What do you think about this "Master"?

[Ali Rahim]

The term “Master” should speak of the level of ones education and understanding, or the ideal of family lineage. The family lineage or education/understanding may be different from others, and then it would be difficult to judge others master abilities.

Some major universities teach different from other universities but have the same ideal.After all education is education no different from grade school through collage, it is what it is and that’s knowledge, just from a different tree.

Ali.

 

[grydth]

My original point was that the degree of "mastery" can not be judged by what is obviously a choreographed production.

I would have welcomed an open debate on that - or any other point on any other post.

Not to be argumentative, but I honestly cannot see how one can use the Ignore function if you don't know what sneak did it! That's the problem with allowing anonymous digs.

I personally think you should not be able to avoid a discussion you'd lose just by keying somebody's reputation door anonymously..... and that you should not be able to neg rep if you don't enter the discussion...... or give your cyber name.....

But rules are rules and I am not the moderator. I am clearly not going to win this one, so I'll leave this thread now and not post on it again. Better a walk than a suspension.

 

[bcbernam777]

in many asian cultures, the term 'master' as translated to english, simply means teacher. don't jump the gun.

Then why dont they use the word teacher?

Ami no one is jumping the gun here, they clearly utilise the word master as a marketing ploy. The basic jist of my post was to demonstrate that if my 65 year old Sifu from Hong Kong takes great pains to detatch himself from the notion of a master, then i hardly see how anyone who has been studying the art even over 20 years can call themselves master.

The point is this, the fact that the term master is bandied around the MA community the way that it is, to my mind shows nothing more than the egocentric attitude that to a large degree has done no small favours for the image of MA, particulary in the gung fu set, where we seem to be producing masters almost by osmosis. These so called masters of course (much to the embarresment of the Gung Fu community) do ridiculaous things like goading other MA practicioners into a fight, by making extravigant claims about their prowess etc etc, they then either get soundly trounced, or come up with some miserable excuse why they cannot fight.

On the other side of the coin there is the shear exploitive aspect to bandying yourself around to be some MA master. Sure, we all know that its a marketing ploy, we may even have a little chuckle to ourselves, but at the end of the day, there are no end of starry eyed students who dream of punching through a solid wall, or who believe themselves to be the next Bruce Lee, who hear the term master and wet their damn panties. I know at the end of the day its semantics, but it does leave certain impressions that i believe only have negative, n ot positive connatations.

As for me, I will never be a master, though I may be a Sifu, but I will definitly be a student for the rest of my life.

 

[Ali Rahim]

Most do not have or come from legitimate wing chun families, and cannot back up their claim of lineage. And some sifu’s are self-taught, base on the fact that you had to be a very close friend of a friend to be consider a group student of “Yip Man”. And it’s a lot of so-call masters out there that were group student of “Yip Man” and claim mastery of the wing chun system under “Yip Man” himself, when all group classes were taught by “Leung Sheung”, “Wong Shung” Leung and others.

So that should speak in volumes all by it’s self… And there are those who are cursed with legitimate wing chun families straight from “Yip Man” himself, and therefore the title of “Master” will fall in place naturally just from hard work alone, so other wise there are some who can not claim the title of “Master” under the “Yip Man” wing chun system, because their linage dose not give them the privilege.

That’s what it is and nothing more then a privilege and blessing, not a cursed or marketing scam. But the title falls in ones lap from tradition and tradition only, if your wing chun family is legitimate or straight from “Yip Man” himself.

I put in a lot of hard work over the years and taught well over a 2000 students and proved my abilities physically and in person, as well against all comers and truly earned the title of “Master”, and with the lineage and family to back me up. And there are many, many more that are like myself.

Ali.

 

[Ali Rahim]

Against popular belief, “Yip Man’s” circle was very, very small…

Ali.

 

[Ali Rahim]

Yip Man only worked with a small number of people while in Hong Kong, if you wasn’t one of the “five disciple” or one that didn’t spend hundreds of dollars on private session with “Yip Man”, even one that was not a student of these five master or disciple of “Yip Man”…

Then the term of master within the “Yip Man” system may not lap in your lap traditionally. And here are the names those five Grandmasters (only after the death of “Yip Man), Chen Kou, Leung Sheung, Lok Yil, Tsui Sheung Tin and Wong Shun Leung…

 

[DaveyBoy]

Hi all,

This is my first post on here after a few months of browsing the forum. First of all I'd like to thank everyone that has posted on here - I've found many of the posts to be eye-opening and extremely helpful for my training. There are clearly a lot of people here with a deep understanding of Wing Chun & I for one appreciate (and benefit!) from the sharing of your knowledge. Respect.

Yip Man only worked with a small number of people while in Hong Kong, if you wasn’t one of the “five disciple” or one that didn’t spend hundreds of dollars on private session with “Yip Man”, even one that was not a student of these five master or disciple of “Yip Man”…

Then the term of master within the “Yip Man” system may not lap in your lap traditionally. And here are the names those five Grandmasters (only after the death of “Yip Man), Chen Kou, Leung Sheung, Lok Yil, Tsui Sheung Tin and Wong Shun Leung…

Ali, you didn't mention Yip Chun or Yip Ching in your post. I'd have expected that, given they are Yip Man's sons, they'd also have trained privately & fairly intensely with him. Is there a reason why you didn't include them in your list? Please don't think I'm trying to cause any dispute - there are already far too many silly Wing Chun politics wars IMHO. I'm simply interested in hearing other people's opinions.

 

[Ali Rahim]

That is true “Yip Man’s” two son are a given; to me they would be the sole heir of the Yip Man system as far as today’s sanders, without a doubt. My sifu feels the same about that statement as well… But they were not apart of the 1951 boom in Hong Kong.
As I heard it said; from King to Prince it only makes sense…

Ali.

 

[bcbernam777]

Against popular belief, “Yip Man’s” circle was very, very small…

Ali.

Though it was small it certinally wasn't restricted to the five, Ali have you seen the Yip man aniversiry book? it was distributed amongst former students of YM, my Sifu let me borrow it for a while and I was going to scan some of it in but I felt that somehow I shouldn't, there are a lot of photos taken from the early to mid fifties (funny enough there are almost no photo's from after that period). There are a numbedr of other students who did train privatly with Sigung, even though they didn't pay great sums of money, Yip Man would work with people who showed promise, amongst them was Bruce, Sifu Fung, Victor Kan, Hawkins Chueng. The main reason why people refer to the 5 is because they are the students who had inititallly started with Sigung, the first of the first so to speak, they where my sifus, Si-Hueng's, and Bruces Si-Hueng's etc.

 

[Ali Rahim]

Though it was small it certinally wasn't restricted to the five, Ali have you seen the Yip man aniversiry book? it was distributed amongst former students of YM, my Sifu let me borrow it for a while and I was going to scan some of it in but I felt that somehow I shouldn't, there are a lot of photos taken from the early to mid fifties (funny enough there are almost no photo's from after that period). There are a numbedr of other students who did train privatly with Sigung, even though they didn't pay great sums of money, Yip Man would work with people who showed promise, amongst them was Bruce, Sifu Fung, Victor Kan, Hawkins Chueng. The main reason why people refer to the 5 is because they are the students who had inititallly started with Sigung, the first of the first so to speak, they where my sifus, Si-Hueng's, and Bruces Si-Hueng's etc.

It all started in 1951, those names that you mention were not apart of the original members of the restaurant union hall in kowloon Hong Kong, they came some time later and were still teenagers at the time they showed up.

I taught thousand of students consistently in-group setting, along with my assistant instructors and only have 8 close students… yet a lot of people were my students, but only a few is asked to carry the legacy. And in terms cannot use the title master.

Ali.

 

[monji112000]

Both these topics are way off topic but hey who cares? Its a forum..

terms specifically “master”. As I have been told by many people who speak the language that the term Sifu means teacher/father not master. This is because you were accepted as the person's live in “Diciple(apprentice)” and that person basically adopted you. So he was responcible for you just like a father was. This relationship mirrored your relationship with your own father in almost everyway. These terms and in some cases practices were continued and still are done. I don't think that The following generations will continue this practise in this exact way becouse it doesn't hold to our times.

So when someone says They were a “student” of Ip man what does that mean? I will say that maybe 3 types of people learned from Ip . Students from his school , Disciples , people who paid for private lessons.

Its very controversial to start saying who was diciple or a private student and who learned what from who. So if you want to know the truth go ask someone who was there. The fact is that Ip man taught in different stages and places. Most people just think of one short amount of time that he taught. Allot of people don't know the other people, because people traveled and were not able to visit often.

Many people have said they are a Disciple or a closed door student .. but its not really important who was or wasn't. Because nobody can prove anything. This is one of the main reasons why Wing Chun is so different to so many people. The “principles” vary from lineage to lineage. What Chi sao is changes from school to school.

The fact is that no official list exists in the public of who were his few “disciples”.Some are known, like Duncan Leung while most aren't. Nobody knows his private students. Why becouse they were private. So if someone says they were.. then you just believe or you don't. Its very possible they were. Ip Man was known for teaching people just for money. He was only human and he had a very demanding habit. Some people paid allot of money and didn't really learn much. While others I am sure paid less or more and learned allot. The people who know about these things don't talk because they aren't interested in politics.

Ip Man never said he was the Grandmaster, which would mean the leader of the style. He wasn't given that role from the Leader of the style. If you call him Grandmaster because you are translating Sigung as teacher's teacher, then I guess that works. The main issue is translations. In one culture things mean allot while in American culture they don't. Ip man gave nobody the title Master or Grandmaster. I know only one person who he gave permission to open a school. It seems very complicated, because no structure was created. It would seem like Ip Man wasn't interested in creating a giant organization , but only to having a income and passing down his knowledge to a few “worthy” people.


Just about everybody believes what their Sifu or Sigung says... and everybody says they were "private" students or disciples. Its really silly to talk about it because nobody can prove anything. Everybody is a expert and nobody was even around at the time most of all not me. Just try to understand that these terms don't translate well and the original means don't really exist in our culture today.


And just as a historical point it all did not start in 1951.

 

[Ali Rahim]

And just as a historical point it all did not start in 1951.

LOL… LOL… LOL… LOL…

That was the first time that “Yip Man” taught anyone in a group setting in “Hong Kong” in a neighborhood church in 1951… And in 1949 is when he started with the first 5 and taught them only and maybe a few of their friends until 1951… Yip Man was a fugitive from the “Foshan War” and was salt out by the military and hided in Hong Kong…


So he did not open up publicly until some time later, because of his ordeal in Foshan... Any true “Yip Man” follower would know when he left Foshan for “Hong Kong” and that was in 1949, I knew that for over 25 year,, Oh yeah you forgot to tell us the original date it started for group classes in Hong Kong…

LOL… LOL… LOL… LOL…

 

[Ali Rahim]

We don’t know what Yip Man said, we were not there… But we do know that his students call him “Master” And those in group classes call him “Grand Master”, back then everyone consider him as one of a kind and gave him a title accordingly, which is a martial art tradition (“titles”)…

Ali.

 

[monji112000]

well if Ip Man came to HK in 1949, (I didn't know it was that year), then I am sure he had people he was teaching before he came to HK. Maybe even a disciple.



I don't know exactly when his Nephew started training with him, but I think they both lived in the same city in china(could be wrong). I know when his formal school opened. I know about the restaurant union. I am not a Ip Man follower, he is simple the "innovator" of the style of martial arts I train. I never met him, I don't know anything about him. I have never seen any trustworthy information about him outside of one or two facts. So its really just myths and legends, along with people saying stuff that allows them to gain more credit and more students. I do know some of his family (not his sons), and have heard many good (some bad) things about him. HE did change allot of people.

nobody called him master he didn't speak English. He was called Sifu, which translates to father or teacher. Master is a completely different word.

 

[Ali Rahim]

well if Ip Man came to HK in 1949, (I didn't know it was that year), then I am sure he had people he was teaching before he came to HK. Maybe even a disciple.



I don't know exactly when his Nephew started training with him, but I think they both lived in the same city in china(could be wrong). I know when his formal school opened. I know about the restaurant union. I am not a Ip Man follower, he is simple the "innovator" of the style of martial arts I train. I never met him, I don't know anything about him. I have never seen any trustworthy information about him outside of one or two facts. So its really just myths and legends, along with people saying stuff that allows them to gain more credit and more students. I do know some of his family (not his sons), and have heard many good (some bad) things about him. HE did change allot of people.

nobody called him master he didn't speak English. He was called Sifu, which translates to father or teacher. Master is a completely different word.

They all called him “Master” Chen Kou, Leung Sheung, Lok Yil, Tsui Sheung Tin and Wong Shun Leung, and my sifu called him that as well, if they didn’t call him that to his face, they always said it to others outside of the family but yet he was called “Master”…

Many other wing chun greats as well called him that such as “Leung Ting”,, “Wong Shun Leung” and “Tsui Sheung Tin” all called him “Master” in their instructional tapes or DVDs, and while in seminars…

Ali.

 

[Ali Rahim]

I have heard this debate for years… Let me break this down for you as a known fact… The term “sifu” puts one in immediate accessibility of one’s time or space, meaning having immediate intention of that person time and consistently.

The Chinese is notorious for using the term “sifu” keeping them in the graces of others by hurting those with direct lineage to the Yip Man wing chun family, when their lineage dose not lead them to the very beginning of Yip Man’s Hong Kong wing chun system...

So the term “Master”, was hated by those who couldn’t link themselves to the first five students of “Yip Man” and therefore making themselves followers and on the same level of training and respect…

And for those who do not know fall right into that bucket of crap!!!

Ali.

 

[Ali Rahim]

And it hurts a lot more when a Non- Asian has this opportunity being titled “Masters” within A lineament wing chun family of Yip Man’s…

Ali.

 

[Ali Rahim]

The Chinese is notorious for using the term “sifu” keeping them in the graces of others by hurting those with direct lineage to the Yip Man wing chun family, when their lineage dose not lead them to the very beginning of Yip Man’s Hong Kong wing chun system...

Especially when there are non-Asian students involved in the equation…

Ali.

 

[bcbernam777]

It all started in 1951, those names that you mention were not apart of the original members of the restaurant union hall in kowloon Hong Kong, they came some time later and were still teenagers at the time they showed up.

I taught thousand of students consistently in-group setting, along with my assistant instructors and only have 8 close students… yet a lot of people were my students, but only a few is asked to carry the legacy. And in terms cannot use the title master.

Ali.

I know that, thats why I said that the former where the first of the first, however that doesn't, in my opinion invalidate the fact that these people I mention where to some level taught by Yip Man at times in a school setting and at times privatly by Yip Man. The fact that they cam on board only a short time later does not invalidate anything. Take for example Sifu Fung, Sifu started teaching in 1979, He taught a number of students before me, I started with Sifu 2004, but he asked me to teach for him even though he had students who had been with him close to 10 years, I dont really see how being first gives anyone automatic entitlement, infact if we really wanted to be technical, yip man did teach in china before arriving at Hong Kong.

Anyway thats all moot because I still dont believe that anyone has the right to claim master, in any martial art, not even my sifu whom I dearly love and respect, and am in awe of his skill, but if someone wants to call themselves master I guess that is their own choice, but as a student, I would personally avoid those who bandy themselves as a master, I believes it shows a level of ego that is restrictive in Martial Arts. As the good book says "Let another man praise you".

 

[Ali Rahim]

The term “Master” is against my religion, and my students are not allowed to call me that because of that same reason alone, but yet my “Sifu” cursed me with that title being a second generation student of Yip Man, he has the privilege to do so.

Ali.