# Tai Chi for Health



## East Winds (May 27, 2007)

I am always interested when I hear people talk about teaching Tai Chi for Health. Many students come to my classes looking for Tai Chi for Health. I usually say, I dont know how to teach Tai Chi for Health, I only know how to teach Taijiquan. I tell them that what I teach in ALL my classes is Taijiquan. As a result of learning Taijiquan they will get good health benefits. I tell them they do not need to practice martial applications, but they certainly need to know what they are. Otherwise how do they know how to put hands, arms and legs in the correct position? What I teach to my elder students is exactly what I teach to my martial students. The difference is my martial students learn and practice applications, push hands, grappling and Chin Na. I contend that there should be no difference between teaching for health and teaching for martial purposes. Often the people who talk about only teaching for health do so because they do not know the martial side of the art. I would be interested in the views of others.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 27, 2007)

East Winds said:


> I am always interested when I hear people talk about teaching Tai Chi for Health. Many students come to my classes looking for Tai Chi for Health. I usually say, I dont know how to teach Tai Chi for Health, I only know how to teach Taijiquan. I tell them that what I teach in ALL my classes is Taijiquan. As a result of learning Taijiquan they will get good health benefits. I tell them they do not need to practice martial applications, but they certainly need to know what they are. Otherwise how do they know how to put hands, arms and legs in the correct position? What I teach to my elder students is exactly what I teach to my martial students. The difference is my martial students learn and practice applications, push hands, grappling and Chin Na. I contend that there should be no difference between teaching for health and teaching for martial purposes.


 
My views on this are changing of late I must be getting old. I do very much feel that the martial arts side of Taiji is very important and knowing that only benefits the health side. But of late I have begun to feel that I want to know all there is to know about Taiji and I am pursuing that. But not everyone does and if they want to come for form and internal and not do a whole lot of applications then that is fine with me as well. Just don't try and tell me I am wrong because I am training the whole package martial arts intact. 

My sifu now has 2 official classes and one unofficial class. A beginner and intermediate (what use to be advanced) and an (unofficial) advanced. 

A couple others and myself stay for the unofficial advanced which takes place after everyone else leaves. We basically stay to get our butts kicked and learn more about push hands, internal and applications. A recent post of mine talked about his ability at qinna combined with his patients from Taiji that leads you to a lock you never felt coming until you are locked. I now feel that if people do not want to go there then that is fine with me, just don't try and stop me from going there. 

In the class prior to that many of these people are interested in what the applications are and how push hands works in applications too they just don't want it to hurt. I show them what applications they ask about but they never train them much after that. 

A recent comment made by one where sifu stopped everyone doing Jain form and showed them how he wanted it done made a lot of this clear to me. One of his intermediate students said, after doing that form "That was hard, I never knew Taiji was suppose to be hard... my legs hurt" the next class they did it the easy way. But they apparently enjoy what they do immensely. However I do have BIG concerns that someday this person may go teach Taiji, or at least teach something they call Taiji and that is a whole other issue that I am STILL having a big problem with. 



East Winds said:


> Often the people who talk about only teaching for health do so because they do not know the martial side of the art.


 
True, or they do not understand Taiji or they gave up trying to teach the MA because they would have no students otherwise.


----------



## oxy (May 27, 2007)

East Winds said:


> I contend that there should be no difference between teaching for health and teaching for martial purposes. Often the people who talk about only teaching for health do so because they do not know the martial side of the art. I would be interested in the views of others.



I'm inclined to agree.

The question, for me, then becomes: "from whose perspective?"

My own view on this is that the teacher should teach the martial aspects of the art, even if the student doesn't realise it.

To address Xue Sheng's problem, the only reliable way in this day and age is to (unfortunately) set up contracts and register trademarks to, at least, prevent people from teaching using your own name as some kind of promotion/authentication.

Every student will eventually develop a desire to teach. It's practically unstoppable.


----------



## bigfootsquatch (May 27, 2007)

Tai Chi is like any other martial art. Most people do it to get in shape, or they do it for self defense. Most are set on one or the other, and don't care so much for both. The ones that do it for health don't want to be "roughed" up, even with light chi na locks. They are there for health only. If people want self defense, most don't come to tai chi/taijiquan/tai chi chuan anyway. They go take karate, grappling, or self defense classes. Tai Chi simply does not have the reputation(at least in the USA) as a martial art. Granted I do know striking and chi na applications for the long form, if I were to teach it though, I wouldn't mention it unless someone asked. NOW, if I were to have several come and say, "well we really want to get in the self defense area", then I would show them. Other than that, Tai Chi lessons are going to benefit the most people by doing it strictly for health.

**I do agree the form should be done exactly as the martial side, otherwise the form turns into some sort of "wushu" version, like what happened to the competition side.**


----------



## dmax999 (May 30, 2007)

Eastwinds,

I fully understand your point and mostly agree with it.  However, I am going to bring up the Taoist Tai Chi Society.  They do "Modified Yang" and I believe you said you were familar with it to some degree.  Their modification were specifically made to increase range of movements and add a lot more "up and down" leg movement to increase leg strength.  I feel they have specifically and purposly removed the martial aspects while attempting to add in additional "health" aspects.  While at first I completely disagreed with their methods, if you see their average student you realise they will probably never ever want to even know the first aspect of fighting.  If they do, they should go elsewhere.

Just curious on your opinion of a group completely opposite of your viewpoint.  I personally believe a physical therapist would be able to help the people out better physically then their form of Tai Chi.  However, the majority of their people go to class to hang out with friends they made there and it becomes a social club, the likes they wouldn't be able to have at a martial aspected school.  (New ager Tai Chi people are generally not nearly as respected at most legit martial arts schools)


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 31, 2007)

dmax999 said:


> Eastwinds,
> 
> I fully understand your point and mostly agree with it. However, I am going to bring up the Taoist Tai Chi Society. They do "Modified Yang" and I believe you said you were familar with it to some degree. Their modification were specifically made to increase range of movements and add a lot more "up and down" leg movement to increase leg strength. I feel they have specifically and purposly removed the martial aspects while attempting to add in additional "health" aspects. While at first I completely disagreed with their methods, if you see their average student you realise they will probably never ever want to even know the first aspect of fighting. If they do, they should go elsewhere.
> 
> Just curious on your opinion of a group completely opposite of your viewpoint. I personally believe a physical therapist would be able to help the people out better physically then their form of Tai Chi. However, the majority of their people go to class to hang out with friends they made there and it becomes a social club, the likes they wouldn't be able to have at a martial aspected school. (New ager Tai Chi people are generally not nearly as respected at most legit martial arts schools)


 
Oh man did you just open a can of worms :uhyeah:

I know this post was not directed at me but I will just say as a long time Traditional Yang style person, I have little use for the Taoist Taiji association for I feel they are neither Taoist or do they do good taiji. It is a great name though if you want to draw people in and make money.

You want up and down movements for leg strength, do Wu style. You want lower stances for leg strength do Chen style. No need to modify anything.


----------



## Franzfri (May 31, 2007)

I started Tai Chi because I knew that it was healthy and good exercise.  Now I say that I have 3 benefits; Exercise, Meditation, and Self Defense.  Imagine me in about 20 years; a tiny 80 year old woman carrying an umbrella walking down the street.  A good target for a mugger...no?  But little does the mugger know that I'll have studied Umbrella Boxing and I know how to how to defend myself.  So as you see even people who start _Tai Chi for Health_ can be inspired to learn Martial Arts applications.  Yes I know that the "Umbrella" form isn't Tai Chi.  I do plan to learn it some time in the next 20 years.


----------



## bigfootsquatch (May 31, 2007)

Xue Sheng said:


> Oh man did you just open a can of worms :uhyeah:
> 
> I know this post was not directed at me but I will just say as a long time Traditional Yang style person, I have little use for the Taoist Taiji association for I feel they are neither Taoist or do they do good taiji. It is a great name though if you want to draw people in and make money.
> 
> You want up and down movements for leg strength, do Wu style. You want lower stances for leg strength do Chen style. No need to modify anything.


 
Agreed, there is truly a tai chi for everyone, Sun Style is also good for leg strength btw, as the knees are bent through the whole form and you stay at that same level. Of course some Yang variations do this, while some don't.


----------



## East Winds (Jun 1, 2007)

dmax999,

I don't really want to open up the old sore of the Taoist Tai Chi Society other than to say, yes, I do have some experience of it and attended several workshops with Moy Lin Shin (the founder) when he was still alive. What they teach is worthless. Taiji is a synthesis and balance of Yin and Yang. If you only "teach for health" you are only experiencing the Yin. You also need the Yang aspect which is the martial.  It is only recently they have acknowledged the "Yang Family" aspect of their form. Prior to that it was a form specially developed by Mr. Moy which he had learned in a Taoist monastery in China. As I said in my original post, I do not believe that you can teach Taijiquan without the martial aspect. Without the martial, it might look like Tai Chi, but it most certainly won't be.

Very best wishes


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 1, 2007)

East Winds said:


> As I said in my original post, I do not believe that you can teach Taijiquan without the martial aspect. Without the martial, it might look like Tai Chi, but it most certainly won't be.
> 
> Very best wishes


 
Agreed.


----------

