MT and San Shou.

And he may be right, not that I would take David Ross's word for anything after having experienced his forum "discussion" tactics.

And IMHO, he, just like you, wouldn't know what real internals were even if they fell on his head.

We are talking about an aspect of Chinese martial arts that is not taught commonly even by sifus who have mastered them.

Yet you still imagine that his taiji mechanics are making him successful.

Well Max Chen is also a tai chi teacher and because of that one would assume that he has expert knowledge in this art and is still practicing. Since tai chi is a martial art, why wouldn't he use aspects of this powerful art in his ring fighting? After all he has stuck to it and achieved expertise despite his San Shou career.

[Hendrik]

Then you are in for a big change when you actually have some taiji lessons.

These aren't applications of taiji either by the way.

according to Edmund's Taiji sure, you are 1000% right.



According to Chen Taiji
Let see what and how is Ma Hong teaches


这套拳不同于一般健身术的一个突出特征，是它始终保持其武术本质。不论从战略思想和战术技巧，还是从种种锻 炼内涵和手段来看，此拳确是一套应敌、应变、防身、护身的拳种。为此，在练拳过程中，要加强武功意识，本着 “一胆、二力、三智、四法”的法则，全面锻炼自己的应变能力，在这方面，此拳的内涵也极其丰富。

（一）根据太极拳的战略原则，练太极拳的人要讲武德，树立大将风度。强调“彼不动，己不动”, “人不犯我，我不犯人”的思想，事事力争和谐，大事化小，小事化了，“以和为贵”。就像陈鑫公所说：“我守 我疆，不卑不亢”。“持正守中”，以化解矛盾为上策。


太极拳姓“文”, 也姓“武”，太极拳不仅练拳脚功夫，而且炼心灵精神境界，或说是头脑、心灵中的功夫。

所以，练太极拳的人，遇到与他人的矛盾，尽量以化解为上策，以能容为上策，实在不得已而交手时，也要尽量以 容化来力，我“以其人之力，还置其人之身”, 使其失去平衡、感到失势为上策。同时，又要千方百计维护动态平衡。或者“化打合一”（• 险扎衣）、“声东击西”（如前招后招）、引进落空合即出（如上步七星）“欲要先给，欲给先要” 等等招法。


....离不开内呼吸(真气)的鼓荡作用。离不开意念力的导引作用。

但是，应该肯定，胸腰折叠必须以丹田内转为枢纽;还必须肯定，真气运行是胸腰折叠的能量流。所

以，必须是内外兼练。运之于内即丹田内转，真气运行...

Was there anything about fighting applications? I don't think so.

I think you are under the assumption that a little theory quote is the same level of information as actual lessons.

From my understanding, there's a lot more practical information given to beginners than what you have quoted.

According to how Edmund think, and Edmund style of Taiji style, That is right.




As for Chen Taiji and Chen Taiji's actual lessons?

丹田内转 or Tan Die inner revolve/rotate which Ma Hong teaches is one of the most basic internal training/lesson ; which is the core of Chen Taiji be it for form practice, health, and fighting applications.


Let take a look on how Chen Taji is described?

总的看来,陈式太极拳的特点是:动作外形缠丝旋转、顿足跳跃,动作劲力刚柔外显、松活弹抖。 动作气势静如山岳、动如惊雷,运动过程中 丹田内转丝丝入扣,动作速度快慢相间,势断意不断。

Could some one please translate the above?

translation In brief, externally appearances showing reel silk spinning..... while within the movmemt, Dan Dien rotate/Revolve to syncronized with action..





Thus, Ma Hong is kind enough to explain Tan Die inner revolve/rotate in details.

丹田内转，实质上是在意念导引下小腹内部内气以及各种脏器的多向蠕动。

这种蠕动，离不开腹肌、腰肌、髋关节、臀部、骨盆等多方面的配合

，离不开内呼吸(真气)的鼓荡作用。离不开意念力的导引作用。

但是，应该肯定，胸腰折叠必须以丹田内转为枢纽;还必须肯定，真气运行是胸腰折叠的能量流。所

以，必须是内外兼练。运之于内即丹田内转，真气运行，意念导引;形之于外则是胸腰折叠，周身运 化。


and Chen Xiao Wang shows its figthing applications

陈小旺讲太极技击
The title is Chen Xiao Wang instruction on Chen Taiji's fighting technics

http://v.youku.com/v_playlist/f2045343o1p5.html

Err. What?
You are the one mis-characterizing his teaching style. It's not a book club...
That's some fairy's bio riding Ma Hong's jock.

You got no idea how he teaches.
You take writing and imagine what actual training is like. I don't need to.

It's not how you think. They do not worry about that stuff. It's mostly about martial applications of techniques. You can keep trying to discredit me if you like. But I've *had* lessons. You haven't.

Thank you for your sharing on Edmund's Taiji.

Based on the above evidence on Chen Taiji be it from Ma Hong and Chen Xiao Wang. We know Edmund Taiji and Chen Taiji are two different type of taiji.

Chen Taiji Must know 丹田内转 or Tan Die inner revolve/rotate thus Ma Hong or Chen Xiao Wang teachers it.

Same goes for Li Jun Feng. You can pull out all the interviews you like. He still taught me, not you.

Sure Li Jun Feng is your Qigong Sifu, sure it is him who taught you. Certainly not me.

I pull out those interviews is to understand what is Li Jun Feng teaches and to understand how and what is your background on Qigong.

and I understand now.

So when I say, "Max Chen looks pretty external to me", it's based on the experience I have which frankly is still more than yours no matter what you read.

You *also* have David Ross telling you he knows Max trains MT and San Shou.
Yet you still imagine that his taiji mechanics are making him successful.

According to your speculation and thinking based on what you know about Taiji, You are absolutely right.



However, According to Taiji, one starts with making the Taiji's
太极球与丹田内转
Taiji ball / Tan Die inner revolve/rotate machanics one's nature which support ones action. That is what you are missing based on the evidences shown in this discussion; it doesnt matter how many lessons one takes .

One can make claim and dropping name that one attending MIT or standford university, but one might never passed the basic examinations and graduate. Attendant is not the point, the point is does one learn anything?



Thus,
This also support my view on

GM Ma Hong has written very details thesis to explain what is Internal training and what you called INVISIBLE according to the Chen's Kuen Kuit... Actually, he heals himself and knowing internal art in very details, Yes, including Zhen Qi and fajing.



To be real honest, I would assume and expect you know these basic of internal training and "Invisible" details which is missing in most so called IMArtists since you learn from his student.

But then, these days ,not everything is obvious, one cant assume and expect.

which you react defensively as the following

2. You've had *no* lessons from any student of Ma Hong so maybe you should be shutting your yap and listening to me about it rather than theorizing about what he's said. At least I've had lessons.

Thanks again for sharing your view. I know understand your point and where you comes from better.

IMHO,
Why Internal training fail? when one doesnt train accord to the core teaching but not aware of it. But, keeping argue why one's speculation on training is right...etc even evidences have shown one doesnt know.

It is analogy to cooking sand and expert to have rice. that is set up to fail.
One can take 100000 lesson on cooking sand, but dont expect to make rice cooking sand because one will certainly disappointed.

[Hendrik]

Very true Hendrik, very true.

See, I like to reason with evidence not to argue or debate or toung fu to win.

I respect everyone from Taiji to BJJ to MT to MMA if they are real deal with evidence.




Let you know I love this old song.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yImP1...BD0A6&index=12

[t_niehoff]

See, I like to reason with evidence not to argue or debate or toung fu to win.

I respect everyone from Taiji to BJJ to MT to MMA if they are real deal with evidence.

I think this is deceptive.

It's not simply "evidence" but the type and quality of the eivdence that matters. Hearsay, stories, demos, etc. are evidence. They're poor quality, nonfighting evidence, but still evidence.

The only evidence that is meaningful is evidence that what you are doing or training to do works in fighting and against competent fighters. Everything else doesn't mean squat.

MMA, BJJ and MT can show that what they train to do they can do in fighitng and at the very highest levels. IMAs can't do that.

[Hendrik]

I think this is deceptive.

It's not simply "evidence" but the type and quality of the eivdence that matters. Hearsay, stories, demos, etc. are evidence. They're poor quality, nonfighting evidence, but still evidence.

The only evidence that is meaningful is evidence that what you are doing or training to do works in fighting and against competent fighters. Everything else doesn't mean squat.

MMA, BJJ and MT can show that what they train to do they can do in fighitng and at the very highest levels. IMAs can't do that.

Thanks you opinion on somthing you know and something you totally dont know.

[t_niehoff]

Thanks you opinion on somthing you know and something you totally dont know.

We're talking about evidence, right? If there is evidence (video, for example) of IMAists successfully fighting competent fighters, please share it. To assume -- as your are -- that these things (IMA) work absent any good evidence isn't rational.

You were the one who said: "I like to reason with evidence not to argue or debate or toung fu to win."

You are the one calling for evidence, so where is your good evidence that IMAs work in fighting?