Bao wrote:Bhassler wrote:"I have been repeating over and over again that he who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honor by non-violently facing death may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. ...
I have always thought that "non-violence" thingie.
Employing nonviolent civil disobedience, Gandhi led India to independence and inspired movements for civil rights and freedom across the world....
Although Gandhi was not the originator of the principle of nonviolence, he was the first to apply it in the political field on a large scale.[182] The concept of nonviolence (ahimsa) and nonresistance has a long history in Indian religious thought.... Gandhi realised later that this level of nonviolence required incredible faith and courage, which he believed everyone did not possess. He therefore advised that everyone need not keep to nonviolence, especially if it were used as a cover for cowardice, saying, "where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence."[183][184]
charles wrote:I'm not a Gandhi scholar. Wikipedia, however, reports for what he was most famous: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi#Nonviolence
wayne hansen wrote:I thank you Charles for the English lesson but you must realise that many here are as uneducated as myself and may never reach your academic heights
This is about martial arts not semantics
lazyboxer wrote:Joking aside, most of the things you're advocating have nothing whatsoever to do with CMA teaching traditions, Jonathan.
The whole wude concept is not well understood by Westerners and has nothing to do with whether a teacher smokes or not. I assume and hope that the case of the teacher you mentioned was just based on his personal decision, not on any objective need for him to tell people how to behave. Many old masters, both dead and living, are famous for their whoring, greed or violent dispositions, many others aren't, but none of that has any direct bearing on their pedagogical ability or lack thereof.
charles wrote:wayne hansen wrote:I thank you Charles for the English lesson but you must realise that many here are as uneducated as myself and may never reach your academic heights
This is about martial arts not semantics
If you set yourself up, as Jonathan has, as an authority and write, publish and sell books on academic aspects of martial arts practice, it isn't unreasonable to be held to a higher academic standard.
jonathan.bluestein wrote:lazyboxer wrote:Joking aside, most of the things you're advocating have nothing whatsoever to do with CMA teaching traditions, Jonathan.
The whole wude concept is not well understood by Westerners and has nothing to do with whether a teacher smokes or not. I assume and hope that the case of the teacher you mentioned was just based on his personal decision, not on any objective need for him to tell people how to behave. Many old masters, both dead and living, are famous for their whoring, greed or violent dispositions, many others aren't, but none of that has any direct bearing on their pedagogical ability or lack thereof.
The article was not about Wu De. I am an Israeli teacher with a Jewish heritage, teaching Chinese traditional martial arts, who speaks and reads in English and is heavily influenced by the American and British cultures. My values as a human being and a teacher reflect these biases. I do not pretend to be completely 'Chinese' in my way of teaching the martial arts. The methodologies, concepts, philosophy, techniques, etc may be Chinese, but otherwise I am my own person with my own unique blend.
jonathan.bluestein wrote: I do not enjoy the benefit of having my own editors, and my articles are most commonly published with only myself doing the work.
DeusTrismegistus wrote:I agree with some of the article. As to the parent part. A better way of thinking would be not as a parent, but a mentor. A mentor does not have the all encompassing responsibility that parents have, and yet have a large impact on those they teach.
DeusTrismegistus wrote:Kinesiology is a specialized field and I don't see any need for a martial arts teacher to know about it. Same goes for history. Most martial artists will know their styles history or at least part of it but in depth historical knowledge is not necessary. Similar for psychology. The teacher should understand how the mind and body work, but that should come from experience.
DeusTrismegistus wrote:4-5 years under a teacher is not long enough to be teaching. The exception would be if the teaching occurs under the direct supervision of your teacher. If the teacher is good all students should see significant progress in 3-6 months. 2 years of training and they should have a good foundation and be fairly confident. 4-5 years they should be moving to upper intermediate to advanced level. 8-10 years and they should have a good understanding and be able to explain beginner to advanced principles and techniques. IMO 8-10 years is where they get enough to teach on their own full time. The above assumes someone is completely inexperienced. If someone has a good deal of prior experience then 4-5 years could be enough to get to where they might be a good teacher. And of course they should always be improving themselves and have their own teachers.
jonathan.bluestein wrote:I have written an article about this subject exactly, trying to analyze in a clear and coherent manner how long it should take one to learn well a traditional martial art...The article arrives at the conclusion that the average time to learn a traditional art in depth is 5.5 years (4-7 years, depending on the art, if one learn in a traditional way).
Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 109 guests