I don't have a 'definition of my own'. But for me personally the bit about IMA's involving 'spiritual' aspects (and therefore by definition EMA's not doing so) is complete cobblers. And to say that IMA's have a 'mental' aspect, and again the implication is that EMA's don't have one, is bollocks. As for Qi, well everyone has a completely different take on what it measn anyway. For me personally there is nothing mysterious about it. Certainly nothing that can't be explained scientifically. So in a nutshell, I suppose I do think that the definition that you quoted is a load of rubbish really. Which isn't your fault, you are just quoting something you found on t'interwebz I guess.
Sadly not "in action" so to speak Wang is an anomaly for me, because i am genreally a very skeptical guy on these things and my "no guff" approach is widely known on MAP and elsewhere. But Wangs mechanics really speak volumes to me - all masters have tales about their prowess, but he is one of the few that has almost universal accalim within AND without the Chinese border It's is the subtlety and lfow you need to look for - the body does not lie This is Smith and Draeger hitting Wang [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgSPsiQhAZk"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgSPsiQhAZk[/ame] Some grainy footage from Wang in Japan - again this is still "demo" speed, but you can see that he can use that belly pretty well [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NWxbDSpgG0"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NWxbDSpgG0[/ame]
Thing is, that definition entirely supports my experiences with IMA's and their practitioners, granted, I've been calling bull on the concept of qi ever since my dad tried to explain it to me when i was 7.
Yeah, i see what you mean, there is a really weird idiosyncrasy to his footwork, you can't help but get an Emanuel Augustus vibe from him, granted, that should probably be the other way around, one can only wonder if all the empty carbs were a hindrance he didn't need, or the belly was a necessity to his style.
His students - the footage I have seen of them anyway - seem much more "conventional" in their IMA compared to Wang. Not to decry that (I enjoy me some taiji!!!) but there was something......unique about Wang
Could be the Raymond Daniels principle in action, an exceptional human who's exceptionalism transcended his chosen field of physical expression, thus giving credit to something that would otherwise lack it.
What's neigong? I practice neigong. Would Johnno recognise what I do as neigong? Would Hannibal? Would I recognise what aaradia does as neigong?
See above when i said that asking the opinion of 10 IMAists would lead to 12 different opinions, i'm not the sort of person who feels that fact should be that open to interpretation, hence my issue with quite a lot of the practices attributed to IMA's and their reputed effects.
But, if somebody, in person, asked you "what is internal martial arts?" or "what makes it internal?" what would YOU say - not what would you get if you google it, what would YOU say??
If you asked me what internal martial arts were, i'd say they are much like what i said in the beginning, a con that was created to allow old masters to convince younger martial artists that they remained better fighters because of their growing ability to manipulate non existent forms of energy through breathing exercises and meditation, despite the actual fact that they were growing older, slower and more feeble as time went on, actual physical techniques aside, that is what i think the distinction between internal and external schools is.
But, like it or not, that's the way it is - because of the snake-oil salesmen a lot of the water is muddied. Unless you're willing to lay down what YOU understand these words to refer to, then there is no way this conversation can progress, because we won't be singing from the same song sheet.
True, but while it seems that is the case, you generally can tell who is legit or not based on what they can show you, when a concept seems to require the abandonment of logic at it's farthest end, and something that would struggle to withstand a double leg at the other, you gotta scratch your head a bit.
You keep on spouting this nonsense, which isn't what I practice, isn't what Johnno practices, isn't what Dan Bian practices, isn't what Hannibal and Simon know about internal arts. We keep on telling you this misconception is just that and not what IMA's are, but you insist on clinging to your misconception and incorrect view and then judging IMA's based on your misconception and incorrect view of what they are. Ignorance is one thing, choosing to be willfully ignorant when multiple people who practice a style tell you otherwise is another. You don't practice an IMA. How about listening to those of us that do? One more time- it is a martial art, nothing more and nothing less. Every move has a fighting application, based on it's principles and body mechanics. NOT based on Chi blasts or mystical things.
What you are telling me is an internal martial art doesn't fit any description given beyond what you tell me, if you are going around telling me what you do remains an internal art, but is stripped of any distinction that removes it from being an external art, how does it remain internal?
This is Sifu Tayam doing forms and Qigong [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OhFd69-p10"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OhFd69-p10[/ame] I cannot speak to anything else he does, but trying to wrestle and move with him is like trying to grab a hold of water - he annihilated me at push hands Significantly he told me that "all arts are pretty much the same when you get down to it; they just use different methods to get there" I have always maintained that External starts with broad application and refines to a fine point; Internal start with small nuances and learns to apply broadly So the distinction is largely meaningless
Granted, this is the first time i've heard that it falls to an issue of methodology if anything, beyond being told i am wrong and being asked to dwell upon it, still if this is the case, why bother having a separate section for internal arts at all?
I'm just generally of the opinion that the less someone can explain something, the more likely it is not worth knowing.
