Do they mean the same thing? Close but not exactly.
Sifu is a Chinese term and concept and can be written in two ways 師父 or 師傅 – the first meaning ‘teacher father’ and the second ‘master’ or ‘expert’. As Chinese, we always call any skilled person ‘master’ or ‘師傅’ (as example, head chef, plumber, carpenter, etc.) There are no special bonds between you and the expert. Furthermore, it doesn’t mean that the person is the top expert ever either, it is just a respectful way to address a skilled professional. However, the term 師父 or ‘teacher father’ implies a special bond as well as responsibility on both sides. Furthermore, there is an implied bond between your classmates as part of a special brotherhood / family. In the old days, trade secrets only get passed within the family. Not everyone can belong, you have to be ‘formally accepted’ by your sifu to be in.
More often than not, the sifu’s goal is to find the right person for his craft / style. So the orientation is more of a “product trying to find suitable candidates” and less of trying to teach the underlying principles or to help a student find his/her true potential and style.
In modern society, a lot of the old family structure is less solid than before. Divorces are common place, disputes between brothers/sisters, father and son, estranged family members are all too real. ‘Contracted’ relationship by itself doesn’t work. Relationships have to be nurtured and real for it to last.
In the old days, until you are considered as accepted into the ‘inner circle’, you are just scrapping the surface of the art. Nowadays, when I go to the university, when I take a course, I expect the material to be correct and true regardless of my religious believes or my heritage. I do not accept a ‘watered down’ version. Why would I accept anything different when it comes to martial arts? Some people are so much into the ‘cultural experience’ that they forgo all their common sense when it comes to martial arts.
The term ‘coach’ is Western. To mean “instructor/trainer” is c.1830 Oxford University slang for a tutor who “carries” a student through an exam; in athletic sense is c.1861. In North America, the coach and student’s relationship is pretty casual in North America in that a player or athlete can switch teams, they can fire their coach, they stop training when they stop, etc. There is very little sense of loyalty. To a certain extent, this reflects where we are today in North America where respect and appreciation is often not taught nor valued. I have heard of so many times where a coach’s heart was broken because their athlete left without even a proper goodbye.
Do you give a weapon to someone that you don’t trust – you don’t. Kung Fu is a fighting art and therefore you must treat it with care. Bragging about your fighting methods and strategies will put you at a disadvantage when you need them. Secrets of Kung Fu are not obvious and are earned through blood and sweat. There are lots of superficial moves that can be taught without ever touching on the true principles. So an instructor can keep you busy without really teaching you anything. However, I can never do that because students believe that a technique can work and their one shot of survival may be dependent on that missing piece of information. I always teach as if my own life is dependent on it and therefore I will never have any regret.
Both have values and flaws. So which model should I follow? The right formula is somewhere in between. 🙂
Exercise:
Taking the pluses of two different style of relationships
– Describe your responsibility as a student
– Describe your expectations from your coach / sifu
– Do you see how martialgym help solve some of the dilemma of the instructor?