- The statements and opinions in this text are
not generally available or applicable to all styles of martial arts. They origin
are in Chinese tradition martial arts and particularly from the Shaolin style.
Martial arts in Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Thailand, etc., may have a completely
different organization.
- There is no hierarchy or organizational
system better than other. Each style has had a "policy" of its own
in this respect, the only ones who can positively or negatively evaluate are
the styles practitioners.
- In terms of how to transfer knowledge and
leadership there may be similarities between the styles that have common origin
Buddhist, Taoist or other oriental philosophical and religious currents, but
this does not mean that they are identical or that marks hierarchical overlap.
Some styles deemed most important aspects, values or qualities over others
(eg, certain principles related to ethics and morality can be valued more than
physical skill or martial or vice versa).
During more than 30 years of experience in
martial arts I "crossed" with many questions about the organization
or hierarchy in martial arts, some continue to be made by new generations who
visit gyms. For some of these questions I will try to offer some answers.
Before we discuss who are the students, the
disciples, the teachers and the masters, what do each of them and what defines
them in one way or another, it is absolutely necessary to make some important clarifications.
There are no students or disciples without a
teacher or master!
Teachers or masters can not exist without
students or disciples!
To define each of them it can be made only by reference to the other and the relationship between them!
Teachers or masters
* When referring to teacher, I am not
referring to the profession in school or other education system but to the
function performed, namely to teach someone else something from peg to quantum
physics.
Generally these are people who have some
information and knowledge that are wanted by someone else, another person.
The Master is a good teacher while the teacher
is not required to be the master. More specifically, the master is the person
who owns information and knowledge, is able to transfer them rigorously and in order
to someone else but at the same time, evaluates it and is able to adapt the
method of transfer of information and even actual content according to needs
and other qualities. Lastly, a master have inspirational and motivational
qualities that include and go beyond the area where it has competence and
personal relationships get in the zone.
A master is someone who knows what he do,
knows how is doing it and is able to teach you to do what he does.
The teacher is the person capable of
transferring information in its possession but in a more rigid, more stringent
way. Ability to adapt their knowledge and their way of transfer is much lower.
Even if it can come to have a deeper connection with the other and can even be
inspirational for it, he will never try to exceed the limits and informational
structure of what he teaches.
The teacher can be an expert in terms of
knowledge but in a fixed way of interacting with the one you teach.
The transfer of information differs. The
teacher is based on the idea that " I'm only one and you all are following
me” and the master model is "I can be what each of you need."
The teacher answers the need for simultaneous
training of a large number of people and aimed at a particular group average.
There is some communication between the teacher and those whom he instructs,
but it is not individual questions and answers regarding the group. In this
case, there is pressure from the teacher that everyone in the group to comply
with the rules and to recognize its authority. This model involves the
application of rules and patterns (practice to control, joint exercises, training
the same period of time, sa).
The master addresses the training to fewer
people, each receiving what they need according his capabilities and personal
needs. In this model there is effective communication between master and those
he instructs, based on bidirectional feedback and there are no pressure to
comply. Those trained admit voluntarily without any coercion, recognise the
master "expertise" and rather cooperate with it. Patterns and rules
are very relaxed. Master guiding practitioner rather than to impose "what
and where". Based on the assessment results, this model requires not a
strict interaction in terms of time or location. Instead it requires that the
trainee to have a very strong desire to evolve and without being under
continuous supervision of the master, to practice it as much as needed.
Students and disciples
Students and followers are obviously part of
those who require information and are trained by teachers or masters.
Both masters and teachers can and have students,
but only masters have disciples. Both master and teacher instruct others and
this makes those to be students of the former.
There is a moment when, after the personal
development of students, they are seeking their master or when the teacher evolves and becomes master
and alter the pattern of interaction with students. Obviously there are
students who remain teacher students for all and teachers who will never become
masters, each one reaching their own limits.
Of students who have, in one way or another, a
master, the disciples appear.
So the relationship student-teacher and
student-master common factor is the direct request to be trained made by
students on his own initiative. The relation can be different, the treining can
be different, but initiative to establish a relationship belongs to the
student.
When is about becoming a disciple, the changing
initiative to "lead the relationship" to another level belong to the master.
The Master is one who declares publicly that he recognizes X or Y or both as
disciples and they accept that responsibility or not.
Disciple responsibility is arising from its
definition, namely: "A person who lives near a teacher, receiving his
teaching and often continuing them and developing them." Or "Person
shall, follows and continues doctrine, teaching, principles of someone."
In fact the disciple it is a kind of split
personality or person of maestro by almost a clone of it. In terms of martial arts
disciple has no connection with degrees or belts, master giving him his right
to act or speak on its behalf and in social situations or contexts outside of
martial arts.
On the other hand, agreeing to be nominated as
a disciple does not mean it is "for life" no matter what you do.
Masters are people and sometimes can be wrong. Disciples also may change
(generally the morallity and behaviorally). In this case it may revoke the
nomination, a true disinheritance, if the master is alive. If the master is no
longer alive, the status of disciple is recognized or not by the other
"colleagues".
The fact that this quality (disciple) is not
connected with the martial-physical is more evident in situations when the
designated successor of school or style is not from the bloodline (son,
daughter) nor the highest rank ( even though these things often overlap).
It should also be noted finally that in
traditional Chinese styles, students, teachers, disciples and masters formed
more than a family structure, hence the "titles" of address among its
members.
