is lineage really that important in MA?

[Phoenix44]

I think lineage is interesting, but not necessarily important.

For example, let's say you're studing a particular Japanese martial art, and that art dates back maybe 2000 years. There's a lot of secrecy surrounding the art, because only this family is allowed to train in this art, so it's not taught or recorded widely. Maybe there's some densho, but most of the population didn't read or write anyway. And within this family, people adjust and change the art to fit their own movement, preference, and limitations. Throw in a few wars, which destroy a lot of whatever records remain, and maybe wipe out some of the inheritors of the style. Add some roads and fast boats to mix up the peoples and culture. Then adjust the fighting style to accomodate various conditions--new weapons, horses, vehicles, weather, terrain, laws.

So now it's 2009, and you claim to be learning the REAL art from a DIRECT descendant...

I think it's important to learn from a dedicated, talented instructor with an excellent knowledge base who is him/herself continuing to learn. Lineage, tradition and history is interesting, and sure, there are some broad mechanical and philosophical differences to various styles. But to ascribe too much value and legitimacy to lineage flies in the face of reality, and I'm not even sure it reflects the spirit of the martial arts.

 

[suicide]

thats what i was thinking !

 

[blindsage]

Lineage CAN be important, and CAN be a useful indicator of certain things, but is by no means the end all be all of quality MA training.

Take Feng Zhiqiang, Chen Taiji master, for example. He was a top student of Chen Fake, the late Chen family Grandmaster. When Chen Fake died Feng was told by the family that one of Chen Fake's children, a much less experienced and less skilled individual than Feng, would now be the Grandmaster of the style and Feng would defer to and learn from him. Feng basically said no thank you and moved on.

So does this mean his Chen Taiji is now fake? Of course that's ridiculous. But knowing the history means you know that there are legitimate Chen teachers that are not necessarily directly affiliated with the Chen family. You know that Chen Fake's top students may or may not be the one's continuing the family legacy. And you know that if you study with Feng that you are studying with the direct student of an extremely highly regarded (for his fighting skills) teacher (and one of the few students that would spar with him).

Knowing lineage doesn't tell you everything, but it tells you some things that can help you know more about what you're studying, and possibly the quality of it.

Studying under one of Maurice Smith or one of his students would be much more likely to give you some useful skills than studying Larry the cab driver's White Scorpion Karate. Not necessarily, there are amazing relatively unknown people out there, but it's highly likely.

 

[Sukerkin]

What Phoenix highlighted above is why the Koryu arts are somewhat different in this regard. The lineage is proven, as is the art. For example, I study Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu iaido. How do we know that what we are learning is the 'correct' form of this sword art? Because, amongst other details, Sensei Iwata has the original papers of the school.

That's what Koryu is - an unbroken line of the school, with changes and additions (if any) documented.

It's the small but important distinction between a style having 'history' and having 'lineage'.

Is it important? Well that's a question only an individual can answer. It's important to me. I wanted to learn an authentic, classical, Japanese sword art and MJER is the second oldest extant school of such nature (Katori Shinto Ryu being the oldest).

 

[yorkshirelad]

What Phoenix highlighted above is why the Koryu arts are somewhat different in this regard. The lineage is proven, as is the art. For example, I study Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu iaido. How do we know that what we are learning is the 'correct' form of this sword art? Because, amongst other details, Sensei Iwata has the original papers of the school.

That's what Koryu is - an unbroken line of the school, with changes and additions (if any) documented.

It's the small but important distinction between a style having 'history' and having 'lineage'.

Is it important? Well that's a question only an individual can answer. It's important to me. I wanted to learn an authentic, classical, Japanese sword art and MJER is the second oldest extant school of such nature (Katori Shinto Ryu being the oldest).

Mark,
In around 1993 I was studying JuJutsu under Peter Garside in York and weight training at 'Bodyline' Gym in Leeds. There was a guy at the gym who taught Atemi JuJutsu and MJER. His name was Mark Sykes, I believe he was yondan in MJER and nidan in JuJutsu. I had next to no money and took the time to teach me at the gym for free whenever he had the chance. I did a google search for him but found nothingand he's not on Facebook. Do you know him? The MJER community in the UK can't be that big. I'd like to reconnect. If you have any info I'd appreciate it.

 

[Tames D]

In my opinion, to me, lineage is somewhat important. If someone opens up a Kaju school, I can look them up and know if they are legit or not. I would much rather take lessons from someone whos' roots can be traced then someone with questionable roots. But, like I said, just my opinion.

I agree with you in theory. But I think, in reality, that isn't always the case. I'm a good example of that. I come from a lineage that I'm very proud of and I know the system inside out, and I can execute the system inside out.
In a streetfight, can I get the job done? Yeah Baby. Can I teach your kids how to do the same thing? No ****ing way. At least not at the level that I would like to teach. I'm just not a good teacher. I don't have that "quality" that enables me to transfer information effectively.

 

[Sukerkin]

YL, I do know the name. I associate it in the same breath as Steve Watering for some reason. Let me poke about the Net and see what I can find ...

EDIT: Is this the fellow?

http://www.eikoku-roshukai.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

 

[just2kicku]

I agree with you in theory. But I think, in reality, that isn't always the case. I'm a good example of that. I come from a lineage that I'm very proud of and I know the system inside out, and I can execute the system inside out.
In a streetfight, can I get the job done? Yeah Baby. Can I teach your kids how to do the same thing? No ****ing way. At least not at the level that I would like to teach. I'm just not a good teacher. I don't have that "quality" that enables me to transfer information effectively.

I agree with this 100%. What I meant was that I can look someone up and know that he's a legit practioner, if he's teaching it, and not a say kempo guy whose friend showed him some Kaju stuff and now he claims to teach it.

Like you, I am also very proud of my lineage. When I was younger, I never really thought about it. To me it was like "so what if my dad and uncle learned under Sijo". It's a little more important to me now.

 

[celtic_crippler]

As evidenced by several posts....it depends on who you ask!

In general, I think it matters initially. When someone is trying to get an idea of what you may practice and how.

However, eventually you will show what you know. Both in communications (forums, phone calls, e-mails, face-to-face) and on the mats.

Some put a higher priority on lineage and some don't but at the end of the day what matters is how good are you really?

 

[yorkshirelad]

YL, I do know the name. I associate it in the same breath as Steve Watering for some reason. Let me poke about the Net and see what I can find ...

EDIT: Is this the fellow?

http://www.eikoku-roshukai.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

Great! Thanks Mark, you made my day.

 

[Sukerkin]

Glad to help .

 

[ap Oweyn]

Lineage is informative, but it has to be viewed with a critical eye. Just like reading a scientific research journal, you can't be satisfied with a surface analysis. You have to read between the lines.

What is lineage really? It's a statement that you trained with someone. But it doesn't say anything about the quality of your training there. Maybe you never trained very hard. But you were a student there, so that's your lineage. Without a critical eye, the class clown and the shining example both carry the same weight.

For those people who have looked into lineage, what came next? Did you call up their teacher and ask what sort of student they'd been? What sort of teacher they made? Etc.

Lineage is accountability, in some sense. If I list my lineage, I'm doing so partly for the recognition that I know what I'm doing. But hopefully, the tradeoff for that is that I then feel some sense of obligation to continue my teachers' good work.

Does that work all the time? Doubtful.

I do believe that lineage is indicative of something. But it's data, not a conclusion. Information to feed into a bigger research effort. And, at the end of the day, what the teacher can actually do and (equally important) what he can help YOU to do is as important as lineage.

I've trained with some teachers who had noteworthy lineage and some that didn't. Both setups have yielded some excellent instruction. Lineage never guaranteed anything in my experience.

Here's the last thing that makes me leery of lineage: People who know what they're doing are better able to watch a teacher and accurately evaluate what he has to offer. People who can't make that level of evaluation are stuck using more... remote types of evaluation. Lineage falls under that heading, to my mind.

Say someone is looking at a kali class. They don't know much about Filipino martial arts. What the teacher is saying about "angles of entry" and "limb destruction" and "translating from weapon to empty hand" all sounds reasonable enough. Or, worse yet, it sounds utterly awesome. But what do you know? You're just starting out.

So then there's lineage. This teacher has trained with a teacher who was certified by Dan Inosanto. And Guro Dan (a terrific teacher) was best friends and close training partners with BRUCE LEE! So in a sense, you're about to be part of Bruce Lee's lineage!!!

Does that guarantee that you've got a good teacher on your hands? No. But is it likely to get you awfully stoked about that teacher? Probably, yeah.

Gotta be more to the evaluation than that.

Alternatively (and I say this without irony), you learn by trial and error. I'd say that experience (both good and bad) have been much more instructive for me in evaluating new teachers than lineage ever has been.


Stuart

 

[Ken Morgan]

What Phoenix highlighted above is why the Koryu arts are somewhat different in this regard. The lineage is proven, as is the art. For example, I study Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu iaido. How do we know that what we are learning is the 'correct' form of this sword art? Because, amongst other details, Sensei Iwata has the original papers of the school.

That's what Koryu is - an unbroken line of the school, with changes and additions (if any) documented.

It's the small but important distinction between a style having 'history' and having 'lineage'.

Is it important? Well that's a question only an individual can answer. It's important to me. I wanted to learn an authentic, classical, Japanese sword art and MJER is the second oldest extant school of such nature (Katori Shinto Ryu being the oldest).

Sukerkin have you seen this interview with Iwata Sensei? http://ejmas.com/tin/tinart_hellsten_1002.htm

Actually I would argue that changes in Koryu are not documented. I have trained with two of the Soke of the Niten Ichi-ryū and they each taught the techniques differently, putting emphasis and leaving parts out as they seen fit. Nothing written down, Koryu by its very nature can be very fluid.

My Sensei has trained with Iwata Sensei, amongst many others, but primarily with Haruna Sensei http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~ballisti/iaido/interview-Haruna.html until his death.

Even though our lineages come from related branches, the koryu Sukerkin and I do would be somewhat different, (though in all likelihood, 95% similar).

Who’s is correct?

 

[ralphmcpherson]

Lineage is definetely important to a degree and I would not join a club without knowing who it was founded by and who they trained under. In saying that though , I know of some very good clubs over here in australia where if you studied their lineage it wouldnt be all that impressive. I think lineage is very important but its not the be all and end all and there are other factors that need to be taken into account when looking for somewhere to train.

 

[Sukerkin]

Aye, Ken, I have read that interview in years gone by. Interesting stuff indeed.

In fact there are a great many articles on the EJMAS site that I would encourage students of any art to read. Very useful and thought provoking.

 

[Ken Morgan]

Aye, Ken, I have read that interview in years gone by. Interesting stuff indeed.

In fact there are a great many articles on the EJMAS site that I would encourage students of any art to read. Very useful and thought provoking.

You know if you, or anyone else here, wants to write an article for EJMAS, I know Kim would be more then happy to post it up. Anyone? Anyone? Anyone at all? Bueller?

 

[Jenny_in_Chico]

Anyone? Anyone? Anyone at all? Bueller?

Hah hah hah!!! Awesome.