Drunken Monkey Posted February 7, 2004 Posted February 7, 2004 i would call my local carpenter a master. we everyone in our kitchen 'sifu'. post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
blitzcraig Posted February 9, 2004 Posted February 9, 2004 I agree with Bdaze. To master is to learn all aspects of something compleatly.....so I dont know if its possible unless they created it....? #1"The road to tae kwan leep is an endless road leading into the herizon, you must fully understand its ways". #2"but i wanna wax the walls with people now" #1"come ed gruberman, your first lesson is here.....boot to the head" #2"ouch, you kicked me in the head", #1"you learn quickly ed gruberman"
Drunken Monkey Posted February 10, 2004 Posted February 10, 2004 how about if someone knew everything, isn't that good a fighter BUT can teach you to be the best? wouldn't he be a 'master' (also without a doubt more useful)? there's a story of a guy who was known to be able to defeat any opponent using just ONE move. would he be considered a master? or how about the newcomer to a style, learns the basics but understands enough to use the style, according to the styles theories, without learning the 'advanced' techniques. master or not? 'master' is purely objective. i say a master is one who understands something, can use what he understands and explain that thing to people so that they can understand as well. post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
blitzcraig Posted February 11, 2004 Posted February 11, 2004 good points....its all in how you look at it and take it. #1"The road to tae kwan leep is an endless road leading into the herizon, you must fully understand its ways". #2"but i wanna wax the walls with people now" #1"come ed gruberman, your first lesson is here.....boot to the head" #2"ouch, you kicked me in the head", #1"you learn quickly ed gruberman"
Ripper Posted February 17, 2004 Posted February 17, 2004 i say a master is one who understands something, can use what he understands and explain that thing to people so that they can understand as well.but if you would fit this description, would you want to be adressed as master, sensei or sifu? René
amp Posted February 18, 2004 Posted February 18, 2004 I would say the Karate master who trains me, and his master, Taika Oyata. I'm also inspired a lot by Ueshiba. Know thyself.
Drunken Monkey Posted February 18, 2004 Posted February 18, 2004 i think i'll prefered to be called by my name unless i was teaching you on a formal basis in which case, according to chinese martial tradition, it would be sifu (martial 'father'). post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
Ripper Posted February 19, 2004 Posted February 19, 2004 why and when would you teach on a formal basis? and what do you mean by formal basis? René
Drunken Monkey Posted February 21, 2004 Posted February 21, 2004 to be honest, i'm still trying to define the difference between showing someone a few moves/ways of doing something and actually teaching them something... is there a difference? i mean, if i'm going to show you something that i think you might want to learn, then i'm going to show/teach you everything about it BUT that doesn't automatically mean i am teaching you (in the teacher-student format). why would i teach on a formal basis? by that i'll take it that you mean, open a class and accept students. well, i have no interest in taking a class or accepting students because i am still a very long way from being 100% in wing chun. in anycase, i have taught some of my younger cousins wing chun (well, two of them) which i took seriously. kinda like how i was first taught; slow, making sure that everything was being absorbed fully, making sure that they could actually use the move as intended before introducing the next bit... the thing is, even though it was ME teaching them, i emphasised that they were learning MY SIFUs kung fu. anyway, while this was fun, it's not really for me. i think that personally, i much prefere being the one learning than the one teaching. who knows, maybe if enough people ask me to them in an organised, hence formal, class i might organise a class of some sort. because it is then an organised class, there needs to be some sort of structure to keep things organised, hence the adoption of 'sifu' - 'to-dai' titles. hmm, which goes back to the question of when am i ready to do this. i think i'm ready when i) the guy who taught me says i'm ready for it ii) when i know i'm ready for it y'know, i'm kinda uncomfortable with titles. other people always bring their own (mis)conceptions to what the title means. the chinese way uses the title to denote that you are very good at what you do. when applied to a martial art and related teachings of, then sifu means that you are good at your martial art and that you have a family of students. it doesn't refere to anything magical or mystical. neither does it mean that i'm undefeatable. if i have a fight with some guy from some other style and i lose then so what? yes it means i have lost a fight but does that mean that my style is bad? that i'm not good? that i shouldn't teach? or does it merely mean that i was beaten by someone better? i'm not one to hold grudges and whether i lose or not doesn't really matter to me. if i win yay, great, i'll go lie down now until i stop hurting... if i lose lose, good, it's over, maybe i can get him to show me how he did that... martial arts is about learning. that's why the chinese term sifu DOES NOT literally mean MASTER. 'master' suggest too much which goes back to my saying that people bring their own (mis)conceptions regarding titles. post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
Ripper Posted February 22, 2004 Posted February 22, 2004 who knows, maybe if enough people ask me to them in an organised, hence formal, class i might organise a class of some sort. because it is then an organised class, there needs to be some sort of structure to keep things organised, hence the adoption of 'sifu' - 'to-dai' titles.So your argument would be that giving titles keeps things organised? Does this mean that if you didn't use titles, things would get out of hand? I don't think so. At any other sport they don't use titles and it also goes well. If I did for example swimming as a sport I wouldn't call my trainer a master. the chinese way uses the title to denote that you are very good at what you do.And this would be another argument? Because it is the chinese way? Well, you don't live in China, and I take it you are not Chinese, so would it be really necessary? Couldn't you do without? y'know, i'm kinda uncomfortable with titles. other people always bring their own (mis)conceptions to what the title means. it doesn't refere to anything magical or mystical. martial arts is about learning. that's why the chinese term sifu DOES NOT literally mean MASTER. 'master' suggest too much which goes back to my saying that people bring their own (mis)conceptions regarding titles.I couldn't agree with you more, but that's also my objection against a title like master. It's because of these (mis)conceptions I dislike this term. When someone insists on being called master, to be honest, my respect for that person diminishes. It's just vanity. René
Recommended Posts