Japanese terms
- Thread starter IcemanSK
- Start date
Aiki Lee
Master of Arts
So after reading the link posted by paul and reading chris's post this is my current understand of the term soke as used in martial arts:
1. Soke is a hereditary title, therefore it is innapprpriate to refer to a first generation instructor of a new art as soke.
2. Soke titles imply there is some sort of family or family like bond where complete knowledge of the art has been passed on and kept within a tight nit community.
3. Being referred to as soke implies that one is the only legitimate source of information on the art one is soke of.
4. A soke preserves a tradition rather than establishes a new one.
Am I even close?
1. Soke is a hereditary title, therefore it is innapprpriate to refer to a first generation instructor of a new art as soke.
2. Soke titles imply there is some sort of family or family like bond where complete knowledge of the art has been passed on and kept within a tight nit community.
3. Being referred to as soke implies that one is the only legitimate source of information on the art one is soke of.
4. A soke preserves a tradition rather than establishes a new one.
Am I even close?
Only sort of correct, due to the fact that the Japanese language is context driven, and trying to assign exact definitions to Japanese words is asking for a headache. 
I'll try and explain a little as I understand it ...
#1 is usually true, but I have heard of menkyo kaiden that have started their own branches of a school referred to as soke, or gosoke. Not much, but I have heard it in certain contexts.
#2 is almost always true, but is not necessarily tied to any specific knowledge.
#3 is sometimes true, but also sometimes not. Soke implies that one is the ultimate authority in charge of what happens within the ryu. In many instances, the soke of a koryu is the hereditary head, not necessarily the one with the most knowledge. Take the case of the Tenshinsho-den Katori Shinto ryu. Iizasa Yoshisada is the 20th soke of the school, but Otake Risuke is the head instructor with all of the knowledge.
#4 is almost always true.
I'll try and explain a little as I understand it ...#1 is usually true, but I have heard of menkyo kaiden that have started their own branches of a school referred to as soke, or gosoke. Not much, but I have heard it in certain contexts.
#2 is almost always true, but is not necessarily tied to any specific knowledge.
#3 is sometimes true, but also sometimes not. Soke implies that one is the ultimate authority in charge of what happens within the ryu. In many instances, the soke of a koryu is the hereditary head, not necessarily the one with the most knowledge. Take the case of the Tenshinsho-den Katori Shinto ryu. Iizasa Yoshisada is the 20th soke of the school, but Otake Risuke is the head instructor with all of the knowledge.
#4 is almost always true.
I have usually heard the terms Kancho (director) or Kaicho (chairman) used in conjunction with the head of an umbrella organization rather than a school. The most common term that I've heard that equates to chief instructor would be Shihan or Hanshi.
Last edited:
Aiki Lee
Master of Arts
Being the dense individual that I am, from what I get from this discussion and the links provided, is that soke is rather a difficult term to define.
Doesn't this mean that technically a non japanese martial artist could make up his own art and be called a soke even if it seems silly? It seems wrong to do this, but the reason why doesn't seem to be very apparent to me.
I'm not advocating this be done, but I can't see clearly why it doesn't make sense if someone really wanted to use the term.
Doesn't this mean that technically a non japanese martial artist could make up his own art and be called a soke even if it seems silly? It seems wrong to do this, but the reason why doesn't seem to be very apparent to me.
I'm not advocating this be done, but I can't see clearly why it doesn't make sense if someone really wanted to use the term.
Last edited:
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
No.
Okay, that may not answer much. Let's see if I can explain....
Soke, as a term, is, as you say, rather difficult to pin down. Like many such things, it is often easier to look at what it isn't, rather than what it is. And one thing it isn't is an English/Western term. Another thing it isn't is self-appointed. Thirdly, it isn't applied to systems without a sense of heritage and history. So a Westerner, making up their own system in the West, and appointing themselves as "soke"? Nup, all that shows is a desperate lack of understanding of the term. If it's a Western art, then the founder should have a Western title, really. As mentioned in our organisation, our Chief Instructor is just that, our Chief Instructor (oh, and Paul? Agreed that those are possibly better literal translations, but looking at the position itself, Kancho is probably a better term. Shihan and Hanshi would be the senior instructors in the organisation, although I can't see us using those titles, honestly... wonder what I'd be, though... hmm).
Back to your list of possibilities:
1-The title of Soke can be applied to a founder, but typically by later generations.
2-Menkyo Kaiden implies full transmission, Sokeship is more about ownership of the system. In a number of systems it is passed along hereditary lines (Takenouchi Ryu, Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu, Sekiguchi Ryu), in others it isn't (Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, Morishige Ryu, Yagyu Shingan Ryu).
3-See Paul's answer here. Once more, though, Soke is ownership of the Ryu, so while not being the only source of the information, they are considered the source of authority for the Ryu.
4-Again, typically yep. Although there can be new traditions established who use the term Soke legitimately, such as Meifu Shinkage Ryu Shurikenjutsu, currently in it's second generation.
Okay, that may not answer much. Let's see if I can explain....
Soke, as a term, is, as you say, rather difficult to pin down. Like many such things, it is often easier to look at what it isn't, rather than what it is. And one thing it isn't is an English/Western term. Another thing it isn't is self-appointed. Thirdly, it isn't applied to systems without a sense of heritage and history. So a Westerner, making up their own system in the West, and appointing themselves as "soke"? Nup, all that shows is a desperate lack of understanding of the term. If it's a Western art, then the founder should have a Western title, really. As mentioned in our organisation, our Chief Instructor is just that, our Chief Instructor (oh, and Paul? Agreed that those are possibly better literal translations, but looking at the position itself, Kancho is probably a better term. Shihan and Hanshi would be the senior instructors in the organisation, although I can't see us using those titles, honestly... wonder what I'd be, though... hmm).
Back to your list of possibilities:
1-The title of Soke can be applied to a founder, but typically by later generations.
2-Menkyo Kaiden implies full transmission, Sokeship is more about ownership of the system. In a number of systems it is passed along hereditary lines (Takenouchi Ryu, Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu, Sekiguchi Ryu), in others it isn't (Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, Morishige Ryu, Yagyu Shingan Ryu).
3-See Paul's answer here. Once more, though, Soke is ownership of the Ryu, so while not being the only source of the information, they are considered the source of authority for the Ryu.
4-Again, typically yep. Although there can be new traditions established who use the term Soke legitimately, such as Meifu Shinkage Ryu Shurikenjutsu, currently in it's second generation.
Aiki Lee
Master of Arts
Thanks, this has been most helpful and I think I have a better understanding of what a soke is and more importantly what a soke is not.
Similar threads
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
Aging, health issues and Martial Arts. - Martial Journal- Latest: Kung Fu Wang
-
-
