Why are there a fair few masters who are masters of quite a few styles??
in old school traditional CMA you have to be a disciple first before you become a master, and you can only have one master at a time, who remains your master until he dies.
I can understand someone being a master of two styles, or knowing 7, 8, 9 styles etc and being a master of only one or two, but some times you see people who are ‘masters’ of 5 styles or more.
peoples’ input and comments most welcome.
discipleship now is likely different then it was back then, not to mention the fact that not all schools still have discipleship.
anyone claiming to be a master of even one style, I take with a grain of salt. I definitely would if they claim to master more than that.
who gave them their rank? by their school’s standards, they may indeed be a master. Once again, take it with a grain of salt…
Define “master.”
Is it a recognition by other people? If so, you’d have to ask the people that call him that.
Is it a political or ceremonial position? If so, you’d have to ask the people who set up that arrangement.
Is it literally that he’s completely mastered everything about the style(s)? If so, I need to go and shake his hand.
Stuart B.
I’m not so sure a master needs to “master” all aspects of the style in order to claim that title on skill alone. They need to be able to teach all aspects of the style successfully, but let’s be honest, some techniques are always going to work better for some than others. My seniors are all better at diagonal cut than I am, where as my build suits a foot game a lot more. They know how to sweep and they can, but they don’t know as much about sweeping as I do on occasion.
Does that make them less skilled than I? Hell, no.
my Master said in the past, ‘you will know a lot of forms, but will have to specialise in a few only’ (a ruff translation)
I hope to be a disciple one day, but I would never claim to be a master, I just could never live up to my masters reputation or that of his fathers.
I agree the the term master is probably overused and undeserved in many cases. If someone has truely mastered one style, and very few of these people exist, then it is not unlikely that they could master multiple styles. A true mastery of one style would give you the rock strong foundation necessary to master other styles during ones lifetime.
I think it is possible, just rare.
No offence to my seniors, but I’d rather surpass them. Not eclipse them, mind you, but if I can’t gain the same sort of skill what’s the point?
I think the “my master is super human” views are just self-delusion, no offence. I’d rather shoot to be an equal with GM Ch’ang, John Wang, Victor Ke, Brian Wu, Joe Judt, etc… than sit there and talk about how great they are. They’re all great Shuai Chiao men, they all have their specialties and weaknesses, and most importantly, they all were or are flesh and blood. Nothing special about what they did besides lots of hard work and some talent.
Besides, you never know until you try for it.
well start at 6 and now being 64 my shifu as a little advantage over me…!!!
Despite the vaccine, Crippled Avenger has caught a case of the correct and is now running a high fever.
Re: masters…
Originally posted by stimulant
[B]Why are there a fair few masters who are masters of quite a few styles??
in old school traditional CMA you have to be a disciple first before you become a master, and you can only have one master at a time, who remains your master until he dies.
I can understand someone being a master of two styles, or knowing 7, 8, 9 styles etc and being a master of only one or two, but some times you see people who are ‘masters’ of 5 styles or more.
peoples’ input and comments most welcome.
[/B]
Actually, even in traditional CMA you could train under more than one master, just not usually at the same time. It was not unusual for master to refer students to other masters. And you certainly did not have to wait until your master died before you could train with another.
there’s one guy who has a ton of ads in tai chi magazine. he seriously has like a hundred videos ranging from every possible combinatin f internal/ weapons varius taiji styles and a number f hard styles too. Really struck me as odd. Ji jiang ye or smething
Originally posted by backbreaker
My chen style taiji teacher once said that there isn’t a technique in taiji , xingyi , or bagua that isn’t in all three, but he never mixes or combines styles
While knowing nothing about any of the 3, I would be very surprised if this statement were true. Bagua circle walking in xing yi or taiji? Any of the xing yi 5 elements in bagua or taiji? Evidence?
The first thing I ever learned in pakua years ago was straight line walking with changing palms using angles so many of the applications are very similar to xingyi and taiji. Xingyi also has moves where you step out at a circular angle to the side and almost circle the opponent. In taijquan there is a circle walking push hands pattern and it’s even called bagua push hands. I suspect many of the energies are the same but perhaps they are a bit different , I’m pretty sure though that taiji has splitting, pounding etc. . There is also the idea of the 6 harmonies in taiji and xingyi , The external combos are probably the hips/shoulders , elbows/knees , and bai hui/hui yin and the internal combos of mind , energy , and body . All the fighting moves can be catorgorized as palm , fist , shoulder , body , elbow , knee , or leg attacks of striking , throwing and locking using explosive releases of energy. All the internal styles I beleive , use the torso and spine for power as well as having similar stepping. Also the use of paths of energy and force and creating or using energy centers .
If that Jiang jian ye guy really has all the skills he advertises then I am very envious of him and he is an inspiration.
yeah i dont get it. i think they declare themselves masters for money reasons. there was this school in my area and i hear the sifu declared himself master and told his students that he got promoted in china :rolleyes: i told my sifu that who knows ihm, and he was like wtf? he didnt even trane in china. my sifu has been doing shaolin and eagle claw for 30 years. i think he is a master of the styles he knows but he is jsut like sifu is fine. so its all good.
point conceeded joedoe…I didnt take into account the ‘refered to other masters’ part in my original thread.
some styles are so large why would you want to start another when you already have monre than enough to learn and train? I guess back in the ‘old days’ if it were you profession then you had a lot more time for it, ‘unlike the 8 hours a week now if your lucky trianing’.
Or maybe people realized that no one system was the complete end all be all, and trained in areas that they were lacking? 
Different styles for different purposes.
OR
now im going out on a limb. maybe its because the standards aren’t as high in america as they are in asia.???
every country has a high standard of ego
most countries have a few high standard people
a few countries have many high standards.
I think america has quite a lot of high standard kung-fu practioners…just a shame the ratio of them to BS is such a huge one!
very true…
in chian you are laoshu, and then shifu
in the west shifu then master
I’ve hard of a famous master who only knew 3 techniques.