# Titles



## Wo Fat (Oct 29, 2011)

We can all agree that martial arts, at least the kind we practice, goes back hundreds of years.  In those traditions, both teacher and student had titles.  In the 21st century, though, there are new titles that suggest a certain status.  For instance:
*
Great-Grandmaster
Senior-Grandmaster
Super-Master* (I kid you not)

Are these titles historically accurate?  Are they new creations?  Do they have a historic meaning or a present-day meaning?


----------



## Nomad (Oct 31, 2011)

IMHO?  No.  Pure self-aggrandizement and ego masturbation.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Oct 31, 2011)

Senior GM is the only one I have heard of. LOL
Sean


----------



## sfs982000 (Oct 31, 2011)

I know that the ATA organization also uses Senior Master and Chief Master titles for I believe 7th and 8th degrees respectfully.


----------



## Blindside (Oct 31, 2011)

Well I have seen Mitose attributed with the GGM title, I don't know if he claimed it himself, and another one out there in the kenpo realm is "Elder Grandmaster"..... 
In my kenpo lineage the senior instructor doesn't like the term "master," he thinks it gives improper connotations, as far as he is concerned he hasn't "mastered" anything and he has only been doing this for 40-something years.  He is just fine with "Mr." or if you need to use a asian title "Sifu."


----------



## dancingalone (Oct 31, 2011)

Some of them aren't so bad, if they refer to a historical founder.

For example, aikido-ka refer to Ueshiba Sensei as 'O-Sensei' loosely translatable as Great Teacher.

Meibuken Goju-ryu karate stylists call Meitoku Yagi 'Dai Sensei'.  Kajukenbo people have taken to calling Adriano Emperado 'Great Grandmaster'.

And the Songahm TKD people refer to their first GM as 'Eternal Grandmaster' now that he has passed on.

On the other hand, if you're still living and you refer to yourself as something similar, well... a little bit of humility never hurt anyone.


----------



## Wo Fat (Nov 2, 2011)

Interesting takes.  Could it be that the increase in the number of martial arts students in the late 20th and early 21st century required new titles?  If someone began their training in 1970, then they've got over 40 years in (assuming consistent activity).  Could be a way to draw clearer distinctions?  I dunno.

But at the same time, if the Songham TKD association only has two Grandmasters -- one deceased and one "emeritus"--then maybe there's something to be said for humility.  But maybe I'm wrong about my understanding of TKD.


----------



## MJS (Nov 2, 2011)

IMHO, I think that there're too many titles, too much ego and too many who think they deserve a title.  For me, the titles dont mean much.  Some schools that I've been at, I've had the title of Sifu or Mr.  Personally, I could care less.  Call me by my name, Mike....that works for me.  

The titles dont impress me.  What impresses me the most is the following:

How well this person knows the material
How well this person can do the material
Can they teach it
Can they teach me

Those are the main 4 things that come to mind, being more important than me calling them GM, Master, GGM, Supreme Grand Master, or whatever else they pull out of their head. LOL!  I'm not one to "ohhh and ahhh" over a title or how many stripes they have or the fancy belt they wear.  Never have, never will be.


----------



## seasoned (Nov 2, 2011)

MJS said:


> IMHO,The titles dont impress me. What impresses me the most is the following:
> 
> How well this person knows the material
> How well this person can do the material
> ...


This indeed sums it up for me also, Mike. Well said..........


----------



## profesormental (Nov 4, 2011)

To answer the question:

These titles are NOT historically accurate, and an invention of the 20th century.

Occidental schools of thought and "mystery" schools (schools of thought with initiation rituals) have as titles Master and Grand Master, because of organizational needs.

Many titles in the martial arts come from an analogy of military ranks for organizational purposes. When you get a fancy title, the title of your teacher has to be fancier. And so it goes.

In Chinese circles, SiFu is about the highest, and so is Sensei for the Japanese.

Hope that helps!


----------



## DavidCC (Nov 4, 2011)

If somebody has been consistently working at something for 40 years and hasn't mastered it, maybe they are doing something wrong...


----------



## Blindside (Nov 4, 2011)

DavidCC said:


> If somebody has been consistently working at something for 40 years and hasn't mastered it, maybe they are doing something wrong...



Perhaps perspective changes, what a white belt views as mastery may be different than what an expert does.


----------



## Wo Fat (Nov 5, 2011)

profesormental said:


> To answer the question:
> 
> These titles are NOT historically accurate, and an invention of the 20th century.
> 
> ...



I'm forced to agree with you about some times being 20th century inventions.  And then there's the old axiom that "necessity is the mother of invention".

So I wonder if the explosion of martial arts practitioners, and the fact that many of the masters are living longer, meant that it was necessary to create new titles.

Not advocating for new titles.  In fact, I personally think that we could do with fewer.  It's just not clear where necessity ends and ego begins.


----------



## Doc (Nov 5, 2011)

Blindside said:


> Perhaps perspective changes, what a white belt views as mastery may be different than what an expert does.


True mastery is never served by the notion that you have arrived. True mastery is obtained by the idea that it is not obtainable, and therefore is a byproduct of the quest. Mastery should always be a third-party observation or opinion, which may or may not be correct, depending upon the individual perspective.

"The moment you acknowledge your own mastery, is the same moment you cease having the opportunity to become one. "- Dr. Chapél


----------



## Gentle Fist (Nov 7, 2011)

In the style of Kuntao Jujutsu, the highest title is Supreme Grand Master...  Sounds like a meal combo at Taco Bell!  

ATA has the title of Eternal GM, which would lead one to believe you can reach demi-god status if you pay enough money...


----------



## JohnEdward (Nov 7, 2011)

I agree with much of what has been said about the usefulness of inflated titles. Titles serve a couple purposes I think. One, out of respect in terms of instruction. You want students to salute you with respect. Two, to indicate who the most skilled one or who has reached a level of skill. Equates to calling someone the boss, doctor, or professor, and beyond that is pure non-sense. There is no reason to call someone Uber Super Smack down Grand Daddy Master Accountant. If that showed up on a resume....!

Martial arts are too ambiguous, and titles have nothing to reflecting skill.


----------



## Flying Crane (Nov 7, 2011)

Wo Fat said:


> Could it be that the increase in the number of martial arts students in the late 20th and early 21st century required new titles?



it is certainly not required, in any objective sense.


----------



## Chris Parker (Nov 7, 2011)

Without getting into the details of Kempo titles and their use (but yeah, nothing to do with anything from "300 years ago"... nor Kempo, for that matter, but that's another discussion), there are a few things about the Japanese titles that I want to correct here.



dancingalone said:


> Some of them aren't so bad, if they refer to a historical founder.
> 
> For example, aikido-ka refer to Ueshiba Sensei as 'O-Sensei' loosely translatable as Great Teacher.


 
Ah, but one of the reasons that Ueshiba Morihei was given that title wasn't necessarily to do with his skills, it was because both he and his son, Ueshiba Kisshomaru, were instructors for the same student body. In order to differentiate which Ueshiba Sensei had given some instruction, or advice, the elder Ueshiba was referred to as "O Sensei", referring to him as the elder, or "bigger" of the two. It has since become more part of the mythos of Ueshiba, rather than being part of the original use.



profesormental said:


> To answer the question:
> 
> These titles are NOT historically accurate, and an invention of the 20th century.
> 
> ...


 
This isn't really true. To begin with, Sensei isn't actually a title so much as a term of respect. It literally translates as "former, or previously born", indicating a senior, or elder in some area. It is equally applied to teachers, doctors, lawyers, and other senior members of society as a term of respect primarily.

Within martial arts, it can be used for pretty much anyone of a significant seniority, or instructional position. However, that doesn't make it a title. Titles would be things such as Renshi, Kyoshi, Hanshi, Kancho, Shihan, Soke etc (basically in ascending order, although that order can change depending on the system itself, with Shihan being lower or higher than titles such as Hanshi, and Soke being separate in a number of cases). Then again, each of these title holders can also be referred to as "Sensei", so it can apply to the highest title, but isn't one itself.



JohnEdward said:


> Martial arts are too ambiguous, and titles have nothing to reflecting skill.



Within traditional Japanese systems, this is very far from the reality, I have to say. Ranking (in terms of titles and licencing) is directly related to skill, experience, and knowledge, as well as the heirarchial position held within the Ryu itself. That's really kinda the point, frankly.


----------



## JohnEdward (Nov 7, 2011)

I didn't add the quotes, I will now to show what I was saying in my post. *
*_
I hope I shall possess firmness and virtue enough to maintain what I consider the most enviable of all titles, the character of an honest man. _
-George Washington

_People don't follow titles, they follow courage. _
-William Wells Brown


----------



## JohnEdward (Nov 7, 2011)

Modern titles even traditional ones give people direction, and extrude confidence from instructor to student. That creates an opportunity for misuse and abuse of the title. Such as titles that are purely ego driven, fraud and other like reasons.  Like I mentioned titles are ambiguous that don't measure skill, but are use for honorific purposes that can be abused and misused, worse misleading people. Where is the weight in the title in the character of person.


----------



## dancingalone (Nov 8, 2011)

Chris Parker said:


> Ah, but one of the reasons that Ueshiba Morihei was given that title wasn't necessarily to do with his skills, it was because both he and his son, Ueshiba Kisshomaru, were instructors for the same student body. In order to differentiate which Ueshiba Sensei had given some instruction, or advice, the elder Ueshiba was referred to as "O Sensei", referring to him as the elder, or "bigger" of the two. It has since become more part of the mythos of Ueshiba, rather than being part of the original use.



Ueshiba Kisshomaru was referred to as Waka Sensei or 'young teacher' to differentiate him from his father.  To my knowledge, once he became the second doshu he never used or was referred to as O'Sensei, which seemingly argues that it was a singular title reserved for his father.  

I can see the point you are making.  Perhaps O'Sensei did start as a mere way of distinguishing the father and son from each other.  However today, O'Sensei means Ueshiba Morihei Sensei specifically.


----------



## Carol (Nov 8, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> Ueshiba Kisshomaru was referred to as Waka Sensei or 'young teacher' to differentiate him from his father.  To my knowledge, once he became the second doshu he never used or was referred to as O'Sensei, which seemingly argues that it was a singular title reserved for his father.
> 
> I can see the point you are making.  Perhaps O'Sensei did start as a mere way of distinguishing the father and son from each other.  However today, O'Sensei means Ueshiba Morihei Sensei specifically.



In the English-speaking world perhaps but this is not the case in Japan.  The prefix o- or go- is a prefix that denotes respect, veneration, tradition, etc.  It is common in many Japanese words, such as (go)han for rice, and in  forms of speech.  Namae-wa nan desu ka? or [Your] name, what is it?  is a way of asking a casual acquaintenance their name.  O-namae-wa nan desu ka? is the more polite form...(Your) honorable name, what is it?  if you will.

&#12362;&#20808;&#29983; O-sensei is the politer version of &#20808;&#29983;  sensei, its use in either form as Chris mentioned is not restricted to martial arts.  One could use such a term when or referring to their doctor or their priest.


----------



## dancingalone (Nov 8, 2011)

Carol said:


> In the English-speaking world perhaps but this is not the case in Japan.



I am fairly confident that anyone in aikido, Japanese or not, means Ueshiba Morihei when referring to O-Sensei.  Your point is taken about about O-Sensei being in use elsewhere outside of martial arts.


----------



## Chris Parker (Nov 9, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> Ueshiba Kisshomaru was referred to as Waka Sensei or 'young teacher' to differentiate him from his father.  To my knowledge, once he became the second doshu he never used or was referred to as O'Sensei, which seemingly argues that it was a singular title reserved for his father.
> 
> I can see the point you are making.  Perhaps O'Sensei did start as a mere way of distinguishing the father and son from each other.  However today, O'Sensei means Ueshiba Morihei Sensei specifically.


 
And when it was applied, it referred to Ueshiba Morihei specifically, it's just that the original usage wasn't for his abilities, per se. That connotation was a later addition.



dancingalone said:


> I am fairly confident that anyone in aikido, Japanese or not, means Ueshiba Morihei when referring to O-Sensei.  Your point is taken about about O-Sensei being in use elsewhere outside of martial arts.



Again, just for reference, a few other systems use the term "O Sensei" as well, but most seem to be borrowing from the Aikido example. But yeah, O Sensei in Aikido has always referred to Ueshiba Morihei Sensei, my point was simply about the reason the term was used, which wasn't necessarily about his skills initially, although it did come to have that connotation later.


----------

