What exactly is a Master?

[Hua Lin Laoshi]

When discussions center on specific people it's easy to lose sight of the topic and turn into emotional arguement. The question of what designates a Master and whether the title means anything today is an interesting one.

How do you become a Master? Is it an actual rank or just a title anyone can give themselves?

Personally I like when words and titles have real meaning. Unfortunately some get thrown around so much they lose their meaning and people start developing the attitude that 'they can call themselves whatever they want, it doesn't mean anything'. This in turn degrades the meaning of the word or title even more.

I remember when a Black Belt was a big deal. Now there are 10 year old Black Belts and their teachers are 10th degree Black Belts. Not to be outdone future teachers will claim to be 23rd degree Black Belts and higher. Same thing with Master. When everyone who teaches is a Master what will be the new title to top that?

It seems to me that a Master is someone who has mastered the style. They know all the material (forms, theory, drills, techniques, applications, etc.) and can display it at any time. They can answer any question (although they may not wish to answer). That means they have reached the end of that style.

Nowadays I think it's used to set yourself above others so you can get more recognition, students and charge more money for seminars.

[TkdWarrior]

That means they have reached the end of that style.
with ur definition then to me that means they hav deaden the style...i won't prefer to learn any dead style...
to me Master is just a Title(like black Belt)
if a Master is untouchable then i wouldn't like to learn from him
Master is a Person/Human first then everything else...
-TkdWarrior-

[woliveri]

In Qi Gong or Martial Arts it is very easy to see a true Master (if he/she reveals it to you). My definition would be someone who could/can counter/respond to endless attacks without thought. I was watching Crouching Tiger/Hidden Dragon last night. An example would be these characters (3 main).

My teacher (Master) told me when I asked her if she would bring students to Master-"hood", she said that it's got to be the inheirent quality in the student that determines if that student can become a Master. That a student must be able to take one technique and turn it into 3 or more. To apply it to many things.

So a student can spend all their lives in the Martial Arts and never reach Masterhood. They can be born into inheiriting a system and still not be a Master.

[SaMantis]

Good question ... and the answer can be nebulous because every style/system has its own standards as to who is a master and who is not, and what to call them.

IMO sifu/teacher/master are interchangeable terms. I look at the title in the context of "teacher" or "schoolmaster" (old British school term, i.e.). A schoolmaster in the old sense was the teacher and held a great deal, if not ultimate, authority over pupils.

To extend the analogy, the teacher had a great deal of knowledge in his field (but keep in mind the different subjects taught at a single school). He didn't have to have complete knowledge of his field in order to teach or to be respected as a teacher. But he had to have enough knowledge to meet his students' needs and an ability to impart that knowledge effectively.

In addition, the teacher himself kept studying to improve his knowledge so that he could teach at ever-increasing levels.

*

In CMA (or in English teaching for that matter), I don't believe it's so easy for people to see a "true master" even when that person is revealing mastery. Not everyone has the level of experience that, say, Hua Lin Laoshi or woliveri has. Experience is the difference between "Huh-huh, look at that there funny move" and "Wow, I've never seen Needle To The Sea Bottom done that way before."

Just my humble opinion.

[Mr.Binx]

When used in the first person, a master is something someone calls themself when they've decided to stop learning. ;)

[MantisifuFW]

The term in Chinese has more than one interpretation. One is that of a master of an artform such as a master carpenter. There are degrees of mastery and some carpenters are better than others. It was rather like belonging to a guild.

The second is that of father figure/ teacher. A special relationship between teacher and student that developed over many years.

On the mainland the term Shifu or master is used only when an instructor coach has gained greatness by his deeds over many years and enters into a venerable status in old age.

Anyway I hope it helps.

Steve Cottrell

[MiamiMantis]

I always thought a Master was someone who has "mastered" a system completely- forms weapons fighting and concepts.


Like a person who has been fishing for many years and can put bait on a hook without killing it. He would be a master "baitor"
right???

ha ha just some martial art humor.....:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

dont' worry about everybody else in life just worry about yourself and your training and your personal goals.

[MantisifuFW]

MaimiMantis, and others,

The Chinese had these same concerns long ago. In my own line, that of Wong Hon-Fun Northern Praying Mantis, my Si-Gung instituted a graduate status for those who had a comprehensive grasp of the system in form, technique, theory and application in both conceptual and actual terms, (they could USE or DO it as well as TALK it). There were only about twenty one of these uniquely talented and skilled martial artists produced throughout his lifetime of teaching. My Sifu, Brendan Lai, was one of these.

However there were many capable persons who were not named graduates but who, still, went ahead to teach, propagate and promote the system. They were still consider Sifu but were not graduates. I have met Wong Hon-Fun non-graduate instructors and students of non-graduates before and in my experience they were very knowledgable and skilled practitioners.

It is a difficult thing and what would qualify as a sifu in one line of Tanglang would only be an intermediate level student in another. I have heard of people being sifu after only a few years of instruction and others take many years of training and maturing.

Some have purposed a central grading authority, but I am not certain of this idea.

Steve Cottrell

[Oso]

I don't understand why the titles of sifu (father)
sigung(grandfather) are enough.

The master/grandmaster bit is definitely ego and money
driven.

just my .02

[puma]

IMHO....as far as martial arts is concerned....a master is someone who has mastered the theories/concepts of the style he/she is
studying

[NorthernMantis]

From what was told to me the title master is a title given to someone in the martial arts community by others with good knowledge and skill and see the person very well skilled in many aspects of the martial arts. Oso was partly correct...if people gives themselves the title of master then it's definitely for ego.

lol @ MiamiMantis' joke

[Oso]

What is the chinese word for master?

If you have gained a students respect enough that they want
to learn under you and honor you with the title of father then
that should be enough.

the rest is traditionally relative to where you are in the lineage.

I'm afraid to say that this is something that my own sifu and
past classmates have lost track of. I have refused any other
title but sifu. I mean dang, it's dumb, I've only been doing this
particular style 13 years and there are days I second guess
myself as a sifu. But, I think this is healthy and keeps me
analyzing what and how I teach.

[MantisifuFW]

Northern Mantis,

Your point is well taken. Sifu is a term used for others. I consider refering to oneself as "Master or Grandmaster so and so" a mistake along the same line as a judge who would introduce himself "Hi, I am the honorable judge so and so". The term may be correct but others refer to him as "your honor".

Off topic, Oso, you are indeed a Robert H. fan! One of my favorite authors of long ago also.

Oso, there are two characters for master or Sifu, (maybe I can scan them in later), one is for a master of a skill like a carpenter or portrait painter or chef, (people apprentice with him like any school of tradesmanship) the other is for a father figure teacher of many years with a special relationship.

Steve Cottrell

[Oso]

Sifu Cottrell,

ha, you're the first to comment.

I'm actually going to rotate all the Notebooks of L.L. through
my signature over the next couple of weeks, just for kicks.

oh, since you are online, I'm still trying to figure out where to
send a request for the list server and MQ.

thanks,

Matt

[TaiChiBob]

Greetings..

Master? more than mastering a system, a Master should contribute to that system.. reaching "the end", knowing all the forms, theories, history, applications, and having the prowess to back it up does the "Master" simply rest and stagnate? I have heard that the ancient masters were expected to add at least one form of their own creation to the system, that was how they were elevated to "Grandmaster".. their peers (other masters) would evaluate the form in its application, consistency with the system, and general usefulness, then by consensus the title was conferred... That was how a system grew, lived and flourished.. That was then, this is now.. Now, it seems that too often a complete system is not passed on, that too few students have the time or capability to train at that level, now it seems that systems are being reduced.. a Master preserves the system, nutures the capable students, adds to the system and, above all else, does so with honor..

A master is authoritative, a reliable source for all matters concerning that system.. authoritative in that he/she takes responsibility for the system and all matters concerning the system. Unless of course there are multiple Masters under a single Grandmaster to which the above would apply.. The Masters are capable of defending the system physically and intectually, each a potential successor to the Grandmaster.. At the level of Master or Grandmaster, those individuals should naturally inspire the respect of their students and others within the Martial Arts community.

Just as a Master earns respect by his deeds and abilities, so too must he/she respect the investment of time, effort and choice of his/her system by the student (unless the student demonstrates a poor attitude). In order to preserve the system, the Master must nurture the students that will move the system forward (no students/no system).

Self-proclaimed masters speak of dreams and wishes.. Masters that have earned the title by a consensus of their peers seldom refer to themselves as such.. "he that knows does not say, he that says does not know" (Tao Te Ching). Once, at a tournament, I was sent to find Master Brendan Lai, when i innocently asked "are you Master Brendan Lai"?.. He replied, "some people call me that".

Whether Master or beginner, first and foremost we are of one brotherhood, honor and respect at that level gives us each a little taste of Mastery..

Just another perspective.. Be well..

[germpest]

in my style, one can only be called a sifu, when they are a master already, but when they have a son studying the art at age 18.

[yu shan]

Is Mimi Chan a Master? Do you know the applications to your techniques?

[SaMantis]

yu shan,

that thread was closed a few weeks ago. you missed your chance.

[yu shan]

SaM

Umm, your silliness aside. Does YOUR your style teach the applications and Ling side to your forms? No it doesn`t so shut up about the fighting aspect, you have NO idea how this stuff works. So just shut your mouth, and go walk thru your forms and "figure" out what your doing. The wl way of course. You wl people are weak and insecure! Because you are weak from the top.

4817 N. Lois Ave.
Tampa, Fl. 33614
(813) 872-6113

Flem and the rest of you peace niks, come see what it is all about.

[SaMantis]

:rolleyes:








No, wait...

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:



There, that's better.

[SaMantis]

Now, since yu shan has provided a fine example of what does NOT make a master, let's get back on topic:

How many of you are still students who aspire to teach CMA someday? What qualities do you think you would or should have?

[HuangKaiVun]

I don't think in terms of "master" anymore.

What constitutes "mastery" in one opinion is often absolute fraud in another's eyes - and vice versa.

As far as students becoming sifus go, I think that the "qualities" needed depend heavily on the system the student is studying under.

[Hua Lin Laoshi]

yu shan,
What make you think there is a ling side to all the Wah Lum forms. You know something I don't?

"You wl people are weak and insecure! Because you are weak from the top."

Planning on challenging Master Chan sometime soon? If so then don't forget to bring your Scolaro blanket. :D

Come on Jim let it go already. Most of the guys who left Wah Lum and found something they like better have no interest in WL anymore. Either that or openly challenge the Temple and be done with it. You got the address. MC's office is now in the Golden Tours building. You might have to go through a Sifu or tu, I mean two (a little humor - oops did I say little), before you get to him.

Forgot to answer your questions.
"Is Mimi Chan a Master? Do you know the applications to your techniques?"

In some eyes yes, others no. Yes I know the applications for my techniques.

[TaiChiBob]

LOL... you are sooo bad..

but, if people were as concerned with their own "mastery" rather than other's.. we would all be better off..

WL history, competition prowess, and number of schools speaks for its validity.. its kind of like listening to your favorie tune on a distant station.. you put up with the static, because its worth it..

Be well..

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by HuangKaiVun
As far as students becoming sifus go, I think that the "qualities" needed depend heavily on the system the student is studying under.

I read in another post that you have developed your own system. What are your qualifications to do this?

[HuangKaiVun]

Why do you ask?

[BeiTangLang]

Just a guess,... but from what he wrote & your quote, I guestimate that aside from considering oneself a sifu, what qualifications should one have before starting their own system?
(Starting a system would not only be calling yourself a "sifu", but also incinuating that you are a master at it)

Like I said, just my interpretation.

Best Wishes to all,
BTL

[NorthernMantis]

What is a true master? Read Brendan Li's last interview on IKF mag ( hey sorry Gene but it had Brendan Li in it). Nuff said.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by HuangKaiVun
Why do you ask?

Actually... let me rephrase the question.

In which style(s) have you trained and how long did you train in each one?

What was it about your previous style(s) that was lacking, making you believe there were improvements that needed to be made?

What improvements have you made to your previous style(s)?

How long did it take you develop your new style?

How did you test out the various techniques as you were developing them?

As you worked on developing this new style, what ideas did you find worked and which ones didn't?

What did you bring to the table from other styles or other outside experiences to allow you to develop a new style?

How would you characterize your new style as compared to other existing styles?

Have you battle-tested your new style against other existing styles? If so, how and which ones? How did it fare in the testing process?

[HuangKaiVun]

Those are tough but GOOD questions, Knifefighter.

You must be a heck of a martial artist to ask probing questions like this. I'm IMPRESSED.

But my original question still stands: Why do you ask?


I've been involved in martial arts for about 20 years, but the last 10 have been formalized training years.

I have NEVER stopped training in any of the styles I did, for each has something of great value. My experience ranges from shotokan karate to fitness Tai Chi to old school kung fu to US military hand-to-hand techniques.

My own personal style has been in existence for about a year now. I needed a method to tie in all the stuff I had learned previously, at least in my own mind. I also have an interest in using everyday objects in my martial training.

Honestly, the main reason I made that style for myself is because I'm an inductive thinker. I do better with a few techniques that fan out into complex ones than a whole library of complex ones that don't fit together in my mind. In short, I'm NOT SMART ENOUGH to remember tons of moves (especially in the heat of combat).

I don't think I've made any "improvements" to my previous styles. The more I train, the more I notice how there's a lot of room for interpretation in any combat method there is. So I'm not sure if I'm doing any better or worse than what I learned.

I'm not sure what "existing style" is most similar to mine. If I had to call one out, I'd probably name the old Chinese system "Tzuranmen". That's because it's a Taoist art (i.e. simplistic inductive method) that has no set techniques. Still, that system is TOTALLY DIFFERENT from mine.

Actually I DO have set techniques, but I don't expect my students to have the exact same ones I do. That's because I emphasize individuality.

As far as combat competence, I've "used" my art to evade countless bad encounters - and get lots of things done in a nonviolent sense. But I've physically gone up against a few MMA who have studied more than one combat art. Some I've won, others I've lost, and some have become my students afterwards.

My students have probably done more fighting themselves than I have. I can name about 4 encounters (one truly lifethreatening) in which my students came to me afterwards to tell me what techniques they used on their assailants.


But enough about me. What about you? How would you answer these great questions of yours?

I looked at your profile and saw your MMA background. Your story is probably more interesting than mine.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by HuangKaiVun
But my original question still stands: Why do you ask?

Just curious as to what prompted you to develop your own style and what made you feel it was more effective than the ones you had already learned.

As for me, I haven't developed my own fighting system. I just use the ones I've learned.