Connecting internal and external martial art?

[Scott Sonnon]

How do you see RMAX connecting external and internal martial art approaches?

[jrat]

Coach, would you mind if we backed up a step?

I'd like to hear what makes a martial art internal, in others' view.

Is there an objective set of defining characteristics? Maybe we can get some agreement here then move to the comparison.

All my best,
John

[Chuck Kechter]

I have a few ideas here (about the comparison). But I "always" seem to post lately and I want to see what others bring to the table first. :shock: :wink: :twisted:

V/R,

Chuck

[Scott Sonnon]

John, I was hoping someone would insist upon that! :wink:

Chuck, don't hold back. Start it going.

[jrat]

Yesterday I made it to the book store for the first time since my son was born...as usual ended up in the MA section. It was good being away for a while, because there were some new books I hadn't seen before. (':P') I picked up a book written by the founder of Aikido's son originally published in Japan in 1986, but just out in English this year.

I'll paraphrase from this book of what it says makes Aikido, Aikido. I figure it's as representative of an internal art as any, so can serve as a starting point for dialogue about what is characteristic of internal arts in general.

Nen
Through sincere and dedicated training according to Aikido principles, a practitioner strives to unify ki, mind and body in order to generate a powerful flow of energy; such a mind-set was called nen by Morihei. That kind of nen, set in the center of the universal ki, is the source of miraculous power, and it also engenders a special kind of intuition that can immediately respond to any contingency....

How can we implement Morihei's teachings on the linking of nen and universal ki, and the transformation of breath-power into cosmic force?...

Aikido cosmology has five premises:
1) As described by the philosophers of ancient China, the universe functions according to the principle of yin and yang manifest in the five elements...the Universe came into being through the interaction of the ki of heaven and earth, and the interplay of yin and yang in all things.

2) In ancient Shinto cosmology...the prime generating force is musubi, or the principle of continuous creation. Morihei emphasized the importance of the interaction between ka-mi (fire and water) and the power of i-ki (breath, or life force) in the creation and maintaining of the universe.

3) The view that nature has regular cycles of life that define existence and that human beings are subject to the laws of karma. For example, plants and trees have a natural cycle of budding, flowering, bearing fruit and fading that recurs year after year; human life seems to be guided by similar patterns...Samurai constantly faced life and death on the battlefield...making them keenly aware of the mortality of life...Although Aikido is not fatalistic; it would be wrong to say that the concepts of karma and the world's impermanence had no influence on Morihei's thought.

4) A belief in the cosmic rhythm of life and that all existence functions according to innate natural laws. This persective has had the greatest impact on Aikido. There is a day and a night, high tide and low tide, sunny days and cloudy days, hot periods and cold periods--such patterns constitute the natural flow of existence, on a cosmic level. On an individual level, within the human body, air and blood circulates, and hormones create biological rhythm that corresponds to the cosmic rhythm...the condition of mind and body varies constantly, and if we ignore the dictates of biorhythms by not sleeping, eating or moving properly we suffer the consequences.

5) The distinctive Aikido world view revolves around the concepts of circularity and spherical motion. Aikido uses this symbolism: move just as the earth spins on its axis, and turn like the earth rotates around the sun...in Aikido, when ki, mind and body are unified, the circular movements appear similarly calm and relaxed, but can be applied with great and immediate efficacy if activated. This principle lies at the heart of the Aikido world view.

[Scott Sonnon]

John,

In light of your beautiful post, perhaps it would be prudent to outline what makes RMAX, RMAX. Any takers?

I'll get it started with the core doctrinal philosophy. The core of RMAX is to recover, coordinate and refine the integration of one's breathing, movement and structure, to discharge Fear-Reactivity, and to enter Flow-State.
In breath, RMAX focuses on Performance Breathing (Breath Scales Mastery (http://www.circularstrengthmag.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3238)). In movement, RMAX focuses on multi-planar, multi-joint recruitment to store and release stored elastic energy through Selective Tension. In structure, RMAX focuses upon discharging Density and increasing Plasticity.

In conflict, one learns to manipulate the opponent's density (and overall Fear-Reactivity) which dis-integrate the opponent's breathing, movement and structure - and by doing so, changes the 'state' of the opponent from dense to plastic.

[jimmy23]

Quick observations:

Rmax's focus on fluidity and coordination of the entire body, with precisely the right amount of tension, strikes me as common to internal arts. The focus on breath (yes I know I keep going back to that these days, hehe) is definately internal , if you MUST classify it.

Also, my short time actively training in the soft Chinese arts focused quite a bit on tendon strength, using it to generate power through elasticy. WHile I cant recall seeing this explicitly spelled out here, the principle seems to be the same.


As for the external, or "hard" arts , I ahve one word - Clubells. The recognition of the need for bodily strength in combat is one that is sometimes forrgotten among internal practitioners, but it IS recognized among some. The tai chi that I was taught ( that was learned by my teacher in Shangahi) emphasizes what they call the low form, which is an hour long series of transition done in VERY deep stances, twisting at awkward angles, all done ina hellishly slow fashion. This is done to develop strength at odd angles, along with balance. The actual combatives of the system typically weretn taught until the student was able to tolerate the low form for thirty minutes or so.


While I am still very much a noob at Rmax training, I see the sysytem as developing attributes along both lines, internal and external.

[Chuck Kechter]

John had a lot of the goods within his beautifully written post.

What does RMax have in common? Off the top. . .

(re) master mind-body connection(s).

(re) master breath control.

(re) master connection to universal principles (elasticity, plasticity, non-violence, non-resistance, sequential overlapping joint recruitment, cooperation, folk wisdom, reciprocity, accommodation, harmonic devotion, amplification, et cetera)

(re) master flow state (Ueshiba's musubi [means blending]) in life, combat, within self (not necessarily in that order).

Add a competitive component that focuses more on efficacy over efficiency, on attrition over amplification, and a protocol of armoring over mobility, and you have the basics of a hard system. . .

Just some thoughts. . .

V/R,

Chuck

[Glenn Sunshine]

The first thing we need to do is define the terms external and internal. I'd suggest a few principles.

First, internal and external are on a continuum. No truly martial style is purely external or purely internal, but contain elements of both in varying proportions. This is the ying-yang idea, that even at an extreme, the seed of the opposite principle is present.

Second, there is a tendency to over-generalize and identify external styles with hard and linear, and internal styles with soft and circular. This is clearly an over-generalization (see point 1), but there is some truth in it. External styles, for example, tend to have more hard blocks, while internal styles emphasize softer deflections. I wouldn't want to push these trios too far, but again, there is a seed of truth here.

Third, a principle difference in focus between the two is the method of energy generation. Hard styles tend to emphasize muscular strength, speed, power, and physical conditioning as a Westerner would understand the term. What Scott calls armoring (aka tempering)--building up a body that can withstand shock--is often a part of this. Internal styles focus on other types of energy, whether you call it qi or chi or ki. This is a hard-to-define type of energy, but along with it comes more of an emphasis on connective tissue (ligaments and tendons) than muscles. This isn't to say the muscles aren't worked--anyone who has been to a good tai chi class knows what it can do to your legs, for example--but the focus is elsewhere.

Fourth, the energy generation principles lead to differences in breathing patterns. Both emphasize training the breath, but the type of breathing is very different. In essence, it's one of the principles of RMAX breathing: breath should be proportional to exertion. Thus external styles of breathing are much more forceful--the kiai, for example. Internal styles of breathing, because of the de-emphasis on muscular force, tend to be deeper and more relaxed. In fact, internal styles generally seem to emphasize lower breathing (abdominal breathing) over any other zone.

Fifth, the balance between tension and relaxation is different. External styles, because of the way the muscles and breath are used, tend to be tenser, while the internal styles focus far more on relaxation and flow. Here is where I think the most interesting comparison between RMAX and internal styles come in. If you are relaxed and doing lower breathing, you cannot become mentally tense or afraid. You are much more responsive and quick physically. Training for that in the internal styles creates a sense of detachment on a philosophical level, but it also results in positive physical changes that enable you to respond quickly to crises. Scott's Body Flow and emphasis on physical freedom to remove fear reactivity seems to me to be in principle much the same kind of physical answer to the problems of fear and tension generated by stress.

Sixth, all traditional arts have a health component in them, with that playing a more prominent role in the internal arts. In fact, training externally without adequate balance to the internal is a common explanation for why so many founders of hard, external styles did not survive well into old age. RMAX certainly has the health component firmly in place and integrated into the martial practices like the best internal styles (e.g. the relationship between taiji quan and qigong).

Overall, my understanding of RMAX (limited as it is) places it in a middle zone encompassing both external and internal elements. My sense is, however, that it has more in common with the internal arts, built on a very extensive base in the external as well. I may have misread this, since my experience with the martial side of RMAX is more limited than with the health side, but given my current understanding of the balance, that's about where I'd put it.

[Chuck Kechter]

Nice post Glenn!

V/R,

Chuck

[jrat]

Great post, Glenn. A lot to chew on there. This is a little redundant to Chuck’s post, but I’m still on commonalities of all internal arts (not comparison to RMAX).

a) Integration--self w/ self, other and universe. Includes model and/or training methods for reconciling time, space and energy continuum.
b) Focus on breath as source of movement and power.
c) Has creation story.
d) In application all involve entering, merging, harmonizing and have methods for discharging fear-reactivity to allow the practitioner to do so. None are “stick and move”, all are “stick and stick”.

I'm trying to stick with Absolute Statements that are true for all the internal arts, but don't know if it worked.

Musubi, I believe, is a profound concept and correlates to the root meaning of Yoga (not the practice)…the Aikido text I paraphrased the above post from says Musubi is the principle of continuous creation (its Creation Story). Musubi in its most basic meaning, though, is to tie, bound or yoke. So to borrow a term from Coach Sonnon, this principle of Continuous Creation is the other wheel of the same cart as Unification and Integration processes. The end and the means, maybe. And this is the other wheel of the same cart to the methods of discharging fear-reactivity—one wheel seems to me to address getting close, not getting hurt on the way in or while in, the other addresses what to do once you’re there (or, more accurately, where the intuition/idea/response for what to do comes from). These two wheels en-courages, or give the courage to implement, a Forward Pressure Strategy and execute a "stick and stick" approach and all ties in to unification of offense/defense, response vs. technique approach, non-contension for space leading to softness, development of Faith….which are all hallmarks of internal arts.

Sorry, upon re-reading this last paragraph could be more clearly written, but it’s the best I can do right now.

All my best,
John

[Glenn Sunshine]

John,

The key principle in taiji push hands and combat is "absorb and redirect," that is, take the energy your opponent is sending your way and instead of trying to stop it, bring it into yourself and through yielding redirect it in such a way as to unsettle the opponent. Not everything ultimately ends up with that, of course--there are a variety of striking techniques, for example, that don't really use that principle in any way I can identify--but it is an interesting example of your "stick and stick" idea. It's no accident that taiji is principally associated with Taoism, with its goal being to understand and harmonize with the dynamic energies of the world.

Yours,
Glenn

[Scott Sonnon]

Absolutely fascinating, my friends! I continue to be stunned by the intellectual capital of our community (though I should know better by now not to be.) Considering this third of the Three Dimensional Performance Pyramid (http://www.rmax.tv/3dpp.html), how do approaches other than RMAX address the Hardwork to Softwork continuum? Are there any that are similar/dissimilar?
http://www.circularstrengthmag.com/images/3dppcompetition.gif
Does this representation reflect the spectrum for only balanced approaches - in regards to Glenn's distinction of no art being absolutely polarized, that every one contains an element of the other end of the spectrum?
Also, from this diagram, is it easily understandable to the RMAX practitioner that each individual comes in with specific needs, goals, resources and (temporary) limitations? Or is it easily misunderstood in that people wrongly perceive this as a dogmatic, imposed "balance" upon every individual (which in effect is not balance, but imbalance)?

[Jrichardson]

there are a variety of striking techniques, for example, that don't really use that principle in any way I can identify--

Think along the lines of Newton's Law of Equal and Opposite Reactions.

Every time you hit somebody, you'll get the same amount of kinetic energy back. How you deal with that returned energy will ultimately have a considerable effect on how efficiently you transfer impulse to your opponent. If your structure breaks down (or breaks!) due to the impact, your transmission of impulse won't be very efficient, and won't transmit as much impulse as it could have.

In my head the difference between "external" and "internal" arts is:

That "external" arts recognize primarily that if you hit or attack a weaker structure than your own, whether someone smaller or just a weak spot on someone bigger, that your own structure will automatically be able to withstand the recoil of the strike, while the weaker structure will either dis-integrate or break;

Whereas "internal" arts recognize that you can hit anyone anywhere with any amount of force you can muster, as long as it is reabsorbed gracefully; and if so it will have a useful effect without self-injury.

Lately I've been thinking that the reabsorbtion is increasingly more important than the production; that how I deal with my own force has a far greater effect, with ANY sort of movement or technique, than how I create force. I guess I'm leaning a bit towards the "internal" pole these days...

[Glenn Sunshine]

Scott,

I think this plane of the pyramid can be understood to say that anywhere on the continuum from internal to external can lead to flow state, but that flow state will only come when the two reach a balance point. In the TCMA I've studied, one of the first statements that caught my attention was that at high levels, kung fu and taiji become the same thing--they essentially merge together. It's like moving up paths along each edge of that face of the pyramid. The Shaolin Five Formed Fist I've studied is a very rich and complex system that starts hard, moves to soft, then back to hard, then back to soft, as you progress upward, with the eventual balance point being "effective efficiency." In taiji, the movement comes almost completely from the soft/internal side, but as the combative component is taught, you get much the same result in the end. So I would say this plane of the pyramid works quite well for what I've learned in TCMA.

If you're interested in specific training methodologies, I'll try to address that in a later post. On surface, they're very different, but I think they try to get at many of the same underlying principles as RMAX, albeit described in culturally different terms.

Yours,
Glenn

[JasonE]

A universal ideal of all martial arts is that with increased mastery, one's actions become more effective with less exertion required. This sliding scale of efficiency is a common measure and the root of much debate.

Over the years, I have had the good fortune to train in a variety of overtly internal and external arts, and some that are a bit of both.

My general impression is that the overtly internal arts train softness and flow from a point of impractibility to a point of practibility.

Conversely, the overtly external arts train simple hard practibility (more-or-less) at the start and gradually progress towards a soft flowing practibility.

Those in between simply pick and choose what they feel to be the most advantageous and sensible training methods from each.

I see CST as a bridge, bypassing the dogma of typical practice to focus on efficient movement. This brings the overtly internal practitioners and overtly external practitioners into a similar state... that of melding with motion efficiently without concern for specific martial form, yet providing insights into all forms.

[Coach Jones]

I see CST as a bridge, bypassing the dogma of typical practice to focus on efficient movement

AMEN!

[Chuck Kechter]

. . .how do approaches other than RMAX address the Hardwork to Softwork continuum?

In my experience most don't address it, or at least do so inefficiently. . . A lot of MAs have a structure that could work the spectrum, but most "settle" for one end of the spectrum or another, with small forays into the "opposite" end of the spectrum on occasion, rather than balancing both, and all.


Are there any that are similar/dissimilar?

I can only think of one system in the last few years that I've seen (please keep that in mind) that is similar, and that is Matt Thornton's SBGi group..


Does this representation reflect the spectrum for only balanced approaches - in regards to Glenn's distinction of no art being absolutely polarized, that every one contains an element of the other end of the spectrum?

To me (and maybe I'm wrong :shock:) but it seems to be missing a piece. And that is that there should be some way to diagram this in BOTH the practice and competitive angles of the triangle. My perception is that most people (who even read, and understand the 3DPP) think the spectrum for Softwork and Hardwork is for competition type training only, when actually it can be applied to any form of training (or movement really).

Which leads me too. . .


Also, from this diagram, is it easily understandable to the RMAX practitioner that each individual comes in with specific needs, goals, resources and (temporary) limitations?

Not from the diagram. It might need a you are here arrow pointing to some point on the diagram. . . :wink: :)


Or is it easily misunderstood in that people wrongly perceive this as a dogmatic, imposed "balance" upon every individual (which in effect is not balance, but imbalance)?

My perception is that those that work with the 3DPP find their own balance in using the performance triangle. Those that don't use it, or merely have a cursory understanding of it probably think it dogmatic.

Again those are only my impressions. I know exactly two other people (in my non-forum life :shock:) that have read of the 3DPP. Both are martial artists, and neither of them is particularly AWARE of his performance levels, capacities, or potentials. And worse, beyond a certain level of basic competency within their "system(s)," they don't care to know.

That is one of the vexing things. For every hundred people I've trained, or trained with, only one or two are interested in the possible enhancement of their performance beyond that basic competency level. They (at least at this point) are not looking for transformation (performance enhancement) they are looking for something else.

I could go on, but I'll stop there. :oops: No need to go on a rant. . .:evil:

Good discussion.

V/R,

Chuck

[Scott Sonnon]

Jon, I feel the same way, currently. :wink:

Jason, I couldn't agree with you more that RMAX provides a bridge over the river dogma.

Chuck, I suspect that you're right that it's difficult for people to see beyond the 2D diagram to the 3D "interior." Each face of the 3DPP superimposes over the opposite two faces. For instance, there is a GPP to SPP to PS to E/MS component to both Practice and Competition; there is a Static to Fluid to Dynamic Drill component to both Competition and Training; and there is a Softwork to Hardwork continuum for both Training and Practice. It's so damn difficult to communicate that the "exterior face" of the 3DPP's three sides are NOT the "thing" but the nebulous interior "stuff" which constitutes the "pyramid" is the "actual thing."

I'd be interested in anyone's input on how to better represent this in diagram format!

And I really like your "reference point" suggestion for the Softwork to Hardwork continuum. If an additional image would give an example of "traveling" up the 3DPP, perhaps it would offer clearer understanding. I like Rick Bibbs' analogy here to depict each individual's unique "Process" of upward exploration (and yes, many people choose an 'early' level of imperfection.)

PIO-- pilot-induced oscillation. Pilot sees he's over-altitude, pushes yoke in, by the time he gets back to checking altitude (from checking course, weather, radios, terrain, traffic) he's too low, pulls yoke out, cycle repeats. Only 'dangerous' if he drifts into an altitude assigned to another aircraft. Inefficient the rest of the time, the climbing costs about 10 knots in airspeed, and fuel consumption applies to ALL distance covered, vertical as well as horizontal. The same thing applies to controlling speed when driving a car (car speed is more relevant to aircraft altitude than to airspeed); fuel costs of speeding up (curiously) don't get paid back when speed drifts downward due to inattention. That's why you get another couple miles-per-gallon using cruise control. These are complex concepts to embody into practice, even when they're explained by an instructor. (I'd been driving 10 years when I learned to fly; it immediately improved my driving, but it took another 10-20 years to get "really good at it".)

[Glenn Sunshine]

My general impression is that the overtly internal arts train softness and flow from a point of impractibility to a point of practibility.

Conversely, the overtly external arts train simple hard practibility (more-or-less) at the start and gradually progress towards a soft flowing practibility.

I think that's it in a nutshell in my experience as well.

Yours,
Glenn

[Glenn Sunshine]

I'd be interested in anyone's input on how to better represent this in diagram format!

I don't want to be too negative here, but I'm not sure you can get everything you want into one self-explanatory diagram. Every mandala I know of needs interpretation, and something as sophisticated as this is going to require some explanation.

Incidentally, I deliberately chose the word "plane" rather than "side," since to me it better conveys the idea that there are multiple lines to the apex. It's subtle and probably idiosyncratic, but there you have it.

Yours,
Glenn

[Scott Sonnon]

Well said, Glenn. The plane vs. face distinction has merit.

[Coach Wilson]

I love what everyone has said. All I have time to add is that after working with Coach Sonnon, all the internal stuff made sense to me, in the combat world. That is the best way I can describe it, I just all of a sudden got it. A real AHA moment. Keep it up. Try Softer!

Always,

Joseph

[Scott Sonnon]

John,

Could you expand on the "Continuous Creation" concept, and "Creation stories" as central to an internal martial art's doctrine? It's very interesting to me.

[RayK]

external to enternal is the natural progresion of anything we do, from learning to drive a car to typing to clubbells. All roads do lead to the same place some people just dont have a map.

[Arluk]

The synchronisity runs deep in this place, I just started learning Bagua from a good friend that has been studying in Taiwan. I showed him some of Coach Sonnon's work and he said "it looks like this is a system of teaching internal MA from the outside in".


From what I have learned so far:
It seems to me that focussing on the internal arts requires one to focus on the internal movement components of the body, to coordinate a body capable of storing elastic and or potential energy within subtle movement patterns. Adding to the sensitivity of internal motion would be using the minds ability to calculate complex force vectors from non-existant levers to amplify the effeciency of the movements. Example: a begginning exercise of twisting the hand through suppination and pronation while focusing on the twisting of the fascia muscles and bones in the forearm, amlifying the potential energy of this exercise would be as simple as imagining an axle with a heavy flywheel extending out of the forearm through the bent elbow. Added to this a lengthening sensation throughout the body to open the joint structures and use eccentric contractions to more actively enguage the entire architecture in creating powerfull force vectors.

In our bodily architecture we have movement possibilities, every joint has its specific mobility range. Example: I can move my arm in any plane of movement I chose and create more or less a large circle, in this external movement there are internal components. To move my arm at all requires me to move my entire body in many ways which may not even be visible externaly. Doing Warrior Wellness or any awareness expanding practice will inevitably enguage the mind in sensing how the body moves as a whole, including large external movements and subtle internal adjustments and sensations. If ones practice involves external martial power they have already been working on their awareness of how the inside of their body is effected by external movements. If a persons practice involves the internal arts they have already been working on increasing their awareness of how the outside of the body moves in accordance with the inside. Warrior Wellness etc can help to bridge the gap between internal arts and external arts by balancing the awareness of the internal and external movements.

As far as qi goes:
We are alive, which means that asside form all else there is a complex chemical oxidation process in our bodies creating life sustaining energy. We get the neccesary substances for this process through eating breathing and drinking as well as a few other intake processes. We can cultivate a body and mind that is capable of very high levels of effeciency in the usage of this energy. We seem to be living in a world with physical laws or tendencies, the apple drops when you let go of it. We are very connected to our physical universe and in that connection we find many different forces at play in relation to our being. There is the force of earth not only gravity, but the spherical shape, the intense heat inside and so on. There is the force of heaven, the sun the stars the enourmity of space. There is a life force held in stasis between up (heaven) and down (earth), that is constantly being effected and effecting all other patterns of energy in its awareness. Quantum physics has some interesting things to add to the ideas of qi. With quantum physics we find that all matter and energy seem to be made up of the same substrate of subatomic energy particles, quarks and so on. It is in the pattern of vibration of the quantum field of any given pattern that we find the identity or traits of that specific pattern of energy, in other words a rock vibrates at a very different magnitude of order than a glass of water or a magnetic field. Interestingly enough quantum physics also finds that the state of the vibrations of quantum particles is effected by things such as vibrational thresholds, thermal thresholds, and interestinly enough, awareness. A glass of water sitting on you desk, just sitting there without your awareness it is at pretty much random on the quantum field level. But give that glass of water a look or even just a thought from the other side of town, and you will create a more coherent pattern in the quantum field of that glass of water.

I do not know if I am capable of taking energy from the earth without eating it, breathing or drinking it, but I do know that it seems by becoming aware of my energy and the earths energy I can raise the level of quantum coherence in myself, the earth, and in the relationship between the two. To me qi cultivation is a practice of awareness of the relationship of my being to my reality in order to increase my efficient use of this awareness to further sophisticate my ability to use these relationships in even more efficient and sophisticated ways.

I have to also take into account that everything I have written here is metaphorical, there is meaning in what has been written but none in what it applies to.

This kind of just came out, constructive critisism is highly appreciated.

[Scott Sonnon]

Marty,

Loved your post... Please tell your friend that I'll be quoting him on this superb comment, "a system of teaching internal MA from the outside in."

[Vbrown]

"Internal" and "soft" often get used as synonyms and there in lays a trap. One does not rely on the other. It can, but it doesn't have to.

There are on-going discussions on what makes an internal art just that. And these are discussions with some pretty big dogs in the areana.

RMAX does work with many of the concepts seen in most soft arts and there is some overlap into the internal arts as well. But there are some things in the internal arts that are (at least as far as I've found) are unique unto themselves. Not "better", but certainly unique.

Some of these skills are subtle but easily understood with the deeper look that RMAX trains us to use. But there are some others that are quite frankly weird and peculiar. And the more I reflect on them, the more I think you have to be born into it to have you song sung in the hills. As it were.

FWIW,

Vince

[Scott Sonnon]

Vince,

So, are you saying that "internal" is not an approach (which any person can apply through their own volition), but a collection of particular styles in which one must participate? If not, could you describe these characteristics which are uniquely internal?

[jrat]

Coach, you asked if I could expand on the "Continuous Creation" concept, and "Creation stories" as central to an internal martial art's doctrine? I’ll try….

First off, in hindsight, a slight mistake was made in lumping the Continuous Construction/Destruction Cycles (Base of Hsing-yi’s 5 Element Theory) and Continuous Change (from I-ching/Bagua) philosophies in as a “Creation Story”.* Although these may serve as tools for opportunity creation, technically these are different from the Creation of Musubi (and other Japanese arts) as these are man-made creation (i.e., production). Intention vs. Attention, in my mind.

As the story goes, Taiji (One) is the movement which springs forth from the Void (Zero). It is this "One from Zero" Creation that is the focus of Zen, Taiji, Aikido and other arts. (Yes, I'm sitting cross-legged and eating lotus root as I type ':wink:' )

This idea flows to an emphasis on feeling of movement, development of intuition, or listening energy in the Chinese arts and feeling of ma-ai, or Critical Distance, with the body in Japanese arts; all going hand in hand with a response-based (vs technique) approach.

Vince wrote:
"Internal" and "soft" often get used as synonyms and there in lays a trap.
You're right, internal can be extremely hard...which leads to a half-hard, half-soft discussion, and then which half is hard/soft...it all gets intertwined making absolute statements pretty difficult. Like to hear of the wierd and peculiar skills.
All my best,
John

[jrat]

The prior post got me thinking on this “Zero to One” idea…
Glenn wrote:
First, internal and external are on a continuum. No truly martial style is purely external or purely internal, but contain elements of both in varying proportions. This is the ying-yang idea, that even at an extreme, the seed of the opposite principle is present.

Second, there is a tendency to over-generalize and identify external styles with hard and linear, and internal styles with soft and circular.

Vince said, "Internal" and "soft" often get used as synonyms and there in lays a trap.

Chuck wrote:
For every hundred people I've trained, or trained with, only one or two are interested in the possible enhancement of their performance beyond that basic competency level. They (at least at this point) are not looking for transformation (performance enhancement) they are looking for something else.

I’d add to this statement that most people are not really looking to develop real martial skill; or that if the price of admission is blood and sweat, then the cost of development or transformation is not worth the price.

I’ve been thinking for a while of the quandary of trying to teach an art that has both transformation and development of extra-ordinary martial skill as primary goals to a population that for the most part isn’t seeking these things. It was actually Coach Sonnon that showed me a vision of a way to bridge this gap…but that is more of a technical bridge.

There is a spiritual bridge too…I propose this is the hard seed nestled in the opposite soft/internal continuum.

I’m not sure if this is a true story…it may be Urban Myth; I’ll keep it real brief and soften it as much as possible. Have you heard the story of the divorcee who went to a work happy hour, where for some reason she got a ride home from a young male co-worker. This young “gentleman” talked his way in the house for a night cap, where he proceeded to get “medieval”. The young lady could not muster a defense and was forced to suffer the worst kind….. When he was done with her, he left her battered and barely conscious, and got up to head upstairs where her young daughter was sleeping. The woman gathered her whits to recover from her stupor, and chased down this man and proceeded to return the “medieval” treatment in kind. I like to say Mother Bear emerged.

I apologize to some readers as this is a highly sensitive subject matter, but I mean to raise two questions: 1) Why was the woman able to respond in the way she did when the object was her daughter rather than herself? Question#2 – If it’s assumed that this Mother Bear response-ability is in us all, how far does it have to go before emerging when it is ourself under attack? I’m reminded of something I’ve read somewhere “It's not what you fight with but what you fight for which makes a warrior!”

Some readers can probably clearly draw the line in the sand, because they have drawn the line in the sand, yet many other readers probably can only imagine where they would draw the line in the sand because this hand has never been forced upon them.

Another related story, we know is true and we’re all familiar with is 9/11. We know four planes went down that day, but one was different than the other. Can we say from this that the ratio of the population willing to transform their situation or fight is 1 in 4. Hardly. How many people were on those planes, and how many people were involved in the counter-attack on the 4th plane? We know the counter-attackers had different intelligence than the people on the other 3 planes….this obviously helped their decision….but still, even when faced with wait and sure death or fight and possible life…how many people would wait and hold out hope for a savior?

Again, I apologize, as this too is a sensitive subject.

My observation is the internal and soft arts have a tendency to draw the thinkers and the pacifists. In reading of Aikido founder Ueshiba’s philosophy, he taught the main goal of his art was the perfection of moral character rather than development of martial skill…if you happened to be able to defend yourself on the way to becoming a better person, then this was icing on the cake.

My experience of the ShinGiTai (Spirit/Technique/Body) paradigm of Japanese was different….man can fight on three levels: physical, technical or spiritual. What ability to respond have we when we are both out-physical’d and out-technique’d? My vision of the spiritual response is more Mother Bear and lacks the refinement of Ueshiba’s spiritual response of leading the would-be killer to salvation on the way to a gently applied pin/lock. I recognize my response is relatively low level on Maslow’s hierarchy—at this stage I guess I am unable to reach self-actualization while fighting for the more basic need of Life….I’ll work on it though.

Maybe it’s that the Spirit has a place on the Recovery, Coordination and Refinement continuum.

I hear people loving Softwork. Some people are talking about discharging fear-reactivity and detachment from fear. I recognize this as a function of Softwork, but what about when you’ve cleared this hurdle. What about Hardwork? What about re-attachment (stick and stick) to the event?

The downfall of many arts/practitioners/practicing groups is too many people are looking for a technique or method to place on a pedestal…they project this need for a savior outside themselves onto certain aspects of the art and build holy shrines around it: Chi, Pushhands, Cosmoligical paradigms connecting you to the Universe….Softwork (had to say it). This over-emphasis, or im-balance, leads the art to become a shadow of its former, virile self. All of these are important components of their respective arts, but look at the case of Softwork, it’s only 1/6 of the base of the pyramid.

If you look at the two above anecdotes, they both point to what I believe is the fundamental seed of the Hard…it is the Hard Choice of the Hardwork. What will you fight for? When? Is this seed in your Internal/Softwork continuum?

[RayK]

If you are practicing your soft work correctly you are creating a pathway for your "bear" to flow out of you.

[jrat]

Exactly, Ray...I kind of see this as part of the Coordination/Refinement. I'm saying for this evolution to occur, first there has to be Recognition and Recovery of the Bear...(sure beating this bear into the ground).

[dave_rusin]

I cannot remember where I read about this, but I recall reading something about motivation to defend oneself instead of passively submitting to an aggressor.

The suggestion was to imagine the aggressor trying to harm someone that you love with all of your heart. The idea being that most if not all will fight tooth and nail to defend someone they love, but that some will submit to an aggressor if the violence is directed at them and not a loved one.

I think it is an important lesson.

If my memory serves me it was in regard to one of the adrenal based systems.

FWIW,

Dave

[Scott Sonnon]

John, thank you for the expansion on the creation story.

But moreover, thank you for your excellent commentary on the state of affairs regarding the Softwork - Hardwork continuum.

I also believe that some people are associating SoftWORK with "soft" and HardWORK with "hard." Softwork can be damn hard, and Hardwork impressively soft. It's an approach that is unique, but has parallels elsewhere. In 3DPP the distinction is very simple: Hardwork is for measuring effectiveness and Softwork is for improving efficiency. You can improve efficiency in Hardwork, but marginally and not always. You can measure effectiveness in Softwork but not accurately and not always.

I certainly am of the opinion that there are people who place themselves in a Softwork-only emcampment, and only position themselves for "improving efficiency." The danger appears when they position their propaganda as combatively effective.

I am also of the opinion that there are people who place themselves in a Hardwork-only encampment, and only position themselves for "immediate effectiveness." The danger appears when they position their propaganda that continued efficiency is not possible for anyone (outside their approach.)

RMAX is a new and unique map which provides both longitudinal (Hardwork) and latitudinal (Softwork) coordination. But moreover, it teaches the user to incrementally turn up two notches of efficiency, then measure down one notch the actual effectiveness. Two steps forward, one step back. This is how the 3DPP checks and balances improvement. One needs to both watch the horizon and be aware of the immediate terrain.

In regards to the primal brain... there are hot buttons, lines in the sand, which when crossed pings the most feral part of our being. When these tragic events occur, we "downshift" to the most certain, direct and practical performance.

Reality-Based Self-Defense systems currently in the vogue promote this as an "evolutionary gift." Yes, it is. But it is a gift with a cost. It is a gift, like a reflex is a gift. The Moro reflex survived as a selected tendency in humans for infants to protect their oversized head from snapping their own neck in falls. When facing a potential topple, the shoulders lift, the face grimaces (bracing the neck structure) and the fists clench (irradiating the arm to shoulder musculature into fixed structure).

RBSD systems use the Moro reflex as a point of departure for effectiveness. Yes, this works. Yes, if I had only a few days or weeks to prepare people for combative engagements, I would link their fighting skills platformed off the "flinch reflex" (as it is currently named in pop martial culture.) This uses "fear-reactivity" as a positive force for immediate survival - the most basal level of survival on Abraham Maslow's pyramid of needs. Yes, it works. But like I said, it works at a cost.

However, as I alluded above, reflexes are only temporarily hard-wired - it is a tendency, not a law. They are NOT permanent, immutable behavior of our neurology. This defies all researched as well as empirical evidence.

Would a reflex-based fighter perform better than a seasoned vet? Would someone with a couple weeks of adrenaline based training perform better than a lifer who has had more ops than underwear changes? No.

With time in an extended training program (one not based upon immediate effectiveness like RSBD systems), one can unhinge this tendency to "flinch" - look at any seasoned vet in any activity and you will see this as self-evident. Tony Blauer made an appearance at an RMAX seminar in FL one time and one of the things he said was that he doesn't flinch anymore. Longterm exposure to RSBD, if you survive without a litany of injuries and post-traumatic stress syndrome, will eventually unhinge the Moro reflex which we are given as a gift for infant survival.

Yes, of course superior training requires more time, more resources, deeper understanding (SOFTwork). Just because in the midst of RMAX development you experience a traumatic situation, you flinch, platform off of it and access your fighting skills, overcome your opponent and triumph, doesn't mean that "flinching" is a requirement for success.

What once made you "flinch" no longer does. As your Fear-Reactivity diminishes (through improving efficiency and measuring effectiveness), your threshold of pain - or your tolerance of stress - improves. You need a GREATER stressor to cause strain - to cause you revert to "flinch."

The primal brain is not a necessary component of survival - it is a fail-safe for a stress level for which you have not prepared. Yes, you must know how to access and utilize the primal brain for "stress-too-high" survivability. But this takes days to weeks. It is only the beginning of training.

It's only the beginning, because while under the flush of the overwhelming chemical burn, your awareness is very restricted (think tunnel vision for example). Your mobility highly governed and gross (blood volume drained from periphery and pumped to major groups). Your respiration near hyperventilatory (affecting your mental clarity). Can you imagine having to make critical decisions for the future of your life, your business, your family while under the influence of this state?

And once you have that platform familiarized, if you intend on continued improvement, you must adopt a different vehicle. A drag race gets you there very quickly, but only a very short distance. Once you learn how to "drag" then you must learn how to manuever - to be more agile than a perceived opponent... to become a fast transient cycling faster than your opponent can react.

Survival arousal is a very dangerous tool. It must have its contexts. And it must be yoked through enduring training. That is... if one cares to develop "professional" level (masterful) performance. If one does not, then this is irrelevant.

[Scott Sonnon]

During afternoon practice, I remembered something I neglected to include in this.

Combat sports, such as BJJ, Sambo, Judo, MMA, Muay Thai, Boxing, all have this element of 'unhinging the flinch reflex' through continued refinement. It's a simple matter to observe the fluidity under extreme pressure of those who have mastered their combat sport.

The RSBD dogmatic knee-jerk here is that "real combat taps a deeper visceral reflex than mere sports." This argument always makes me chuckle since it defies neuroscience and tested research by forefathers of RSBD; men such as Col. John Boyd, and Bruce Siddle. Siddle's research demonstrated that over time, one's stress arousal DECREASED when exposed to the same combat multipliers (variables.)

"Kill House" scenarios (a form of Softwork to Hardwork) demonstrate this over and over and over again. Run the scenario until it's as mundane as scratching your dog's back.

I obviously have nothing against RSBD approaches as long as they know their place as one tool in the toolbox (and only an "early" tool at that.) Everyone needs a hammer every now and then, but not everything is a nail, and not everything needs pounded through cherry wood.

[jrat]

The bear analogy went a little far, so it may have looked like I was espousing building the foundation on the primal brain.

Coach wrote:
I obviously have nothing against RSBD approaches as long as they know their place as one tool in the toolbox (and only an "early" tool at that.) Everyone needs a hammer every now and then, but not everything is a nail, and not everything needs pounded through cherry wood.

This is really what I was envisioning. As a teaching tool, just to draw some "raw fight" out, and for the practitioner's sake, to know they have access to this, but to use with the discression of a "nitro button in your drag racer". I was also seeing this more as a tool in the self-defense arena (and for woman more than man) than combat sport. Coach, would you use this as a tool at all in your teaching or do you stick to methods of layering hardwork onto softwork after some confidence has been built, fear-reactivity reduced?

Coach wrote:
Once you learn how to "drag" then you must learn how to manuever - to be more agile than a perceived opponent... to become a fast transient cycling faster than your opponent can react.

While talking about the limits of a more "primal" approach...as they invented the sport, rules and approach, the Japanese dominated sport karate for years up until maybe 15 to 20 years ago. Now the Europeans dominate, and I believe a key reason is their use of what you said "cycling faster than your opponent can react." The Japanese stick to their approach, and the U.S. pretty much follow their lead (to give you an idea of U.S. results).

Coach, is there such a thing as "Intended Cycling" and "Attended Cycling"?

All my best,
John

[Vbrown]

Hi Coach,

"So, are you saying that "internal" is not an approach (which any person can apply through their own volition), but a collection of particular styles in which one must participate? If not, could you describe these characteristics which are uniquely internal?"

No. There are a few styles that happen to contain internal principles. But the essense of internal is in the execution, not in the style. There are thousands of people who do "internal" styles in name only.

The principles of movement, alignment, and power generation are certainly applicable to all aspects of one's life. These principles are fairly rigorous, but it's more like principles of good mechanical engineering than just opinion.

In CMA, there are a number of styles that share some of the basic tenents an IMA. Then they deviate from there to accomplish the strategic task they wanted to address. These are the "internal/external" styles. (just as a point of historical illustration)

For example: I've spent a good chunk of time watching and learning from Li Tai Liang and Chen Xiao Wang. Top ment in their feilds (xingyi and taiji respectively). They move very differently from each other, yet the movements are powered in a similar fashion. The "forms" (at least taught by LTL) are a "blizzard of techincal examples" of moving with particular principles. As one understands these "rules", one can then explore other motions with the understanding of still trying to keep the "rules" intact. Which means that my movements will be unique to me, but I will have a common language with my xingyi brothers.

Am I making any sense yet?

Vince

[Scott Sonnon]

Coach, would you use this as a tool at all in your teaching or do you stick to methods of layering hardwork onto softwork after some confidence has been built, fear-reactivity reduced? I don't accept training contracts for short-term, immediate effectiveness. There are an enormous amount of these weekend seminaring programs. My time is better spent with those intent on long-term, effective efficiency.

These RSBD programs are dominating public awareness due to the fear/urgency buttons they push through their marketing. Overwhelming people's perspective with fear may be good for their business, but it's not good for individual or social health.

People need to realize that there is a much more empowering, masterful approach - one that reduces and eliminates fear, rather than reinforcing and platforming off of it. I've dedicated my time and energy to those people who desire this, because frankly I believe this is better for people individually, and more responsible and more beneficial for us as a people socially, culturally and globally.

This is why many of the people who come to RMAX are more seasoned and have seen the end conclusions of the immediate effectiveness solution. They find it wanting in addressing anything more than the immediate fight - the symptom of a greater disease.


is there such a thing as "Intended Cycling" and "Attended Cycling"? Absolutely. The Intentional Cycle of "Intention, Opportunity, and Ability" (to do harm) is the feedback loop of the downward performance spiral (the "Vortex") and the Attentional Cycle of "Orientation, Differentiation, and Integration" (towards resolution) is the feedforward loop of the upward performance spiral (the "Zone").