L
lvwhitebir
Guest
East Winds said:Taijiquan is more than merely performing a predetermined set of movements. If treachers are unaware of correct application techniques, how can they possibly teach correct body structure and correct posture? It is through correct body structure and posture that the energy gates and channels are opened.
I agree with the first statement. However, I still believe you can teach correct body structure and posture without really knowing the application of the techniques. Unfortunately the studies' summaries don't say whether the practitioners were taught the martial aspect or not, but I surmise it wouldn't matter. It might be interesting to see that aspect some day.
East Winds said:I will continue to push for a higher standard of teaching particularly in taijiquan, if others are happy to settle for less, then so be it!
That's my point exactly. Do the best you can and teach what you think is the proper focus of the art. Show others that you're way is a great way to learn and is highly effective. But, if others choose a different path, why spend your time and energy bashing them and forcing their art to have a different name. Where's the authority that proves without a doubt that you're right and they're wrong. There isn't one. So it's a no-win battle and reminds me of 6-year-olds calling each other names. All it does in the end is diminish the art because no one wants to get involved with the argument. Embrace the difference to grow, there's probably something there that you can learn.
Besides, Tai Chi Chuan is a large art that has a great variety of sub-divisions. Who's to say which "family" is "correct" if one removes teaching the martial applications and instead focuses on the health aspects.
WhiteBirch