is wing chun internal or external?

[MrMcFu]

Is it possible to make a thread about _ing _un that doesn't turn into a squabbling, slow motion 100 page car accident?

[FickleFingerOfFate]

Is it possible to make a thread about _ing _un that doesn't turn into a squabbling, slow motion 100 page car accident?

no.


.

[It is Fake]

Don't fucking lie about my words.

Push Hands vs Chi Sau is not saying Tai Chi=WT.

It is saying a specific drill is similar. This proves my point about you and your theories.

Thanks for reinforcing my belief about you. You get **** rolling around in your head and ignore everything else in front of you. I said a similar drill is Basically the same. Your fucked belief systems carries it to its illogical conclusion. If one drill out of a hundred is the same he means Tai Chi=WC is the same.

That isn't what I said anywhere on that thread.

[It is Fake]

did I say he as wrong.? If you can not validate why those three styles are unique to get that label it is useless in a functional setting, what does it mean? If all it means is that it is from an authors book, what for? Why am i even caring. Its a sacred cow. If you want to lay claim to the term, please define it better. (and to recap, I clearly admited that the _un is external)


I am only offering another angle on it, from a few centurys of people that read the old meaning and moved on. What makes it Internal? What is Mystical about it and why can a WC sorceer not conjure up the same powers of biomechanics and Tantric energy cultivation? What is external then? How are these three not external? Is it really a combination all along? hard/soft, yin/yang? In a seperate thread you have tried to claim everything we do is inside tai chi and that the chun is nothing different. If so, is the chun internal enough to just be relabeled tai chi, so i can say I am Tai Chi so i am internal?

Did I ask you to throw something away? Take it or leave it or prove me wrong, doesn't matter to me. Internet posts don't change minds, minds do. I wanna know what he meant by internal.

There is no internal or external just different training methods. No one anywhere said it can't be done by someone else. Hell, in one of our earliest debates I said Fajing is just the drop step used in boxing. OMG a sporting venue funny how you forget about that conversation.

You are taking two established shitty marketing ploys and saying internal means weapons which it doesn't except in your little world.

BTW,

Yes, the internet changes minds it just doesn't change yours. There is a monster thread with people thanking bullshido for helping them out.

[Jack Rusher]

Push Hands vs Chi Sau is not saying Tai Chi=WT.

Just for the record, I was saying tui shou > chi sau and taiji > WT. But I meant it in the nicest way possible.

[It is Fake]

Just for the record, I was saying tui shou > chi sau and taiji > WT. But I meant it in the nicest way possible.

No he is angry with me right now. In that thread I basically said Push Hands is similar to Chi Sau.

IMO one is more restrictive blah blah blah but the goals and the principles are damn near identical.


Somehow he is now saying I said Tai Chi=WT. Maybe I have a typo in that thread but, with all the explanations, there is no way you can assume one similar/same drill=an entire art.

Well, unless you are DTT.

[Dr._Tzun_Tzu]

Is it possible to make a thread about _ing _un that doesn't turn into a squabbling, slow motion 100 page car accident?

no, but did a pretty good try in the history section once.

There is no internal or external just different training methods. No one anywhere said it can't be done by someone else. Hell, in one of our earliest debates I said Fajing is just the drop step used in boxing. OMG a sporting venue funny how you forget about that conversation.

Don't change it up now, the term "internal" was diffined strictly as refering to its use to elitize three styles. Now there is "no Internal/external"? Well that makes it easy, the "ostrich in the sand defense". Relax everyone, IsItFake has erased the dualism of internal/external from existence.

Yet my bones are still inside my skin and my stick is still outside of my body?

I put it many different ways, including inside or outside the skin, but you rejected all of them, that leaves only the reference to the book as your validation. You are projecting the idea that I fail to expect others idea, yet that is what you have done to my arguements. While I surely mocked mystical chi forces as the source of the term internal, as those forces are not considred practical to depend on, that doesn't mean I do not appriciate the methods used in Chi Gung arts to label, cataloge, and pefect the energy methods of the human weapon, both as pysics and as mystics. As I said then, I have no access to those schools or terminologies. I have many ways to look at this subject.

You are taking two established shitty marketing ploys and saying internal means weapons which it doesn't except in your little world.

yes, science, the shittyist marketing ploy since they tried to convince us we landed men on the moon before the Russians. A sphere defining the zone created by elbow distance is a ploy? The idea that you add energy to the system or that you can negate the energy back to zero or a negitive is marketing? Your marketing scam is some elses training methods and terminology and vs. versa. and "The grass is always greenist on my side of the fence."

PS_ I said EXTERNAL means weapons, foresure, unless you hide them inside the body. Can we atleast start to agree on that, that a stick is external to the body?

BTW,

Yes, the internet changes minds it just doesn't change yours. There is a monster thread with people thanking bullshido for helping them out.

I put anti- into (brackets) now to reduce it to only a prefix because of how this site changed my view point on the term and grappling, I have modified several aspects of my training from things I have learned here, I have even developed a Youtube channel specifically to host MYMAS as video for discussion. So do not even try to get all high and mighty on me about "mind Changing" or that I am not a part of this community of change..

Just for the record, I was saying tui shou > chi sau and taiji > WT. But I meant it in the nicest way possible.

cool, my point was also that its (it may be) a spectreum or continuem too, but not having , < or > be a worse/ better direction but a change of a contium, like front stance work to back stance work. Some people felt or implied that Chi Sau was contained inside push hands, That Push Hands is the total of the contium itself. I never got a straight answer on with this, EXCEPT FROM YOU JACK, thanks. and my rough quick clip of the thing I was talking about was never addressed, only the low quality of my performance, exept from you too, thanks.. Yet who of you didn't start with that same type of intro drill for tai chi? or that starting type of drill for WC? Are they the same drill?

No he is angry with me right now.

I am not mad at all, you are one of the more stimulating minds on here.

In that thread I basically said Push Hands is similar to Chi Sau..

off coarse its "similar", so it is to grappling and judo. Thats a non-amswer. the similar is to the laymans eye wich leads to the constant newbee question of "is Chi sau the same as Push hands?" IS it? Is it the same thing? Yes or no, I read to much Ayn Rand to listen to non-absolute stuff with a word phrase like "the same as"..

IMO one is more restrictive blah blah blah but the goals and the principles are damn near identical..

"damn near" eh? so that is not then "the same thing" is it?

My views on internal/external are "damb near identical" to the concepts used to define it in Tai CHi, ...see where this is going.

Somehow he is now saying I said Tai Chi=WT. ..

Y0oo did imply that, and even that why bother with the chun if is contained in the bigger Tai Chi panacopia attitude. That the Chun is nothing special and it should stop thinking of itself as unique. (thats from memory, so I may be off alittle).

Maybe I have a typo in that thread but, with all the explanations, there is no way you can assume one similar/same drill=an entire art..

I tried to look at one drill which each art STARTS with. No better place to try and compare one thing within a program, then at the first lessons, espically since the drills in question are those such beginner stages. You instead posted video of the latter drill stages. You took a term "push hands" for an entire level of progression, when the terms push hand and chi sau refer to an entry stage of that concept. So who assumed a term was bigger then a drill and covered an entire art? I was even willing to let the terms push hands and chi sau refer to the overall goal of the complete systems, both very similear indeed. But Tai CHi and _ing __un are not infact the same even then.

so is push hands the same as chi sau?
does that make them the same enough to be a non-issue?
does that make wing chun an internal art?

I guess the anser is they are similear? that sure helps solve this question, thanks...

Well, unless you are DTT .

and I am.

[Jack Rusher]

Yet [...] my stick is still outside of my body?

I shall not, no matter how tempting it is, take the bait to speculate on the location of your stick.

Some people felt or implied that Chi Sau was contained inside push hands, That Push Hands is the total of the contium itself. I never got a straight answer on with this, EXCEPT FROM YOU JACK, thanks. and my rough quick clip of the thing I was talking about was never addressed, only the low quality of my performance, exept from you too, thanks.

Cheers. I'm not here to take random pot shots at anyone's martial art or to argue endlessly on the 'net. I do think there are some serious problems with chi sau, and I do consider it a variation on the same theme as push hands/push body, probably developed by someone who learnt the other method a long time ago.

That the Chun is nothing special and it should stop thinking of itself as unique.

Uniquity = Bullshido. Physics and human body mechanics are the same everywhere in the world. For example, shuai jiao != judo, but their throws look very much alike. Some argue that this indicates a parent/child relationship between Chinese and Japanese throwing arts, but one also finds these throws in all the European collar & elbow wrestling systems. A more plausible explanation is that there are only so many useful throws and that they've been rediscovered wherever humans have developed throwing skills. Other things, like fire and the wheel, also turn up as independent inventions all over the world.

Likewise, a boxer's punch uses the same mechanics as every other hard punch. My first Northern Shaolin coach taught a round kick that uses the same mechanics as the Thai round kick. The headbutt mechanics my father taught me when I was a boy are the same as the ones I learnt as part of Shaolin "Iron Head" training (laugh it up), which are the same as the ones used by Zidane at the last World Cup. These are not mere coincidences.

Anyone who thinks they've got a secret no on else has found is very, very likely to be wrong. What's more — and I don't mean this to sound as harsh as it will — the things that I do see chunners doing differently from everyone else are exactly the things they're doing wrong.

[It is Fake]

You refuse to take anyones opinion outside of your own. So, I got tired of coddling your fragile ego and became just as adamant as you.

Everyone agreed with your assertion that Push Hands and Chi Sau were basically the same. The minute you saw everyone agreeing you flipped and suddenly said oh no at the basic level they are different. So, they still end up accomplishing a similar goal. There are about 15 people on the other thread that agree. So focusing on me is quite ridiculous. Even your fellow chunners agree.

The three style you seem to assume I don't practice teach that their weapons are internal. Yes, that's right. Maybe if you studied besides read a few books you would know this little nugget.

They teach that the weapon is an extension of the body so if you learn an internal art you lean an internal weapons.

Go read that thread again. You made it an issue. Most of us said they were similar. Hell many said basically the same.

Oh and your little tirade about internal/external?

I believe in training methods so yes, chun could be internal. It could be external.

Personally, I could give a **** as training is better than sitting on your ass.