This here thread is to just get some of your opinions on this title, and to voice some of mine. Not to offend anyone who goes by a master/grandmaster title.
What does it mean to you? Does it repeal you from the art or draw you towards it?
All that I am wondering is how you can call yourself a “master” when in my opinion you will always learn something through either training or teaching. Now the grandmaster deal I have heard one explanation from my head instructor, he said, that the way it happens is that if he were to teach me everything he knew and got me to the level he was at, only then he could officially call himself a grandmaster. But to market this title, to me I think is lame.
I too have wondered about this. There are many people, some who have every right to call themselves masters and/or grandmasters. Though in the United States we usually have more people who after a few years of training set themselves up with these terms. Its rather silly when you see people claim grandmastership after training for ten years.
One can look at it from a psychological bent and see that there are many who need to cling to the title as they have to see it to believe it.
I agree with you that I would never use these terms myself as I feel in my lifetime there is too much to learn to ever say that I am a master.
To me Titles are a way of showing respect and acknowledging the level somebody else has achieved.
But they should not be used by oneself or used for advertising purpose.
Sifu= Someone that is of higher skill level and teaches what he knows.
Master = someone who has received the Full Transmission.
Grand Master = someone who has passed on the “Full Transmission” to a Student.
Grandmaster to me is the most senior teacher of the style as acknolaged by the previouse grandmaster.
I think the term master is much over used. I can honestly say that i have never called anyone master or even been asked to refer to anyone as sifu so it always amuses me to hear some one call them self master.
The grandmastership of my style is very clear cut as every one active in wudang taichi was taught though Chen Tin Hung, but as Chen Ting Hung is now very old it is looking more and more like there will be a power struggle for the title as I have heard of at least 2 people who belive they have been promised it.
I agree with you on the way of showing respect, but acknowledging the level somebody else has achieved, don’t you think this may be expressed by how many years they have experience in the art they are teaching. I think this is a better way, but of course it has its big flaws in it also.
Something I have noticed in some ads for, is that one may say that they have over 20 years in MA experience but yet the art they are teaching you they have only been training in for about 2 years, and already in his ad calls himself master.
For me,
Sifu is someone competant enough in the system to actually teach it.
a master is fully competant in the compete system and has been acknowleged by the Grand master (see below)
Grand master - head of a perticular line, and MASTER of his art as well as teacher of his art. Often one must have brought a student to the master level as well to claim this title.
For example, Wai Lun Choi is the Grandmaster of his line. due to the fact that the lineage is so small with Li Hu Ba Fa, it could be argued he is the only Grand master of the entire art, period. However, if someone with his level of understanding were to break away from him, and found thier own line, they would be the Grand master of the new line. The issue is more of position in the lineage than skill.
It is a foregone conclusion that a "Grand"master must have been a master of thier art first, and probually a teacher as well.
I do not agree with schools or lineages that promote more than one person to the Grand Master rank. Master, I can see, but only one person in the line can be the Grand Master.
Grandmaster= CEO/ President of Kung Fu franchise.
Sifu= Franchise operator.
Now I have no problem with a grandmaster being in fact a grand teacher or your teacher’s teacher. However, most who use the title do so to place themselves above others and to have power.
That may work on paper, but the reality is, that there are only four ways to become a Grandmaster-at least traditionally, and the fourth at this point is shaky;
One, you inherit the title from the previous Grandmaster upon his retirement, or demise.Grandmaster being the one and only head of that particular lineage.
Two, is that you are a Sifu, and you have a student who then becomes a Sifu by you. He is the teacher/father to his students, and you are to his students Si-Gung-teacher grandfather.
Three, you open up more branches of your school, therefore you become the Grandmaster of your schools-like superintendant.
Four-You become a pompous ass and create a new style named after yourself, or tag the word Shaolin onto it and proclaim yourself 10th degree Grandmaster, and go out and open up McKwoons. So there are actually three.
I agree with you on the way of showing respect, but acknowledging the level somebody else has achieved, don’t you think this may be expressed by how many years they have experience in the art they are teaching. I think this is a better way, but of course it has its big flaws in it also.
My biggest flaw here is that time trained does not equal true skill.
In my Style I got a few Students, who were ahead of me when I started.
But due to circumstances they had to take breaks in their training and I have currently gotten ahead of them even though my training time in years is shorter.
In “real” training time we are most prolly about equal.
Either way is flawed.
Personally I rather train under someone that took 20yrs to become a Sifu, than someone that took 8yrs.
(Years are just examples)
IMO there are too many people who claim the titles of sifu or sigung that do not deserve the title. The titles should be bestowed upon you by your peers or your betters, they should not be taken.
If you have to proclaim yourself as a sifu/sigung, then you probably aren’t one.
I think the term “Grand Master,” the way it is normally used, is a Western concept. Either that or a concept that’s marketed to westerners. Ironically, the term doesn’t translate well into Chinese. While it seems perfectly normal to say “Billy Bob is a grandmaster of Kung Fu Do” in English, the sentence doesn’t make much sense in Chinese. In Chinese, you normally don’t refer to someone as Grandmaster, unless he really is your teacher’s teacher. Otherwise, the person is simply refered to as sifu. For instance, Chen Fake, a highly accomplished Chen Tai Chi practioner, would be refered to as “Chen Sifu” in Chinese. You would not hear him being refered to as “Chen Sigung” (sifu means master, sigung means grandmaster). If someone wants to show greater respect, one would use the term Qian Bei (in Mandarin) or Cheen Bui (in Cantonese), which means forefather. This term is used by outsiders however. Students and grandstudents still use the terms sifu and sigung, respectively
I think the mangled western meaning of grandmaster contributes much to the confusion surrounding the term. In Chinese society (as well as other eastern societies), the terms sifu, sigung, todai, sidai, siheng, etc. are not so arbitrary. You don’t “become” a master simply because you’ve got your x-degree black belt and you don’t become a grandmaster just because you opened up your own school. You’re a sifu if you have students, and you’re a sigung if your students have students, but only to your grand students. To your own students and everyone else, you’re simply sifu.
I actually don’t even like the term “master”. I think “martial arts father” is a better translation for “sifu,” and “martial arts grandfather” is a better translation for sigung. This is just in the context of martial arts. In fact, the term “sifu” is used to refer to a teacher of any art. A cook, a painter, a calligrapher, etc., can all be refered to as sifu.
"You become a pompous ass and create a new style named after yourself, or tag the word Shaolin onto it and proclaim yourself 10th degree Grandmaster, and go out and open up McKwoons. "
Here in the US, that is the most common way. to become a master or grand master or Soke go to… http://www.bushido.org/~whfsc/ and fill out the appropriate form.
In the membership types you will see that you need to be a 5th degree, send in $35.00 (75.00 for life member) and you are now an official Master
For grand master you must be 35 years old and have a certificate that says you are a 9th or 10th Dan. The fee is no longer on the site, but it was $300.00 a few years ago.
If you need the certificates to back up your rank go to the United States artial Arts Association http://www.mararts.org/ and send a check and let them know what rank you feel you should be. Their policy is that its not up to them to verify if you are that rank but that they “trust” you are giving them the rank you should be.
Then go back to the council, pay the fees and you are now a master or Grand Master.
What does it mean to you? Does it repeal you from the art or draw you towards it?
It is no different than a masters degree obtained through our educational system. It means you have put forth time and extended effort to understand you chosen style.
It does not mean you have learned or understand ‘it’ all; rather, it is a title of recognition given by your Teacher for attaining a high level or degree of performance and understanding. It also denotes a proven commitment of continued propagation of said style, usually by operating their own kwoon.
I do not fathom how any kwoon can have more than one Master/sifu. Sifu to me equates to master level. There can be only one sifu per kwoon. Black belts are not mandatory sifu. They are merely adept at their style. These practitioners need to prove their commitment (and ability) to propagate the style by acquiring students. As a master or sifu, I can not give recognition of ‘sifu’ to any student that has not proven they can transmit the style from scratch. A sifu or master will be a person who will carry on the tradition and teachings of our Family as prescribed by our Family.
To say that a master knows all or that such a title repeals oneself from their style reveals an attitude of misunderstanding and probably misuse of what a master is.
Grandmaster is simply one that has bestowed recognition of master/sifu on one of their disciples, therefore becoming a grandmaster or sigung.
There feasibly can be many modern day masters upon our ranks, for who are we to refute the recognition of another’s ability and contributions to their chosen style as bestowed by their Teacher.
Originally posted by nospam
[B]What does it mean to you? Does it repeal you from the art or draw you towards it?
It is no different than a masters degree obtained through our educational system. It means you have put forth time and extended effort to understand you chosen style.
It does not mean you have learned or understand ‘it’ all; rather, it is a title of recognition given by your Teacher for attaining a high level or degree of performance and understanding. It also denotes a proven commitment of continued propagation of said style, usually by operating their own kwoon.
I do not fathom how any kwoon can have more than one Master/sifu. Sifu to me equates to master level. There can be only one sifu per kwoon. Black belts are not mandatory sifu. They are merely adept at their style. These practitioners need to prove their commitment (and ability) to propagate the style by acquiring students. As a master or sifu, I can not give recognition of ‘sifu’ to any student that has not proven they can transmit the style from scratch. A sifu or master will be a person who will carry on the tradition and teachings of our Family as prescribed by our Family.
To say that a master knows all or that such a title repeals oneself from their style reveals an attitude of misunderstanding and probably misuse of what a master is.
Grandmaster is simply one that has bestowed recognition of master/sifu on one of their disciples, therefore becoming a grandmaster or sigung.
There feasibly can be many modern day masters upon our ranks, for who are we to refute the recognition of another’s ability and contributions to their chosen style as bestowed by their Teacher.
This is my belief…
nospam. [/B]
In a lot of ways I agree here - I have a problem with a Kwoon having more than one sifu. But each to their own I guess.
I do not agree with your last statement though - a lot of people take the title of sifu for themselves, it has not been bestwoed upon them. I have no problme with someone being referred to as sifu if they have had the title given to them by their peers or their own sifu. However there are a lot of people who have taken the title for themselves without truly earning it. These are the people I have a problem with.
"I have no problme with someone being referred to as sifu if they have had the title given to them by their peers or their own sifu. "
How do you know it hasnt? I will agree with your statement, but there is not a current way of standardizing it.
One way would to be part of a “Governing Body” or major organization that will distrobute the titles with certificates. But soon after every money grabber will be selling certificates stateing it for a fee.
OK, I guess I have personal experiences driving my hatred of those people :). Let’s just say I have met practitioners under the same sifu I have trained under who have taken the titles without the knowledge nor the permission of our sifu. And trust me, they did not deserve the title. :mad:
Man, Ultimate Grandmasters? When will it stop? I just think they should call them selfs a Martial Artist.
I may just open my own school and be the self proclaimed Divine Grandmaster. Or may be just open up a bussiness to sell plaques that grant a man the title of Divine Grandmaster. Hey, thats where the money is right?:rolleyes:
Governing body? I will not have someone out of my style tell me what rank I have or not have. Unless of course it is a governing body within my style that perhaps ‘endorses’. This is the case with my style, but even so - if my teacher has been recognized as a master and so forth from his teacher upward, then my teacher’s recognition, if I so qualify, is personally good enough for me.
A Governing body incorporating a variety of gung fu styles would never last. This has been attempted. Too many ego…too many differences in opinions and methods. The only way I can see a governing body work and have longevity is if it is just style specific, and more than likely involving ‘masters’ from the same lineage.
Even if you have 2 masters from one style and same teacher, that is one too many. They will more than likely teach differently; have different goals and how to achieve the goals; and so forth..
It is a novel idea, but unless we want to become wushu - best kept as just an idea. Kung fu takes too long in the making to achieve with too many variables occuring during that time frame.
