Black belt vs. Master vs. Grand Master

[MichiganTKD]

Tigerwoman,

Easy to answer. Don't have Tae Kwon Do be your primary source of income. Our Grandmaster has told us many times not to rely on Tae Kwon Do for money, because then you don't have to compromise your integrity by being greedy.
You can make money from TKD, but don't rely on it for income.

 

[Miles]

Excellent analysis MichTKD!

Miles

 

[MichiganTKD]

Thanks Miles.
I really do appreciate the kind words.

 

[dmdfromhamilton]

i had no idea the definition of master was so different from style to style... until today i thought master was 6th dan 7th Dan Seniior master and 8th dan grandmaster and 9th dan grandmaster but reseved for the head of the style but its intersting to see that tkd considers a 4th dan a master

 

[James Kovacich]

Well, I guess that came out all wrong. Sorry, your right. I am not blaming it on lawyers, really. It's more or less because we are more "civilized..." so there is none of the old "So your a "master" eh? Prove it, lets fight." If one beats up another over a silly title, then one will end up in jail or sued. I actually think that this is a good thing, however sometimes good things have negative consequences. The negative consequence in this case is a lot of people walking around with titles that they don't deserve or cannot uphold.

Now...please don't sue me! :angel: lol

Paul, don't take this wrong but is there a differance in "claims" such as claimimg to be a master and one such as your signature.

I'm definatlely not trying to disrespect you. Just when I read I read your signature I thought about it. :asian:

Personally on the master issue I think it should come from your master instructor or higher.

 

[Cruentus]

Paul, don't take this wrong but is there a differance in "claims" such as claimimg to be a master and one such as your signature.

I'm definatlely not trying to disrespect you. Just when I read I read your signature I thought about it. :asian:

Personally on the master issue I think it should come from your master instructor or higher.

Long post ahead, as I have been put on the spot a bit:

No disrespect taken, akja. There is a difference with my title, and that difference is that I am honest about it. My title was legitimately obtained. I recieved a 5th degree (Lakan Apat in Modern Arnis) from Remy Presas. 5th degree is considered "master" in my circles.

However, because I don't want to play the political game in the Modern Arnis or martial arts world, I don't claim any authority in any one elses martial art. Therefore, I have moved in my own direction, and taken more of a tactical approach with a western martial arts model. Historically, in western martial arts, school owners of "arms" schools or pugalist schools were often referred to as "master, Master teacher, Master instructor, master at arms, master of defense, etc. etc." Being a school owner, they took whatever title they wanted. The "Master" title was commonly used, and there was no requirement that the title must be recieved from a higher source. You just had to be able to prove what you had, otherwise people wouldn't train with you, and you risked being challenged to a duel and killed if you were dubious with your claim to Master. The title that I chose to go by my written signature is "Master of Defense." I have just started my own self-defense training company called "Tulisan Tactical Training." At the moment I focus on private instruction and seminar training for tactical close-quarters defense with both empty hand and weapons for both operators and civilians. I am also exploring and research/developing historical martial arts programs.

Now these are all new efforts for me, and I can garauntee that I will be making major changes and updates for 05.' I may change the names and the structure of things, but fundamentally my focus on both tactical training and historical martial arts will remain the same. I may drop the whole "master of defense" thing and just go with "master instructor;" or I may go with no title at all. This is a learning and growing process for me.

But, the fact is, I obtained a master title by the standards of the traditional martial arts world, in that I was given rank and am recognized as such by instructors superior to me. So it is legitimate in that regard. The important thing is that I am honest about where the title comes from.

The problem with these titles is that many people who go by them are not honest about how they obtained them, thus the standards for these titles have been significantly lowered over the years. People pay for dubious rank that gives them these titles. People go to "Soke" associations and boards, and pay money to obtain titles. People give themselves titles, but misrepresent how they were obtained. People are given titles by illegitimate instructors. All these things add up to the pool being pissed in. What makes mine different then many of these is I am honest about it, and my title was not obtained in a dubious fashion.

That all said; now although 20 years of martial arts experience may fit the bill, I am very young to be considered "master" of anything, and I was even younger when I recieved my rank 4 1/2 years ago. I still have many lifetimes of knowledge to study and learn. Plus, people who seek instruction from me are in my age bracket or older. A few of those who seek instruction from me actually have more experience in martial arts then I, and a lot of those who learn from me have more tactical real world experience then I do. This makes my teaching experiences really enjoyable, as I often end up learning from my "students" as well as they learn from me. So, because of this, I don't expect nor want anyone to address me as "master"; on and off the training floor my name is "Paul" (or "Sir" if someone insists on a formality). If someone calls me master, I simply tell them just to call me "Paul." Also, I don't feel comfortable calling those who seek instruction from me "my students," as I feel that we should all be students, and I learn much from those that I teach. I usually refer to them as clients, seminar attendees, or group members if they are officially a member of The Gild which is the instructor certification division.

Final thought: The bottom line with this stuff is just be honest with yourself and everyone else around you. Be honest, and do good work. If your honest about yourself, you do good work, are a good martial artist and a good instructor, and can prove yourself when needed, then titles or legitimacy will take care of itself.

Sorry for the long post.

I hope that I explained everything...

Paul

 

[bart]

Hey There,


An interesting thing about Master is where the word originates and how it comes into our everyday understanding. Linguistically it comes from the latin word "magister". In classical and medieval latin it generally meant "teacher" or "one who is adept". Languages influenced by latin such as the romance languages, the slavic languages, and the germanic languages inherited a great number of variations: "maestro", "maestre", "master", "mister", "magistrate", "maître". They all however tend to mean the same sort of thing: "a learned teacher, adept at something, and who generally is in charge". The terms "sensei", "sifu", and "guru" all signify the same sort of meaning as "master". But even then the translation is imperfect because each of these terms carries different significance in the originating languages.

Within our separate arts these general terms come to have special meaning. In general they carry a different meaning than in the internal jargon of our styles. Titles that mean something special in one group may be thought ridiculous or offensive in another or may be unintelligible in the great mass of commonspeak. In Britain the American peace symbol (index and middle held up) is the same as the American bird (middle finger). Imagine the kind of confusion that can cause at a rock concert or soccer match. Misunderstanding is rampant when people fail to recognize that the other side of an argument may not be speaking the same language.

 

[Cruentus]

Nice post Bart, very informative.

:asian:

 

[James Kovacich]

Long post ahead, as I have been put on the spot a bit:

No disrespect taken, akja. There is a difference with my title, and that difference is that I am honest about it. My title was legitimately obtained. I recieved a 5th degree (Lakan Apat in Modern Arnis) from Remy Presas. 5th degree is considered "master" in my circles.

However, because I don't want to play the political game in the Modern Arnis or martial arts world, I don't claim any authority in any one elses martial art. Therefore, I have moved in my own direction, and taken more of a tactical approach with a western martial arts model. Historically, in western martial arts, school owners of "arms" schools or pugalist schools were often referred to as "master, Master teacher, Master instructor, master at arms, master of defense, etc. etc." Being a school owner, they took whatever title they wanted. The "Master" title was commonly used, and there was no requirement that the title must be recieved from a higher source. You just had to be able to prove what you had, otherwise people wouldn't train with you, and you risked being challenged to a duel and killed if you were dubious with your claim to Master. The title that I chose to go by my written signature is "Master of Defense." I have just started my own self-defense training company called "Tulisan Tactical Training." At the moment I focus on private instruction and seminar training for tactical close-quarters defense with both empty hand and weapons for both operators and civilians. I am also exploring and research/developing historical martial arts programs.

Now these are all new efforts for me, and I can garauntee that I will be making major changes and updates for 05.' I may change the names and the structure of things, but fundamentally my focus on both tactical training and historical martial arts will remain the same. I may drop the whole "master of defense" thing and just go with "master instructor;" or I may go with no title at all. This is a learning and growing process for me.

But, the fact is, I obtained a master title by the standards of the traditional martial arts world, in that I was given rank and am recognized as such by instructors superior to me. So it is legitimate in that regard. The important thing is that I am honest about where the title comes from.

The problem with these titles is that many people who go by them are not honest about how they obtained them, thus the standards for these titles have been significantly lowered over the years. People pay for dubious rank that gives them these titles. People go to "Soke" associations and boards, and pay money to obtain titles. People give themselves titles, but misrepresent how they were obtained. People are given titles by illegitimate instructors. All these things add up to the pool being pissed in. What makes mine different then many of these is I am honest about it, and my title was not obtained in a dubious fashion.

That all said; now although 20 years of martial arts experience may fit the bill, I am very young to be considered "master" of anything, and I was even younger when I recieved my rank 4 1/2 years ago. I still have many lifetimes of knowledge to study and learn. Plus, people who seek instruction from me are in my age bracket or older. A few of those who seek instruction from me actually have more experience in martial arts then I, and a lot of those who learn from me have more tactical real world experience then I do. This makes my teaching experiences really enjoyable, as I often end up learning from my "students" as well as they learn from me. So, because of this, I don't expect nor want anyone to address me as "master"; on and off the training floor my name is "Paul" (or "Sir" if someone insists on a formality). If someone calls me master, I simply tell them just to call me "Paul." Also, I don't feel comfortable calling those who seek instruction from me "my students," as I feel that we should all be students, and I learn much from those that I teach. I usually refer to them as clients, seminar attendees, or group members if they are officially a member of The Gild which is the instructor certification division.

Final thought: The bottom line with this stuff is just be honest with yourself and everyone else around you. Be honest, and do good work. If your honest about yourself, you do good work, are a good martial artist and a good instructor, and can prove yourself when needed, then titles or legitimacy will take care of itself.

Sorry for the long post.

I hope that I explained everything...

Paul

Good post and I did not mean to put you on the spot and especially glad you did not take offense because I am trying to be genuine with my martial brothers and sisters.

But your signature that caught my eye was this one.

The Highest Caliber of Private Close-Quarters Defense Instruction...

Thats what I was asking you. Your opinion comparing that type of claim vs. a master claim. Could there be a connection as far what people claim, whether it's rank related or just abilities that imply greatness. I'm sure that you're Martial Talk signature has nothing to do with how you do buisness. It just caught my eye while discussing claims. Thats all, nothing more.

I know your qualifications because I am aware of Modern Arnis standards so there is no questioning there. :asian:

 

[Cruentus]

Good post and I did not mean to put you on the spot and especially glad you did not take offense because I am trying to be genuine with my martial brothers and sisters.

But your signature that caught my eye was this one.

The Highest Caliber of Private Close-Quarters Defense Instruction...

Thats what I was asking you. Your opinion comparing that type of claim vs. a master claim. Could there be a connection as far what people claim, whether it's rank related or just abilities that imply greatness. I'm sure that you're Martial Talk signature has nothing to do with how you do buisness. It just caught my eye while discussing claims. Thats all, nothing more.

I know your qualifications because I am aware of Modern Arnis standards so there is no questioning there. :asian:

Ah...thank you sir. Sorry I misunderstood, I didn't realize you were refering to my little tag line.

Well, sure, my tag line may be a little, how could I say this, "swelled." So, I agree. Yet, many advertisements, slogans, and tag lines are. The question is if these are ethical or not.

Is Hydroxycuts really the "next step in the evolution of weightloss," or is Fidelity investments really the "smart move," or does Lexus really allow you to "take a luxurious lifestyle with you;" well you get the idea.

Tag lines or slogans are really just opinions. Obviously Fidelity is of the opinion that going to them would be the "smart move," where as I am sure they have plenty of former clients who might think differently. What makes it ethical or unethical is what is behind the tag line. If Fidelity is not trying to misrepresent themselves or act dishonestly, and if they are doing all they can to make their product "the smart move," then that is what is makes their tag line within the realm of business ethics.

As to my tag line, I am striving to offer the highest caliber of private close quarters defense instruction. Whether I can offer that or not is a matter of opinion, in which some will say yay, and others nay. Honestly, some are of the opinion that they have gotten the best instruction for their needs at the time from me. They aren't and weren't interested if someone else might be more expierienced or higher ranked or better then me in some way; they were interested in a private program tailored to fit their needs and objectives for a price. By being able to deliver such a program that accomplished their objectives, to them they feel that it was the highest caliber of instruction for the money, time, and effort that they were willing to put out. And, I won't argue with them there.

So, I am not trying to misrepresent myself with my tag line, as I realize and want others to realize that how high caliber my programs are is a matter of opinion, and some few share (and more may share in the future) the opinion of the tag line.

This does not mean, by the way, that I think I am the best martial artist or tactical instructor ever to waqlk the planet. The reality is that I have a lot to learn and there are a lot of folks out there with more experience then me. However, I do feel that many of my programs are competable with the best. This doesn't mean that I am the best, it just means that the program competes well. Example, I teach an Every Day Carry civilian knife seminar that in about 4 to 5 hours gives a person what they need to know about the basics of carrying a knife, and using one for self-defense. I would put this program up against anything else that is out there trying to fullfill the same objective within the same amount of time. This does not mean that I am the best guy out there. Instructor A, B, and C may have better knife skills then me, for instance. But, if they are designing a 4-5 hour program to fullfill the same objectives, I'll bet that my program will compete well with theirs.

Who's program is "better" at that point really will be up to the client. One program may suit one person better, and another program may be better for someone else.

Anyways, that all cleared up, I am probably getting into too lengthy of an explaination here. The pointI am getting at is that a tag line usually is an opinion, really. It will be up to the consumer to decide if they share that opinion. A title or rank on the other hand is not a matter opinion; what title one goes by and what rank one is, and how they obtained these are facts. What matters is whether or not one is honest about the facts, and whether or not the facts themselves are dubious.

Bottom line is it boils down to honesty and ethical behavior. If one has these, then all is well.

Side note: My efforts with my company are very new. Tulisan Tactical Training is in the process of defining itself, and presenting things in a marketable and coherent fashion. I don't propose to be even close to knowing everything on this, nor will I ever. This is one big and exciting learning process for me. With this process, however, mistakes are going to be made, as this is how one learns. A lot of people try to hide and cover up mistakes for fear of bad "PR," and this is where I think many people get tripped up. If what one has to offer is good and can stand on its own, then there is no need to feint perfection or hide mistakes. Therefore, I hide nothing, and put it all out there. I want to see the reaction and responses I get and I want to here opinions on my efforts in both marketing and instruction, as this will allow me to continually improve. So, I appreciate opinions that are constructive. As to my tag line, this conversation has caused me to rethink it to tweak it a little, as I think that it may be too "swelled" for my liking. So I do truely enjoy constructive conversations like this, even if I am put "on the spot" a bit.

Thanks again,

Paul

 

[Rich Parsons]

Personally on the master issue I think it should come from your master instructor or higher.

With in your art or organization your official title should come from your higher ups, in particular if you are studying a traditional art where you this type of title and rank are part of your system.

:asian:

 

[Rich Parsons]

Hey There,


An interesting thing about Master is where the word originates and how it comes into our everyday understanding. Linguistically it comes from the latin word "magister". In classical and medieval latin it generally meant "teacher" or "one who is adept". Languages influenced by latin such as the romance languages, the slavic languages, and the germanic languages inherited a great number of variations: "maestro", "maestre", "master", "mister", "magistrate", "maître". They all however tend to mean the same sort of thing: "a learned teacher, adept at something, and who generally is in charge". The terms "sensei", "sifu", and "guru" all signify the same sort of meaning as "master". But even then the translation is imperfect because each of these terms carries different significance in the originating languages.

Within our separate arts these general terms come to have special meaning. In general they carry a different meaning than in the internal jargon of our styles. Titles that mean something special in one group may be thought ridiculous or offensive in another or may be unintelligible in the great mass of commonspeak. In Britain the American peace symbol (index and middle held up) is the same as the American bird (middle finger). Imagine the kind of confusion that can cause at a rock concert or soccer match. Misunderstanding is rampant when people fail to recognize that the other side of an argument may not be speaking the same language.

Another example: In Germany the Ok symbol is calling someone a seven letter word for your rear end. Cultures are different and understanding them is good. One cannot assume or presume that it is the same all over and everywhere. This is the number one error that US Tourists make while traveling. They assume the food and language and money and clothes will all be the same. It is not, it is a different culture with a different history with different understandings and meanings.

Peace

:asian:

 

[Flying Crane]

I'm not sure why everyone is so interested in having titles like Master and Grand Master, and Great Grandmaster and Professor and O-Sensei, etc. These imply perfection, or near perfection in martial practice, a claim that I feel few if any people can really backup. Some organizations attach titles with certain ranks, some people acquire titles by being recognized by others, some people acquire titles by group self-promoting, and some people simply give themselves the title.

Personally, I think claiming very high rank and titles simply puts you up for a lot of potential scrutiny, ridicule, and even challenges. Not something I would relish. These titles may have meant something in the past, but I think in about 99% of the cases now, it is used for promotional purposes, to attract students. After all, would you train with the 3rd Degree Black Belt, or the 8th degree Master Professor who runs the school down the street? There is no guarantee that the the 8th degree isn't gonna be lousy, and the 3rd degree is really top notch. But these guys prey on the ignorance and gullibility of the public.

I would like to see people stick with titles like Sensei, Sifu, Teacher, Instructor, etc., and discard the high titles that go along with the inflated egos.

 

[arnisador]

Hear, hear!

 

[searcher]

Very well put Flying Crane!!!!!

 

[Sapper6]

I'm not sure why everyone is so interested in having titles like Master and Grand Master, and Great Grandmaster and Professor and O-Sensei, etc. These imply perfection, or near perfection in martial practice, a claim that I feel few if any people can really backup. Some organizations attach titles with certain ranks, some people acquire titles by being recognized by others, some people acquire titles by group self-promoting, and some people simply give themselves the title.

Personally, I think claiming very high rank and titles simply puts you up for a lot of potential scrutiny, ridicule, and even challenges. Not something I would relish. These titles may have meant something in the past, but I think in about 99% of the cases now, it is used for promotional purposes, to attract students. After all, would you train with the 3rd Degree Black Belt, or the 8th degree Master Professor who runs the school down the street? There is no guarantee that the the 8th degree isn't gonna be lousy, and the 3rd degree is really top notch. But these guys prey on the ignorance and gullibility of the public.

I would like to see people stick with titles like Sensei, Sifu, Teacher, Instructor, etc., and discard the high titles that go along with the inflated egos.

very well said! i agree 100%

 

[tradrockrat]

Often it happens through flying.

Basically what you do is get on a plane in one place as a black belt, then when you land you are a Grandmaster. Ask about it at the airport.

THAT is TFF!!!!!!!!!:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

 

[Navarre]

Each system is going to have its own approach. I have Master ranking in one system at 4th degree but have the same rank in another system where I am not even called Sensei because I do not teach my own class. Most arts consider one a sensei at black belt level because we are "teachers" whether we have a specific class or not.

Neither title means a great deal to me. I am fully aware of what I went through in each system to achieve it, what I am capable of doing with or without the title, and what I feel I have to offer those around me.

I spend more of my attention focusing on what I can learn from others, from white belt on up to Grandmaster. When I got my first black belt ranking (just over 14 years ago now) my sensei looked me dead in the eye, shook my hand, and said with complete sincerity, "Congratulations. Now you are an *advanced* beginner."

 

[Flying Crane]

When I got my first black belt ranking (just over 14 years ago now) my sensei looked me dead in the eye, shook my hand, and said with complete sincerity, "Congratulations. Now you are an *advanced* beginner."

That's about what I was told as well.

 

[searcher]

When I got my first black belt ranking (just over 14 years ago now) my sensei looked me dead in the eye, shook my hand, and said with complete sincerity, "Congratulations. Now you are an *advanced* beginner."

This is a very good point. Most of the general public and many martial artists have the idea that being a BB is the same as being a master. That you are a lethal weapon or the like. Most don't understand that the only thing you have truly mastered are the basics. I am sure some will disagree with my view on this.

I heard it said one time by a guy I heavily respect that, " I have only one master and He is The Creator of Heaven and Earth."