This relation demands to clarify some details in order to establish the right interaction amid both parts.
There is a big difference between a person who is training and a student. To be a direct student of an Instructor or Master, the apprentice must feel particularly identified with the Teacher, who knows what the student doesn’t, what the student needs and who is expected to have a personality and moral values the student wants to imitate and not only for a particular or remarkable sport fighting condition.
The one only attracted by the struggle abilities of an instructor, is just a person only interested in the fighting aspect of the art. These people only need a coach, not an Instructor or a Master.
Regrettably the current trend is tarnished by this behavior. Nowadays the sport target seems to be the main path to follow and leads to switch instructors as fast as the fighting tendency vary; leaving aside all acknowledgements for the person who has completely taught the base of the art.
Loyalty seems to be a lost value that belongs to a very old époque.
This behavior not only applies to competitors. There is a twisted consideration about the student and Instructor’s relationship, fed by many Masters and Grand Masters who consider all the members of a particular institution as their students. They are just institutional leaders but not their instructors.
If a Master or Grand Master is giving a course or a seminar, he is only exposing the theory, rules and biomechanics with the intention to establish the unique criteria to follow. The people attending the event will be those to apply the institutional mandate. With few exceptions, they are not the Master’s or Grand Master’s students. If a Master or a Grand Master is leading an entity with 1.000 members, they are not their students but they only are members of a particular institution whose administrative authority has the Master or Grand Master category.
Today many Masters or Grand Masters are not active as Instructors. Those who really are, have just a bunch of direct students as any other person who is teaching regularly.
The students-Instructor’s relationship is bigger than the occasional course or seminar. This has to be fed everyday in a human correlation that includes social behavior and philosophical characteristics of the art beyond the sportive area and the demanding training aspects.
The personal relation with the direct Instructor normally is more important and necessary for the student’s evolution than any other higher category who occasionally dictates a course or seminar.
Because of that, choosing an adequate Instructor is not an easy job; once you find him, never betray his trust on you.
Senior Grand Master Ricardo Desimone
To be aware read the previous notes