I have never been struck even lightly with an 'internal' snocking type of strike but have read a number of seemingly reliable accounts. These are also in accordance with my sons' one limited experience.

This week I have had a bad cold and again get to have that greatly unpleasant experience of shooting fingers of pain through the body after a bad sneeze. It occures to me that this slow motion electric shock type of effect may be related to an 'internal' strike effect. A natural generation of 'whole body power'. As I write this I now recall Erle Montague uses the sneeze as an example while explaining fajing.

Anybody have any thoughts or experiences related here? I wonder if when feeling a bad sneeze comming on, if the energy could be directed outwards as in a fajing strike to avoid ones own agony? Ideas anybody?

I've been struck by a few different 'internal' fa jing strikes ( I was holding a pad to my chest at the time).

One of the strikes was a 'shocking' (not 'snocking') energy or a jolting strike. Tim did this to me while demonstating some diferent types of fajing- The shocking strike jolted me greatly and caused me to spring backwards then scramble for footing while my innards felt like they were buckeling. If ever had a sneeze effected me this way I would seek medical attention immediately... a second sneeze would have probably done me in for good.

There's no magic to the shocking strike... Tim just puts his structure where mine was while including a short burst with his arms... it's a freaky thing to experience.

From what I've seen of Erle Monitque's videos and what I've read from his website, I wouldn't bother asking any one if his explinations hold water.

Mark,

To my knowledge I would say that what you experience from being hit with a good use of internal power would largely depend on where you were hit. For example, a blow to the solar plexis, kidneys, liver, spleen, testicles etc.would each differ in terms of what you would experience.

My personal experience is limited to being struck in the chest this way with a chest protector. If it is a penetrating blow I get what might be described as a "stinger". This is like sharp localized pain that may last a few days.

I think you need some Nei Kung "iron shirt" type training to even be on the receiving end of this type of power. Once we know we can issue it we switch to gloves & footwork & issue our power strikes to the heavy bag.

Although I think it is necessary to give & receive such power at a certain point in your development, by the time the other guy needs to double up on chest protectors to stay safe you can be pretty sure you have power & lay off a bit.

I (unlike Shane) like what little I have seen of Earl Montaigue. His philosophy fits in with what I have been taught for the most part & he certainly looks powerful (all the more so as he has gotten older.

I don't know about that sneeze analogy though.

Did you like it when Erle said his daughter regularly knocks him out while playing around with DimMak techniques? And how his wife has to sleep in a seperate bed because he has so much 'Chi' his limbs fly about while he sleeps?

I mean, come on. The guy's a nut.

Shane,

My knowledge of this guy is limited. i know some think his reach extends his grasp. What you point out sounds a little looney sure, but they have different standards of sanity down under. Besides, even I elbow my wife in my sleep sometimes.

I know he has students teaching in the New York area. Does anyone know how good his whole program is & how solid these guys are? All I know is I wouldn't want to mess with Erle himself.

The books and articles that Erle wrote more than twenty years ago will reflect his attitudes and experience of that time in his life as will the articles that he wrote last week. He is often mis-quoted or his quotes taken out of context, as in the previous few messages in this thread.

While I don't agree with all of his opinions or marketing techniques, I have known him for fifteen years and trained in many of his forms and methods during that time -- and benefitted greatly from most. His interpretation of the Yang style and pa-kua are hardly mainstream but they are as valid as the other legitimate versions that I have seen in terms of body mechanics and internal principles.

While fighting skills are not the only reason to train in the Chinese internal arts, Erle has real skills in these areas and just seems to get better and better as he ages!. He is also a gentleman and doesn't call other martial artists names anonymously in pointless internet "duels".

As to his students, and in this respect, he's like every other teacher I have ever met, the quality varies. You should not judge a teacher by his or her students unless you have the chance to observe or work with several who have been with that teacher for some time.

Opinions about Erle seem to be very divided. I must say, on the face of it, he looks like an obvious con artist, and it looks like the reason his defenders are so vociferous is because deep inside they know they've been conned, and have to pretend to themselves they haven't been. Sort of "shoot the messenger" type syndrome.

However, to play devil's advocate, it's possible that his closer students may have learnt a few fighting "tricks"; he was apparently a bit of a scrapper in his youth, and has some real fighting experience. I have also heard that, contrary to what one might think from looking at him posing in photos, he does actually have a tiny bit of internal ability (or at least an inkling of what it's all about); although he doesn't appear to have taught any of of _that_ "real stuff" to his students, even the close ones.

An interesting character, nevertheless - he writes oddly well, in a hypnotic sort of way - really weaves that cosy feeling around you that you're in some sort of special "club".

As to the sneeze thing, the sneeze is a natural reflex, an instinctive thing. There's a tiny grain of truth in what he's saying, but with the caveat that Taiji doesn't use instinctive reflexes, it laboriously trains you to have new, highly un-instinctive (though mechanically "natural" ) reflexes.

I'd say the dantien can power an external move in a sneezy way, but for it to do the same thing with an internal move, you'd've had to have slowly trained a long time for a rather different _style_ of movement, before it could have the same power-giving effect. The "sneeze" might be the same, but the kind of movement the "sneeze" would be driving would have to have been learnt slowly over a long-ish time, because it's so different from the way we ordinarily, instinctively move.

For instance, normally the "sneeze" would most naturally power a "closing" move, but very often, for internal styles, the "sneeze" would have to power "opening" moves, which isn't instinctive, and has to be trained. IOW, with "closing" the "bucking" of the dantien helps bring the two ends of the (very) shallow 'C' of the neijia spine together; with opening, the idea is for the "bucking" to help straighten out the 'C', which isn't such an easy thing to do.

"laboriously trains you to have new, highly un-instinctive reflexes" that sounds like a discription of external arts rather than TaiJi.

The ideal is to return to the bodies natural state of movement.

YOUR TEACHER MUST'VE BEEN A CHI-HUGGER TO FILL YOUR HEAD WITH SUCH NONSENSE.

There are several senses of "natural". Maybe, in one sense of "natural", we're training to "get back" something we lost. Maybe. But maybe, in another sense of "natural", what we're doing isn't actually natural at all, and takes a bit of getting used to.

I have no teacher, btw - us cats are notorious natural neijia creatures

Tim,

Questions Concerning Internal Strikes:

1) Does Yang-style Tai-Ji Quan lack the whipping strikes that are the core of Xing-Yi Quan (I ask after having read of Yang TJQ that the entire body starts & stops motion simultaneously -- whereas a whip stops at the "handle end" long before the whipping action is complete; the actual quote from the book "Combat Tai Chi Chuan: Joint Hands and Self Defense Techniques: Volume II," compiled by Douglas H. Y. Hsieh, concerning arm & leg coordination, & body parts such as hands feet & waist, is "When one is moving, the others should also move. When one stops, the others should also stop;" since the word "eventually" isn't in this quote or its surrounding context, I'm assuming the starting & stopping of all body parts to be simultaneous)?

2) If Yang TJQ has whipping strikes, then is there a "combative" version & an "exercise-only" version of Yang TJQ (the exercise-only version starting & stoping all body motion simultaneously as in the aforementioned book & the combat version doing differently)?

Mike,
First off, there are like a zillion variations of the Yang style, so I can only answer your question in regards to the Yang systems I studied.

There is an emphasis in the Yang style, primarily the Yang Chen Fu variations that emphasizes the concept of "dong/dang" (I don't know the actual physics terms, I translate dong/dang as primary force/ and the residual movement of inertia). For example, you throw a ball, the movement of your arm with the ball in your hand as one unit is "dong," as you release the ball, the ball travels on its own after your hand stops moving, this is "dang." Force is transferred from the arm (that stops moving at the point of release) to the ball (that continues moving after the arm has stopped). The arm provides the "primary force" and the motion of the released ball is the "residual movement." (if anyone who has studied physics would care to replace my layman explanation with the proper terms for dong/dang, please feel free to post).

As an example from Yang Taijiquan, look at the Push movement. Your arms are carried forward by the movement of your body (dong/primary force) and then as the body stops the momentum is transferred into your arms and your arms continue to move forward (dang/ residual movement) until the transferred energy is spent. By the time the movement of the arms is completed, the body is already moving into the next technique, so there s a conservation of energy and "continuous" movement. So, everythng "moves together" but there is a certain degree of pliability. You could also interpret everything "starting and stopping" together differently (like pushing a stone statue on a skateboard and then stopping the momentum. This would be a literal interpretation of everything starting and stopping together) but I don't think that is what the authors of the classics you are reading intended.

dang.

Thanks Tim. I get the basic concept if not the particulars.

Concerning the particulars: in Xing-Yi, would the initial movement of the leg (ending with the knee say near but beyond the ankle) be the primary force (bong), and the remaining motion (say of the hips, shoulders, arms, & hands) be the residual force (dang)? Or would the legs be dong to the hips/shoulders being dang, then the hips/shoulders being dong to the arms being dang -- in relay (whipping) fashion?

What I'm seeking here is to know if the "whip" is two-part (i.e. lower-body & upper-body), or if it's made up of many parts (& if the later, then in what order... what are the feelings &/or images?).

Tim,

My limited experience with your teachings so far has been mostly exercise-based, with a little bit of throwing or knocking-down, & a little taste of striking. The exercises are non-exertion-type exercises for the most part (with the possible exception of exercises like push-ups & swinging-jump-ups). When I've thrown/knocked down another correctly I've felt nothing (or close to nothing) different than just walking thru a form solo as you said it should be (a great feeling, or non-feeling, I might add).

However, with striking -- outside of swinging "haymakers" (pendulum-like motions) -- I usually feel as if I'm exerting myself in order to get good, sharp, crisp (aka. solid) blows (that is I'm tensing at some point in delivering any other particular blow); or else, when I shadow-box without any feeling of exertion I feel as if my blows might land too softly, without effect (much like that "fighting" guy on Mad TV). However, there is a "middle-ground" I've found in my shadow-boxing practice that feels powerful (a loose, slappy feel, with significant follow-thru), but I'm not sure if I'm exerting myself or not, as it is faster than I was doing Ba-Gua forms practice (in general) & I do eventually get winded (as when doing swinging-jump-ups). Perhaps I'm confused over what exertion is & isn't.

In striking, is this heavy-handed, slap-happy feel I get from trying to "whip" out my blows a correct or incorrect feel for IMA? I need to settle on practicing one way (to keep my practice simple & effective), as I'm still undecided -- not knowing if this "feels-good-to-me-approach" is IMA-correct or not.

Mike,
I read your above posts a couple of times, and I'm not really sure exactly what you are asking. In regards to your first question about dong/dang, it might be helpful to just think of the body (torso) mass moving first then the momentum transferring into whichever limb is to deliver the force (the "weapon" that will transfer the force to the target).

In regards to your second question, I'd go with "slap-happy."

Thanks Tim,

A review of my Xing-Yi notes answered my first question [foot-to-hips/shoulders-to-elbows-to-hands; or as you just put it, first move torso, then weapon (it's that way in traditional Tai-Jutsu too)].

And I'm glad to hear it's "slap-happy" (cause I likes it so).

Thanks again!

all this guy is doing is jing projection of power..he pops you with it just like bruce lees one inch punch..it doent even require drwing back your fist..and when you get good enough at it you can just point at the area and theyyll get sick and sometimes die...this is the true kung fu...dim mak hand touch of death

Hi,
Tim, thanks for the analogy about throwing the ball; it elucidated some ideas that I had running around my head. I am curious about some thing in regards to bagua and hsing- i ; when you use the whole body as one unit; I guess it means that when one part moves all parts move and the same for stopping which seems to create the ability to issue power from any point in any movement as you are working with synergy of the whole body from the ground up. It also seems that this, when combined with good sensitivity would create a very useful method of fighting as you can issue power from any point and are sensitive enough to change at any point in the movement to redirect an attack. Sort of like being in complete control of the movement at all times like the first half of throwing a ball before you release the ball. I am not familiar with the whiplike force of after you release the ball , so I cannot say anything about effectiveness, but it seems that after you release the ball, you are not in control so much any more and therefore cannot change direction or redirect a strike as effectively. I don't know alot about Yang tai chi, but it seems that this would work well with tai chi or hsing i as they both stop, root and then issue power and seem not as concerned with change as an art like bagua would be. My question (finally, I know...)is this; have you found these whiplike strikes to be a part in all internal arts, and if so , are they common practice or sort of side techniques of issuing power due to the lack of ability to instantly change? I could be completely off as I have no experience with these type of strikes; I'm just curious and like to write alot. Thanks, Josh

Josh,
It may help to think of issuing force as either "long" or "short." The mechanics of developing the force are the same, the only difference is the time over which the force is applied.

Force applied in a short time frame (like a "shocking" type of strike) is "short power.

Power applied over a longer period of time (like a push) is "long power."

All the IMA use both types of power.

Hi,
Thanks for the information, Tim, I got kind of caught up in mechanical babble as I was writing so I forgot to look at it as an action instead of a schematic. Josh

If you have any issues with Erle you can take it up with the guy; I've emailed him a couple of times and he's answered all of my questions satisfactorily.

You know he sometimes sends out material to people free of charge? I know because he sent me a DVD about fajing, and a book to someone I know. They were given totally free of charge, to people he's never seen thousands of miles away. Later, when I ordered a couple of titles, an error in shipping left me with two extra DVD's. Again, he did not charge me for them.

With regard to the sneeze analogy, I think it ties in with aikido's nen, when you move in a split second and with the self as a whole unit but in the case of what Erle teaches with a violence comparable to being badly surprised/burned. Instead of a recoil/retreating action, Erle teaches basically to move forward aggressively.

Tim said:
if anyone who has studied physics would care to replace my layman explanation with the proper terms for dong/dang, please feel free to post.

I know it's an old post, but I'll have a crack:
Dong=force=mass x acceleration
dang=momentum = mass x speed

Throwing a ball imparts a force F, which changes the ball's momentum by the amount F x t, where t is the duration at which you apply the force. This change in momentum is commonly called 'impulse'. So you can also interpret Dong as impulse.

In the vacuum and absence of gravity, the released ball will not change its momentum (i.e. will not accelerate/decelerate) until another force is applied.