Master and Grandmaster titles

[andyjeffries]

From another thread:

I stand corrected. Reminds me of the time when I invited Nam Tae Hi to teach. he referred to me as "Master" and I was a 6th Dan. So as not to get into hot water I told the assembled that while flattered I was not a "Master" but I knew better than to correct my senior. ...They laughed.

Most Kukki-Taekwondo consider you to be a Master at 4th Dan, so I'd have called him Master Piller anyway.

The interesting one comes at Grandmaster... This is diverging from my original thread on side kick improvements, so I've split it out.

What do you consider the requirements for the title Master and Grandmaster where you are?

Master for us has always been fairly fixed - 4th Dan Kukkiwon is Master rank. There are some that say "it's not until 5th Dan", but 4th Dan is where promotion privileges as well as full graduation from the Master Training Course at the Kukkiwon take place, so that's where I feel it should be too.

Grandmaster seems to be fluid. My instructor always said - when another grandmaster or your instructor calls you grandmaster, then it's effectively giving you the right to that title. A rather rude guy on the instructor course told my instructor that he isn't one (my instructor is 8th Dan Kukkiwon, 9th Dan Changmookwan and KKW 1st Class instructor) because the requirement is 9th Dan KKW and 1st Class.

I asked my contact at Changmookwan HQ in Korea and they said that it's an automatic title at 9th Dan CMK/KKW, but as above, if your seniors call you Grandmaster then that is valid too.

So, what are your thoughts?

 

[Earl Weiss]

There is a book called "Living the Martial way" Good book on many counts. Without naming names he talks about an org that reduced the rank where the term "Master" was used. (Seems pretty clear it was the KKW) His point was "How can you be a master of a system when the entire syllabus is not taught to you at the time you reach that level."

He addresses about 20 pages to this topic.

At the end of the day,the title adheres when the Seniors / Org. have dictated it appears.

Oh, and I think I saw an articl;e about this somewhere
https://1c47d0f0-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites...ghB2AzAFVbnt8A0YSH46JlfPV1uw==&attredirects=0

 

[oftheherd1]

There is a book called "Living the Martial way" Good book on many counts. Without naming names he talks about an org that reduced the rank where the term "Master" was used. (Seems pretty clear it was the KKW) His point was "How can you be a master of a system when the entire syllabus is not taught to you at the time you reach that level.

At the end of the day,the title adheres when the Seniors / Org. have dictated it appears.

Interesting thoughts. I suspect at higher ranks what you say is correct. Although there would possibly be some differences based on what the highest rank was. In the 60s, we were told that the highest belts in TKD were 8th Dan. If we were told they should be addressed as Grand Master, I don't recall that (of course, I was being taught by a 6th dan, not a 7th or 8th dan).

In the Hapkido I studied, 4th Dan was considered a master, and 7th and 8th Dan were Grand Masters. I presume it was the same in TKD in the 60s, but as I said, I don't really know for sure. There was a time when they considered going to 10th Dan, but I think so many of the long time GM just weren't interested, so they reverted back.

I never delved into it, but I always associated those titles with European titles such as Apprentice, Journeyman, and Master. An experienced journeyman was considered very knowledgeable, but wouldn't have necessarily known everything. Perhaps not even a new master. I think probably the amount of experience played a part as well as some kind of recommendation and testing. I could be completely out in left field since I really don't know anything more about that.

I wonder if MA are the same? Since there is more than one level of master, and more than one of grand master, at what point is one expected to know everything?

 

[Dirty Dog]

At the end of the day,the title adheres when the Seniors / Org. have dictated it appears.

This.
When I first met my instructor, he was a 3rd Dan. He'd been one for something like 20 or 25 years because he'd simply declined to promote. Since then he's been pushed to 5th Dan despite his reluctance.
Our Kwanjang called him Master Valdez at 3rd Dan, so that was good enough for me.

It's worth remembering that these are western titles. I am not even sure that Korean has words for these titles. Certainly, the terms commonly used in schools (Busabum, Sabum, Kyosa, Kwanjang...) are all various ways of saying teacher.

 

[chrispillertkd]

What do you consider the requirements for the title Master and Grandmaster where you are?

A minimum requirement would be, IMHO, knowledge of the entirety of the formal syllabus of whatever art you study. If you're still learning new aspects of it I would say that either 1) you're not really a Master, or 2) Master means something more akin to what it means in the skilled trades where the title of apprentice, journeyman, and master are traditionally used. There's absolutely nothing wrong with this but if that is the approach one takes then they should be a bit less put off when people don't refer to them as Master (or Grand Master).

Grandmaster seems to be fluid. My instructor always said - when another grandmaster or your instructor calls you grandmaster, then it's effectively giving you the right to that title. A rather rude guy on the instructor course told my instructor that he isn't one (my instructor is 8th Dan Kukkiwon, 9th Dan Changmookwan and KKW 1st Class instructor) because the requirement is 9th Dan KKW and 1st Class.

I have always thought the KKW called people Grand Master at 8th dan (and have met several who do use it at that rank). I didn't know it was supposed to be for 9th dans. Interesting.

In the ITF Grand Master is a title reserved for IX dan alone. I don't know of anybody who would actually tell a IX dan that they aren't a Grand Master to their face. If they did the most likely result would be having several very senior VIII dans all giving them a well-deserved lecture on manners. Given the difference in organizational cultures I have trouble imagining an VIII dan referring to themselves as "Grand Master," although I know of at least one "ITF-style" organization which uses the term for VIII dans.

I asked my contact at Changmookwan HQ in Korea and they said that it's an automatic title at 9th Dan CMK/KKW, but as above, if your seniors call you Grandmaster then that is valid too.

Out of curiosity, is the title Grand Master that you refer to here simply Kwan Jang? Or is it a different Korean term? Or is it just what is used when speaking English?

The ITF uses specific titles which, as far as I am aware, are unique. VII and VIII dan use Sahyun (사현) while IX dan is referred to as Sasung (사성). 사 translates as "teacher" while 현 is relates to virtue or wisdom, thus Sahyun could loosely be translated as "wise teacher." Sasung uses the same character for teacher and 성 which means "sage." Sasung therefore means "teacher-sage."

Pax,

Chris

 

[tshadowchaser]

No longer being in the Korean arts anymore comes from a complete outsider at this time.
I have heard of many Korean instructors being called Grandmaster at 7th or 8th but My question is what is the head of the system given for a title. Should not the head of the system/organization be the one and only grandmaster whit every one under him/her just being a master? Why confuse people with so many Grandmasters?

edit this is asked with true respect and an enquiringly mind

 

[Dirty Dog]

No longer being in the Korean arts anymore comes from a complete outsider at this time.
I have heard of many Korean instructors being called Grandmaster at 7th or 8th but My question is what is the head of the system given for a title. Should not the head of the system/organization be the one and only grandmaster whit every one under him/her just being a master? Why confuse people with so many Grandmasters?

edit this is asked with true respect and an enquiringly mind

The head of a Korean system is the Kwanjang (nim is an honorific, basically "respected", and is only used in reference to the Sabum, Kwanjang, etc. Never in reference to oneself.) but Kwanjang is roughly equivalent to Headmaster. As in "Head of the school". Strictly speaking, if you run your own school, you're Kwanjang, regardless of rank.
As for Grandmaster... I don't really know... our Kwanjang (8th Dan KKW, 9th Dan MDK) just signs "Master". The signatures I have from GM CHO, Hee Il say "Master". I've never asked, but it's entirely possible that to their way of thinking, the "Grand" is equivalent to "nim" and never used for oneself.
As I said, I am unaware of a Korean word that actually translates as "Master" or "Grandmaster",and I believe that these titles are merely western concepts that we're trying to shoehorn into an eastern setting.

 

[tshadowchaser]

,informative answer thank you

 

[WaterGal]

There's an interesting idea I see here from a couple of posters, that a Master is someone that "knows everything". By that standard, then, nobody is a Master. As long as you keep training, you're going to learn something new.

But I think, past a certain point, the "new material" in the curriculum is largely a formality, to show that you're still training.

 

[Buka]

My TKD instructor is an eighth. Under his direction, his students and my students address me as Kwanjang-nim, even though I was a fourth, explaining that it symbolized my being the director and chief instructor of a dojo. We also addressed him as Kwanjang-nim. (Hey, I just do as I'm told) The titles of Master and Grandmaster weren't used in either of our organizations.

For the last twenty years I go by the title of Coach. He's still Kwanjang-nim, though.

 

[RhythmGJ]

Interesting discussion. I am totally unfamiliar with Korean arts, but as I've recently re-entered the TMA world, and have been studying a number of different traditions (Japanese, Filipino, Brasilian, Russian, along with Western/European fencing), and have even taken a lesson with a Chinese practitioner of Japanese Kenjutsu (!)... Needless to say, keeping my various "Coaches, Guros, Tuhans, Sifus, Senseis, Shihans, Instructors, Professors, and Masters" straight has been a bit of a daunting task.

I recently saw this article that gives a little perspective on the whole "honorific title" thing. It would be interesting to hear your responses (although admittedly, the author is focusing on Japanese tradition rather than Korean, or anything else).

Anyway, here's the link:

Honorifics in Meibukan NOX Dojo Markham Karate





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tony Dismukes]

For the last twenty years I go by the title of Coach.

At my gym the standard term of address for instructors is either their first name or "coach." I'm still getting used to be called "coach", but I kind of like it. It doesn't imply that I'm on some elevated level compared to the students - just that I have some insights to help them improve.

 

[chrispillertkd]

Interesting discussion. I am totally unfamiliar with Korean arts, but as I've recently re-entered the TMA world, and have been studying a number of different traditions (Japanese, Filipino, Brasilian, Russian, along with Western/European fencing), and have even taken a lesson with a Chinese practitioner of Japanese Kenjutsu (!)... Needless to say, keeping my various "Coaches, Guros, Tuhans, Sifus, Senseis, Shihans, Instructors, Professors, and Masters" straight has been a bit of a daunting task.

I recently saw this article that gives a little perspective on the whole "honorific title" thing. It would be interesting to hear your responses (although admittedly, the author is focusing on Japanese tradition rather than Korean, or anything else).

Anyway, here's the link:

Honorifics in Meibukan NOX Dojo Markham Karate

I largely agree with the sentiments in the article. I have heard some westerners refer to themselves as "Master," in Taekwon-Do but their attitude when doing so made it apparent they were simply using it as a title, similar to how one would introduce themselves as "Dr. So-and-so" if they were a doctor. In both situations a person could use the title simply because that's what they are, or to show people how awesome they are ("Hey, I'm a DOCTOR, and you're not!"). That being said, I don't really care for people introducing themselves as Master/Sahyun and know some very senior practitioners who, when meeting someone or introducing themselves will simply use their name and no title.

Generally speaking, titles are for other people to use in reference to the person who has them.

And if you are having trouble remembering which title goes with which person when you're talking to them I have found that you can't go wrong with simple "sir" or "ma'am" (and a bow).

Pax,

Chris

 

[andyjeffries]

I have always thought the KKW called people Grand Master at 8th dan (and have met several who do use it at that rank). I didn't know it was supposed to be for 9th dans. Interesting.

I think most do consider it at 8th Dan (whether that is Kukkiwon rank or Kwan rank), this was one guy saying that.

Out of curiosity, is the title Grand Master that you refer to here simply Kwan Jang? Or is it a different Korean term? Or is it just what is used when speaking English?

Just English titles.

Another interesting version I had heard is that Master is someone who has the right to promote other people (so in Kukkiwon terms a 4th Dan). And when you have one of your students go from white belt to master rank then you are a Grandmaster. Thinking in terms of Father (when you are old/high enough rank to have your own children/students) and Grandfather (when when one your children/students is old/high enough rank to have their own). An interesting way of thinking it.

I definitely don't think of Master as having complete mastery of the art, it's just a title that expresses that you know enough, well enough to give others Dan rank. If it meant complete mastery, then it surely would only be at 9th Dan - and there'd be no need for Grandmaster as any title.

 

[chrispillertkd]

Well, FWIW, my initial comment on the title "Master" was that it should entail "knowledge of the entirety of the formal syllabus of whatever art you study." If one doesn't know the system one can't be a Master in the first place, IMNSHO. That's why I personally prefer the ITF's way of handling things (you aren't considered a Master until VII dan). You can promote students to dan rank when you're certified as an International Instructor (minimum of IV dan).

I know other organizations handle things differently and more power to them. They just have a different concept of what a Master is. On a sliding scale I would say that the ITF has an understanding of Master being closer to one who has mastery of a system while the KKW is closer to the apprentice/journeyman/master skilled trade understanding. I could be wrong, that's just how it seems to me.

Pax,

Chris

 

[chrispillertkd]

I think most do consider it at 8th Dan (whether that is Kukkiwon rank or Kwan rank), this was one guy saying that.

Interesting. I wonder where he got his information. I also wonder what rank he happens to hold

Pax,

Chris

 

[Earl Weiss]

Titles aside, the whole issue of rank, historicaly vs current is frought with issues. reading He Young Kims book, he relates that Lee Won Kuk became a 4th Dan in Shotokan in 4 years. We know the history of General Choi being a second in Shotokan and then an Honorary 4th in the CDK which may or may not have been because it was a civilian gym and he was military and then there was the rise in rank for lee won Kuk and General Choi from 4th to 9th and the timelines were?

in the ITF it takes many 25-30 years to reach 7th Dan. I saw Han Cha Kyo cert and he was K-8-6 in 1973. He was born in 1934 so he was all of 39 years old and in those days they rarely started as young children.

While training may have been harder and Mc Dojangs aside, training and knowledge now is much better than in those days.

 

[Gnarlie]

I think how mastery can be considered depends how the syllabus is weighted i.e. where the material requiring physical mastery is covered. By 4th dan, there aren't many new physical testing requirements that are really going to push a person or ask them to demonstrate any new principles. The majority of the physical aspects have been covered and drilled in / mastered. After that, more mind and spirit along with teaching and testing, and furthering the growth of Taekwondo.

I also think that these titles get blown out of proportion. I would take actual respect over a title any day.

 

[Buka]

At my gym the standard term of address for instructors is either their first name or "coach." I'm still getting used to be called "coach", but I kind of like it. It doesn't imply that I'm on some elevated level compared to the students - just that I have some insights to help them improve.

I like the "Coach" thing. I'll go out that way.

You go with the flow. For the first ten years I taught, my students only addressed me by my first name. Later, as I trained under various Instructors, they insisted my students address me as...whatever. Later still, it would be something else. Now it's just Coach. (Pay dues long enough you do what you want)

The only good thing about the various monikers - you run into folks who trained with you a year or two, which was a big part of their lives, but it's a blip on the radar in yours. Five to thirty years have past, they don't look anything like they did before, their hair, age, weight, health, posture - it's all different. When they call you by....whatever, you know from what era/school/circumstance/state they're from and you can remember them easier. I like to remember people, but sometimes it's just hard.

I address anyone in the arts by however they're addressed. Be it Master, GM, their first name, Shihan, Sensei, Coach, Kwanjang-nim, Sabu-nim, Proffessor, Sifu, Sir, etc, it's all good. Martial etiquette is big in my book and that's what I go by. Outside the dojo they're just another old, scarred son of a ***** like me and we say whatever we want to each other.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

When developing the IKSDA as a formal governing authority for the schools under our umbrella we deliberated long and hard on the topics of master and grandmaster. Looking around the martial arts world it's easy to see that there is an inundation of grandmasters/supreme grandmasters/ultimate grandmaster etc. We wanted to officially and properly recognize the instructors within our group while staying away from all the nonsense.

What we officially decided was this; master would be the rank of 4th Dan. At this rank the complete system, as far as syllabus is concerned has been learned (taking into account that depth of learning will always continue to be added regardless of Dan rank as well as continuing education).

For the title of GM we debated whether to even use it or not. We finally decided that within the entire association there would be only one GM and that would be the highest ranked individual that also held the position of IKSDA Director. This would be the Dan rank of 9th Dan. So within the IKSDA, there is only one 9th Dan who is the only GM. The highest Dan rank that can be achieved otherwise is 8th Dan and the title of master. When the GM formally retires then he appoints a successor. But he is allowed to retain the title of GM as a point of honor.