The Cult of Lineage

[Matt Irvin]

There’s something that’s been bothering me, and I just have to get it off my chest. Forgive the ranting tone.

I don’t care who your sifu is.

Really, I don’t. I don’t care who your sifu is, or what his name is. I don’t care that what you’re doing is the “original” style of such and such—especially since the only “original” stylists are the long dead founders of systems. I don’t care the least little bit about whether or not you’re the 19th generation disciple of grandmaster so and so. Your lineage doesn’t mean anything to me. And why is that?

Because it doesn’t matter.

Really. It doesn’t matter one single bit. Your lineage isn’t going to stop any punches. The only thing that matters is what YOU can do. The only thing that matters is your level of ability. My teacher has no name, as the Chinese say. Or maybe he does. What difference does it make? If you’re the 19th generation master and I’m a nobody and I put you on the ground, who’s losing out? Dan Inosanto is the number one disciple of the late Bruce Lee, and one of only a few people authorized to teach Jun Fan JKD. But does Dan Inosanto move like Bruce Lee moved? No. And I’ll bet you he doesn’t have the power Bruce Lee had. So what does that mean? I think it means that whatever level of ability Bruce Lee had, he wasn’t able to successfully pass it down. And considering most of the JKD stylists (yes, “stylists”) I’ve seen are not much more “scientific” or Daoist in nature than your average kickboxing stylist, I think my guess is a good one. Chang Dong Sheng, one of the last great masters of Chinese wrestling and internal arts in Taiwan—yet how many of the people that learned from him can really do what he could do? As Yip Man reached out to the wooden dummy, he was continuously moving, completely relaxed and flowing, and made the thing shake like an earthquake was hitting it. Modern day Wing Chun stylists can’t do that, so they bang their arms on it instead. Why?

Here is my hypothesis: As the impetus for developing functional, protect-your-life martial arts has diminished over time, the general level of ability has gone with it—not necessarily as a natural by-product, but because of the way people were “traditionally” taught. That is to say, a lot of the old style people got really good by repetition and experience: training all day, and fighting for real. Of course their level of ability would be high. But without a true understanding of what they’re doing, eventually all they pass down is form. An empty vessel. A corvette body with no engine in it. Without the first-hand assurance that their arts would work in life-or-death situations, practitioners began depending on the renowned names of their teachers to carry them forward and lend a measure of authenticity and merit to what they were doing. Living in their teachers’ shadows. This is foolishness—self-hypnosis.

I’m not suggesting that everyone go out and fight. That’s not practical, wise, or moral. However, other than fighting, there is another method that can give you a reasonable assurance of your self-defense ability, and will certainly improve your level: Research. Compare styles, compare methods. There is a danger of fundamentalism: dismissing everything that’s not from your style/teacher off the bat. There is a danger of absolute relativism: don’t, out of an interest to be politically correct, insist that everything is equally effective, because it’s not. Research physics; observe movement in athletes and animals. Read about violence, and real-life violent confrontations. Don’t buy into the hype about so-and-so’s Ultimate System That Was Taught to Delta Force. Talk to cops, bodyguards, bouncers, military men. Read books that they write. Listen to them. Listen very, very closely to those of small stature who have defeated those of greater size, because they must have real ability to do it. Observe the similarities between things, and try to figure out how they fit together—a consistent theory will allow you to pass on your ability, without the art becoming yet another encyclopedia of dysfunctional techniques. There’s a lot of information out there: see for yourself—open your eyes. Don’t lie to yourself. Don’t let others lie to you.

I’m really not pointing the finger at anyone in particular—it’s just my supreme hope that we can cut all of this “my lineage” and “my sifu” crap. It seems to me that by doing this, all you’re just embarrassing yourself to anyone outside of the cult of Chinese martial arts. Because they don’t care who your sifu is, either, especially when they’re knocking/choking you out. They don’t care if your style is more “original” or “traditional.” In fact, comparing your own ability with those that came before you, chances are you’re embarrassing your style’s ancestral pioneers by claiming them as your lineage. And why attach your identity to a classification of style? Say you open up a Holy Northern Roach Fist studio—you have lots of students, and your style is traditional and the same as it was 2000 years ago when it was founded and all that. How can anyone introduce anything new or more effective to you if you already have a pattern of doing things that is fixed in stone? I encounter this all the time—nobody wants to learn anything new. I have a student’s loyalty to my teachers, but only for as far as they can take me. I will take anything good I can get my hands on—why aren’t other people the same? Don’t they want to be good martial artists? I do! I want to explore and get good stuff from any source. It’s my art, right? Otherwise I’m just a copy machine, churning out bad copy after bad copy of a long-gone original.

At the end of the day, if you’re not doing your own style, who’s style are you doing?

[Royal Dragon]

I have to admit, I still like the lineage thing, but it's more of an extra for the "Coolness" factor.

I have done a lot of research, and I have come to the conclusion that he great masters of old had few forms. It was not until reacently that styles with 30-40 or even 100 form exsted. Back in the day a dozen was alot. If you want to "Restore" the bad copie (I love that line by the way) you really need to trim the style back down to the original sets.

People tell me that by doing that I'm eliminating advancements, but I have to admit, the 1970 Corvett has much more apeal to me than the 2002 does. It's fast, simple, easy to modify with no restrictive emission standards like thew modern "Advanced" version. It's a machine that was pure function, and little cush.

I see martial arts the same. The OLD versions of the systems were brutally effctive, and very functional. I would rather learn THAT, and come up with my own advances based on MY experiance than continually memorizing the advancements of others. At some point, you have to stop learning, and really master what you already know.


As for the lineage thing, today it really does not matter as many people capitalise on the names to the point that the knowledge is not the important thing anymore. Rather the "Appearance" of knowledge is. In the old days, lineage ment you at least knew what you had was workable, and there was little chance of wasting time with extra "Fluff" and stupid additions that are added purely to keep the main stream public from becomming board and quiting. Today, it's very different.

I know of one "Lineage" holder right now that was a life time Karate guy, then spent only two years in a Kung Fu system and was promoted to 10th degree Grand Master over a financial transaction. This guy has GREAT lineage, but his skills only represent a beginner or intermedite level (How cold they be more in the short time he studied?). At best he has memorised the forms, but has no substantial knowledge of the system. If one were to go study under him because of his "Lineage", he would be in for a sad ripoff.

[MA fanatic]

I agree and disagree with some portions of your post. First of all, the only reason leneage may be important is to determine whether or not you actually teach what you teach. Of course skill is most important. Leneage should never take presidence over skill. But, if I open a Brazilian Jiujitsu school with a black belt, people have the right to ask where that black belt came from. Hell, now adays, even if I have a purple belt, people have the right to ask who promoted me that rank? Otherwise, anyone who sees a bjj video series will decide that now he is qualified to teach. There are so many phonies around, and belts can basically be bought in martial arts stores, anyone can claim to be skilled. Most people not skilled in the martial arts wouldn't even think to ask. I knew a woman who signed up for TKD lessons and was basically learning from a TKD black belt, who later turned out to be only blue in real life and hasn't had any formal training in years. He was just making up techniques as he went along. And, most of his teachniques sucked. As for Dan Inosanto, some say his skills surpassed Bruce Lee's. But, he was never Bruce Lee. On the other hand, you're right, some arts died with their creaters, while numerouse people tried to claim the rights to the art through talk of leneage.
MA fanatic

[scotty1]

*clap clap*

Well said gentlemen. :D

There are two sides to this story, and both extremes are, well, extreme.

Some sort of authenticity to what you practice is surely good, but relying on your teachers name is lame.

[patriot]

A factory-trained technician from an authorized dealer should be able to work on your car's problem in most instances better than most gas-station garages, at least theoretically. Albeit there are always bad dealers and lineage disciples who have not completely inherited the art.

[Ryu]

"There is a danger of absolute relativism: don’t, out of an interest to be politically correct, insist that everything is equally effective, because it’s not. "

Preach on, brother!! :D

Sing it!

*clap clap*

Ryu

[guohuen]

Can I have an Amen from the choir?!
Someone's been doing their homework. Have a cookie.

[SaMantis]

Research. Compare styles, compare methods. There is a danger of fundamentalism: dismissing everything that’s not from your style/teacher off the bat. There is a danger of absolute relativism: don’t, out of an interest to be politically correct, insist that everything is equally effective, because it’s not.

That's what Bruce Lee was getting at -- find what's useful, discard what's not. One step on the road to becoming "formless," able to adapt to your opponent quickly because the trappings of a style aren't there to hold you back.

Even within a single system, different people adapt best to different methods.

[TjD]

a lot of the problem with totally ignoring lineage, is that many times part of the learning process and of becoming a better fighter is making the things your sifu work

if they are inherently flawed, you may not ever be able to make them work or understand them.

discarding things which do not work is good imho, however if a tool doesnt immediately work for you, i dont think that is a good reason to discard it. people can use this "oh it doesnt work for me" as an excuse to not put in the work towards becoming a better fighter. once you've understood how a tool works, and you realize its flawed, then its time to discard and change it.

the big question is, how do we know what we're learning will actually work, or it has an underlying principle for us to understand?

watching our sifu, or our sigung helps a lot, as well as lineage. its not entirely useless. how do i know i have a good sifu/lineage? i put the time and effort into learning and understanding what they have to teach me, and what i've learned is how to understand what they teach so i can use it to its fullest.

[Cody]

This discussion is like a breath of fresh air.

I don't know about exact numbers of forms (I tend to give credence to Royal Dragon's report, and to my own experience re learning simplified forms for mass consumption). I have seen that the basics of tedious stance and energy training are glossed over. These take precedence over the forms, and, in fact, with applications and conditioning, are really all that one Needs to develop within, and get the job of defense done. The flavor of the individual arts would still come thru. Performance of complex forms should be, imo, an advanced way of doing what one already knows.
It is frustrating for a student to do the same block over and over, knowing that something is missing, but lacking the information. The teacher shows. Why can teacher do? Yes, expert body mechanics comes into it and can serve as an answer, even pass for one. The teacher is doing something else. And that is what is missing. You can have lineage coming out your behind. If you don't know that, you're a technician. The early training (which students are often told is not what it was) leads to something. Lineage without as much rigor as is possible for each student to reach his/her potential as a human being and as a fighter is meaningless, except as a museum piece.
Maybe life has gotten more complicated with distractions that are closer than ever, but there will always be people who can either partake moderately (not even all teachers can do that) or not have much interest in them and feel hollow without the kind of training that should be offered, regardless of pedigree. The human mind and spirit, whatever is out there and within, exists with or without the lineages of yore. It would be nice to have that link. More than nice.

The essence of martial arts and of any martial art in particular is reflected in the skill of the adept. I find myself looking around and seeing a lot of movement, a lot of forms, a lot of trophy winners, and a lot of misplaced dogged devotion to that which could fade away. Lineage is a history. What is passed down can be a jewel, or part of a jewel. It can become a marble used in a child's game if the name becomes more important than passing the essence of the art to many students of good heart, including those possessing varying degrees of practical abilities, but those who can absorb the kernel.
There is a need for fully functional masters as well, ones who are as adept as those who came before, and who wish to leave a legacy of developed bodies and spirits which reflect the best of martial arts in general and of that genre represented.

Cody

[BSH]

Based on my tag line, you can tell where I fall in this debate. But let me get specific.

Lineage is only important if you want to learn authentic traditional Kung Fu. If you don't, I think that is great. Train hard and find something that works for you. Anyone can learn how to fight and defend themselves if they train hard and have some solid guidance.

If you want to learn authentic, traditional Kung Fu, you need to find some evidence that this is what you are learning. The idea of lineage is to trace the history of your system to its beginning from Grandmaster to Grandmaster. You should know that the system was taught in its entirety from Grandmaster to Grandmaster and that the title of Grandmaster was properly conferred from GM to GM.

There are many who claim a lineage, but there is a gap somewhere along the line where so and so broke off from their GM and started to train their own version. I don't see the loyalty factor existing in those cases and therefore question the authenticity.

MAIN POINT, the proof is in the results. If, at the end of the day, you are getting the results you expect, lineage is worthless.

For me, I am proud of the lineage of my art because I see amazing results from all of the students in their Kung Fu skills, their self-confidence, and most importantly, their overall happiness.

Peace to everyone.

[MightyB]

Lineage is important, as another poster stated, in identifying frauds. Plus, "those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it". At the same time, "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results".

My answer, San Shou or NHB. Study the old stuff, compete full out.

Good kung fu from a good lineage can offer insights into fighting that you or I or anybody cannot have alone. One person simply doesn't have enough experience or knowledge to be able to develop a system that is as overall inclusive as a legit kung fu style. You are in essence benefiting from generations of martial thought and philosophy. Any good teacher knows that moves are moves and it's only the philosophy behind the combat that matters. The philosophy is constantly evolving and all encompassing. Unfortunately, it's a lesson that's often lost. That's why they're so few legitimate lineages. It's the people who understood the philosophy and essence of the style who are able to pass it on. Most of the people learning will only learn moves and forms and will have no comprehension as to what it all means. One may understand, and if they combine that philosophy with the moves, they become great. Unfortunately, they may not know why they are so great and they will only transmit a series of moves. But the philosophy is hidden in the moves and someone may, through practice and study, re-discover the essence of that style. That is what Bruce Lee did. He invented nothing, he discovered nothing, his thoughts weren't original, it was all rediscovered.

Enough ranting, Heck, my theory is that if you are so concerned about discrediting the importance lineage, maybe you're learning crap. :rolleyes:

[Arhat of Fury]

Good post MI,

I have to agree with the fact that lineage means nothing on the fighting side of things. Thats why they portrayed the old days as such. Asses kicked first, then if people thought you were good they would ask who your sifu was.

What good is your lineage if you cant hold it up respectfully.

I think the only time lineage becomes important is when you are looking to retain the art in its wholeness(forms/concepts) for whatever reasons.

Anyway-good post

AOF

[David Jamieson]

If you got a degree from a university then that degree is relative to the institution.

IE: Harvard Law degree is of more value than Law degree from Brown.

same goes for Kung Fu in that sense of lineage. The lineage you come from defines the training methodology and system used to produce the results you are able to achieve should you as a student be diligent in your study and practice of these things.

If you don't have the whole system, then you don't get the degree. If you don't come from a specific ineage then you are not taught the same methods as another lineage which may or may not have the depth required to achieve the skill that you want to or that you think you may be able to.

skipping around from school to school will only gain you the beginners knowledge as there are simply not teachers who are willing to give you advanced material fresh in the door.

so, lineage is not all that unuseful at all.

True that the student will never be the teacher, but that is not to say that students have not altered the systems they were taught, not a single person on the planet earth is doing anything in it's "original" form. or at least you would be very hard pressed to find any system or method that has not been changed over time and more importantly practical experience.

also, just because someone has done something doesn't necessarily mean they are able to transmit to you how to do that same thing. to many factors pertaining to the individual will involved when it comes to fighting art.

patterns, and methods, and principles are the foundations of learning in martial arts. application is absolutely individual expression. Your style will still fit a pattern in the end, but the expression is all you, not your teacher, or your teachers teacher.

careful to not throw out the baby with the bathwater on this one.

peace

[Matt Irvin]

MA Fanatic : I agree that the preponderance of frauds in the martial arts is a problem. That is why research is so incredibly important. If you're really serious about becoming a good martial artist (rather than simply doing it as a hobby) then you must compare methods and practitioners, and not get hypnotized by your system or your teacher--that is to say, always be willing to look elsewhere. That doesn't mean jumping from thing to thing without ever learning anything, but it means a willingness to recognize something good when you see it. However, just because somebody learned BJJ from a Gracie school does not necessarily mean that they are skilled martial artists. There are so many opportunities for breakdown in the passing of skills from one person to another that the dependence on the name is a lot like the airports pre-9/11: that is to say, it's the illusion of security.

BSH : What is traditional? What's authentic? And how do you know? People throw these terms around as if they actually mean something, so let's dig into the language. Is it "traditional" and "authentic" because your teacher or your teacher's teacher learned from someone famous? Someone who was supposedly the top fighter of this or that region? How many people are out there claiming names and lineage who have little if any real ability? And what exactly is "the entirety of the system?" And how do you know? I don't see any of these old grandmasters around for me to interview. I'm not trying to be hostile, I'm just pointing out what I perceive as common flaws in common arguments. I hear "traditional" and "authentic" in every advertisement for every martial arts teacher in an identifiable style. If there were that many good martial artists around, I think the overall ability of martial artists in this country would be much, much higher than it is now.

Mighty B I will be the first to stand up and say that the old masters had a great deal of martial wisdom that should be taken into consideration. However, I also trust it a lot more when it's from a primary source, rather than a tertiary or quaternary source. It's true that many of the good fighters from way back were illiterate, so there's only so much you can hope for in that regard. But even with the oral wisdom, there's a question of whether or not a given student or practitioner REALLY understands the words that they're regurgitating. For example, in the Taiji Classics it says something to the effect of "Once one part of the body moves, the whole body moves with it." So why is it that I see hundreds upon hundreds of Taiji Quan practitioners moving their arms and legs autonomously, with little if any body movement or overall coordination? Including people who claim to teach it as a fighting art? I ask why, but I know the answer: they are lying to themselves, and to their students.

And to respond to your last point, I'm not that concerned with 'discrediting the importance of lineage." I'm concerned with encouraging honest self-evaluation and productive thinking. And blowing off steam. :)

Kung Lek I honestly don't think your comparison to a college degree is directly analogous or even relevant to what we are discussing--because those with college degrees go into vocations where they prove the value of their education time and time again, through depth of knowledge, understanding, and real-world practice. There are observable, quantifiable differences in the quality of education at Harvard versus, say, Chico State, based on the overall economic and social performance of their respective alumni. What's more, because of that observable value, there is a reputation of ability associated with certain schools that they are under national and sometimes international scrutiny to uphold--to people of all walks of life, not simply a minority percentage of special interests, as in martial arts. Not to mention the legal and bureaucratic machinery devoted to ensuring the value of various methods of accreditation in different schools.

Once again I have to ask what exactly the "whole system" is, and how anyone really knows. There are no videotapes of the old masters, as there are with past generations of expert athletic performers. There are few lengthy theoretical dissertations explaining various points in detail, as you'll find at Universities. So what is this about a "whole system"? How long does it take to learn it? Ten years? Twenty years? Thirty? I see karate and san shou practitioners fighting essentially the same way after five or ten years of training as others do after one or two years, with the main differences being in their timing and stamina, not in their technical methods or tactics. So have they really learned anything? Admittedly, competition methods are extremely limited and have little relationship to actual fighting, but considering the fact that most people don't fight and have no solid theoretical basis for their practice, it's my best "laboratory" example.

Again, I have never advocated skipping around from school to school. That suggests impatience and a short attention span. What I am advocating is research: logical evaluation and comparison. The problem with a "style" is that if you see a method that is good from another source, then you're more or less forbidden by what is commonly thought of as "traditional" and "authentic" (there are those pesky words again) from utilizing it. That discourages what I think are the most important components of gaining knowledge: research and comparative selection.

Royal Dragon : That's what I like to hear. Honesty. "Coolness" factor is undeniable in knowing someone like "Invincible Yang" is your school ancestor, so to speak.

I have other disagreements with the way I have seen people training and practicing that I believe to be out of place on this forum because certain points must be physically demonstrable. What I'm focusing on here is what I think of as a somewhat psychologically dysfunctional philosophical matter--the cult of lineage, as in the title of the thread. It's an issue to me because I see a lot of people with not a lot of ability hiding behind styles' and teachers' names, claiming to teach self-defense and potentially putting people into a position where they will get hurt. That is unacceptable, and immoral. So if you truly believe that lineage is of utmost importance, I just hope for the sake of you or your future students that you have the skills to back up your talk. And if you refuse to shine the light of comparative evaluation on what you are practicing, you will never know.

[Ryu]

I have a Phase 1 instructorship in JKD from Paul Vunak that's probably not good anymore.... :( (But even if it's not, I still got it muahaha BAD move, Paul! ;) jk...)

I should move up to full instructor. That'll keep my lineage good! :D



;)

Ryu

[David Jamieson]

Matt-

I would think the allowance to nvestigate other styles would be up to the practitioner and not the teacher.

A teacher can only take you so far, the "doing" comes from the individual.

The university degree analogy fits in context to the lineage question in many ways. Who is to say that a martial arts student doesn't apply what has been learned in their day to day? what of LEOs or soldiers who train in traditional martial arts.

What is the "whole" system. Once again, that depends entirely on the offerings of the style.

Granted, there will come a time in every students path that they will question the validity and applicability of what they have been practicing. This is absolutely essential to the learning path. otherwise, it would just fall into the category of faith.

Faith as many of us know is useless in an altercation and you have got to have the skills to make it or not in real life, in any field of endeavour.

"Kungfu" is holistic and pertains to much beyond the martial aspects of the offerings. How do you deal with the rest of the world, what are your coping strategies, do you get angry and go off or do you listen and I mean really listen to a person who is mad at you? Kungfu and it's practice is a journey of investigation and discovery about many of the things that we refuse to see in ourselves. If we fail to acknowledge our weakness and recognize it for what it is then we fail to get past them.

To find a teacher who can impart enough to you to truly begin your self discovery is to make a rare find indeed. I say "rare" because there are many teachers who can provide this but few students willing to look at their failings. Even worse, to look at the failings all around them and to attempt to try and find a way to right them without compromising their beliefs and dignity that each of us has a right to.

Traditional and authentic ways of transmitting Kungfu work. If they didn't we wouldn't have so many great styles still around.

Often, that which is said to be "new" and "innovative" has been done before.

Many of us do not wish to shovel all the snow to get to the cabin, so we reject the hard path and instead start looking for the quick answers.

There is much of great value in that which is old. there is much in what is new that is in fact old and just newly discovered and pointed at like some "great" thing. The old men will laugh at this :D

I'm just short of forty and I find many of these so called new methods quite laughable. They are not new, nor are they evolutionary or advanced thinking. Often they are a stolen mish mash put together in a new package.

Hard work and diligent practice are the only things that are going to bring Kungfu to ones life.

peace

[Matt Irvin]

"A teacher can only take you so far, the "doing" comes from the individual..."Kungfu" is holistic and pertains to much beyond the martial aspects of the offerings...To find a teacher who can impart enough to you to truly begin your self discovery is to make a rare find indeed...Often, that which is said to be "new" and "innovative" has been done before...There is much of great value in that which is old. there is much in what is new that is in fact old and just newly discovered and pointed at like some "great" thing...Hard work and diligent practice are the only things that are going to bring Kungfu to ones life."

I absolutely agree 100% with every single one of those statements. And if your comment about things claiming to be "evolutionary" was a snipe at my site or what I do, we can talk about that in private, but the fact of the matter is that "evolution" is the Eight Trigrams theory. Eight Trigrams doesn't mean anything to a non-chinese (and doesn't mean much to a non-philosopher who is chinese) so it's necessary to convey the the essence of the concept, which is evolution. My teachers don't claim to be doing anything new, and neither do I.

However, a couple of points: First, regarding LEOs, soldiers, and military--many of them don't train in anything like the so-called traditional martial arts. For one thing, they don't have time for it. They need simple things that can be learned quickly and will be relatively effective. And they live or die by experience. I'm sure there are plenty of cops/soldiers who train traditionally on the side, but I doubt you'll hear much about cops/soldiers who died because their techniques didn't work, because how could you? Who could say? So that hardly proves the value of traditional styles. Also, I would say that cops/soldiers tend to be stronger/bigger/more in shape than your average person, so who's to say their technical ability is what keeps them alive? The university analogy is still invalid because of the lack of provable results.

Secondly: "Traditional and authentic ways of transmitting Kungfu work. If they didn't we wouldn't have so many great styles still around."

I don't agree with either point. First of all, a "style" is only as "great" as the person doing it. Second of all, I've seen a lot of arts and a lot of practitioners and done a lot of research, and it's my opinion that the general level of ability is not very high. If the transmission methods worked so well, once again, the ability level would be much higher. I refuse to believe that the average shaolin practitioner circa 1850 was as sloppy, lacking in holistic movement, and weak in power generation as the average modern martial arts student. Once again, it was a more dangerous time, and I think that experience and endless repetition were more responsible for transmitting ability than actual understanding or training methods. It's true that "modern" methods (which seems to me to almost always mean muay thai and BJJ for some reason) are not always better than the old ways, but to simply avoid modern training methods and theoretical understanding of physics is to foolishly lock yourself into the past. Don't you think the great warriors would use any methods at their disposal to continue to improve? Why are we so different?

I believe that old abilities and skill levels can be rediscovered by looking at them through the lense of modern physics. This offers no "shortcuts," but rather efficient ways of training based on understanding. There's a story I heard once that goes something like this: There was a man who had a pet monkey, (work with me here.) He left the monkey in the car to go to the store, and left the keys in the ignition. The monkey got bored and took a crap in the back seat, then smeared it on the window. He bounced around in the car, jumped in the front seat, honked the horn, turned the windshield wipers on, punched the glove compartment, and generally created chaos. In the midst of this he--by pure chance--turned the keys in the ignition, and the radio came on. The monkey liked the music, and the next time he was left alone in the car, he did the whole routine over again. It worked, and he got music again, so he went and screeched to all his monkey friends how they could do the same thing. This method became monkey law, passed down for generations. Of course it resulted in a lot of messy cars.

The point of the story, of course, is that if the monkey had realized that all he had to do was turn the keys... would that be a shortcut?

And, I say once again, you're throwing these terms around and not addressing what exactly "traditional" and "authentic" are. "Authentic" in particular has the air of meaningless elitism to me, so I'm anxious for someone to give me an explanation of it that doesn't come off as cultish.

[Gold Horse Dragon]

My sifu taught me three things about lineage: first, the students appreciation of it demonstrates respect and honor for all ancestors (sifu) who took the time and effort to pass on the art your sifu has taught you so you may have it today. 2. The person(s) who inherit the art have earned it and will be able to transmit the whole art and 3. to inherit the art and pass it on the person must demonstrate complete understanding of the art, have integrity and be able to apply (self-defense) the art at a high level. But to think you are the cats meow just because you are in a kwoon that has lineage and that this alone will make you skilled is foolish indeed and could be down right dangerous on the street.

GHD

[MightyB]

I think that this thread is a good demonstration of one of the primary problems facing CMA today-- fraud and deception. Since there is no governing body or unified set of rules to ascertain a person's legitimacy, people often refer to lineage. The problem is that there are a lot of people who claim a certain lineage who are not qualified to do so.

To be legitimate takes a couple of things. First, you have to be dedicated. Second, you have to be skilled and display an abundance of natural talent and athletisism. Third, you have to be invited by a legitimate Sifu. Fourth, Live it, love it, promote it, and most important, prove it. Fifth, finish the darn program, with the dedication of an ancient master monk it took 10 years, so how long do you think a twice-a-week wannabe warrior should spend-- probably more than 10 years. :eek:

-- There's an awful lot of so called "closed door" programs around, but, if you can buy your way into one, then it's not truly a closed door.

One thing that I've found in my 9+ years of recreational Kung Fu is that the real masters all know who you are and who your Sifu is. They know dude. I've gone to a couple of the big events, if you're legit, they know. You can't buy it, you can't BS it. Heck, most of the real CMA masters in America came from Hong Kong. They didn't have the lawyers to back them up, only kung fu. They all know each other and each other's reputation. Lineage does carry weight in that community. But that's why you have to be invited. It's not bought because it's that community that grants you legitimacy, not just your Sifu in your little school. With that legitimacy, you can continue the lineage.

Rant over

[HuangKaiVun]

Don't post this thread on the Wing Chun lineage forum.

You'll anger too many of the lineage worshipers there.

[BSH]

Matt, you seemed to have missed my point. Authentic lineage is important to ME because it tells ME what my Art is based on and where it came from.

The proof is in the results. I am 100% sure in the authenticity of my art's lineage because of the results I am getting. Nothing more, nothing less.

The reason people claim a lineage is because it defines their art. It tells you where it came from and what you can hope to learn and what sets it apart from everything else.

Heck, if it isn't important to you, go buy a video or take an MMA that cares only about fighting. That's not what I want. I want the whole package.

I want fighting ability.
I want speed.
I want herblore.
I want Chi Kung.
I want personal health.
I want the funky esoteric stuff that most people don't believe in.
I want the ability to help others.
I want happiness.
I want enlightenment.
I want nothing.

I am on my path and my Kung Fu is a part of that path. It is the best for ME and the lineage is what defines it for ME.

How do I know it is authentic. I have faith. That faith is confirmed each day as I learn more. Do I want others to learn my art because of its lineage? No. I want others to learn my art because it is great for me and I therefore think it will be great for others. I want to help others follow their path.

Man, I just ranted. Sorry. In short, it's all about ME and it's all about everyone. Does that make sense?

[guohuen]

Good answer!

[Merryprankster]

Lineage is only worth a **** if the community at large maintains the standard.

Case in point: We recently had an unranked person claim to be teaching brazilian jiujitsu AND that he had a 3rd degree black belt. The fellow was certified by the "American Jiujitsu federation," which means exactly sod all--it's one of those pay the fee get the certificate.

Guess what? The BJJ community found out and the response was collective outrage. Challenges poured forth. People began planning road trips to visit this guy. I was on the verge of going myself to find out what was up, since it wasn't that far away. He changed his website and ultimately took all the stuff down. The culture of the challenge is alive and well in BJJ, and quite frankly, thanks to the spirit of competition and it's ties to MMA, I don't think that will ever change. It doesn't mean we'll be immune to fraud, but it does mean that access to good instruction will be easy, open and maintained. Nobody ever claims mastery at wrestling if they aren't because they'll get called out and they KNOW IT. Same with BJJ, boxing, MT, etc.

The death of the challenge culture--the willingness of the CMA community to allow people to run around teaching garbage hurt the credibility.

From the outside looking in--take it or leave it.

[KC Elbows]

Merry, hate to disagree with you on that, but there's nothing to stop this guy from changing his website, but still telling prospective students that he's a third degree in bjj. And once there's a hundred guys doing this, there won't be enough qualified bjj people with enough time and money to travel all over the country challenging all these folk. There's absolutely nothing to stop that from happening, challenges or no, and for every one person with a website making false bjj claims, there could be five doing it by word of mouth. It's a foregone conclusion that it will happen. Eventually, there's nothing to keep a bjj instructor from just showing techniques like many martial arts schools, and not rolling in the sparring sense. Then the students would just be learning techniques, and not live usage. Maybe they could even learn flows. That would seem like advanced stuff, and they could feel real tough. Maybe they could call them forms. I know it's a crazy concept/model for a martial arts school, but I have this weird feeling that it might make money.;) :D

When I signed on for kung fu, I did not become the kung fu police. I am not paid to travel the country kicking the butts of fakes. I cannot afford to do it on my own. Most people can't. I am busy debunking the fakes who I've directly dealt with. I don't have time for the others without giving up training and having a family life. When you've got twenty mcbjj schools to deal with, you'll understand. The first time I suggested the idea of a mcbjj school, I was sort of laughed at. I've heard of three now. It sucks, but that's life.

Wait until the first generation of students taught entirely at mcbjj schools are awarded teachers certificates/black belts. Then you'll loose all quality control over the process except at your own school. Sad but true.

[BSH]

Merry:

I wish we could still deal with imposters via challenge or destruction. It would get rid of the *(&^ that is out there.

Sadly, any McBJJ or McDojo out there has a legal right to exist. These new "masters" just refuse your challenge because they have nothing to gain by it. If you force it, you will get charged with assault. If you continue to push for a challenge, you'll get charged with harrassment. The traditional Kung Fu schools have been dealing with this for years.

That's why it is so hard to find authentic schools out there of any kind. The haystack keeps growing and we keep losing the real needles.

[David Jamieson]

matt-

no personal snipes about your site. I haven't visited it yet. Just that I have heard the term "evolution" in context to martial arts so much in the last 10 years...well, it gets to grind on you after a while when you come to realize that very old systems developed long before I walked the earth work very well and are transmitted in the same way that they have been transmitted for a long, long time.

my sifu has instilled the hard work = success ethic that is 100% essential to achieving Kungfu in martial arts. I am still not a master of anything and I work diligently with what has been given to me.

I discard nothing and attempt to understand it as I progress with it. There are some unusual techniques that I may never fully comprehend, but there are also core techs which i favour that I am able to apply readily should I find myself in the regretful situation of having to.

what works for you may be a load of nothing for me. what works for me, may not work for others. the shaolin knew this ages ago and developed myriad methods of training to fight and applying the fighting techs that were trained. all different types of bodies, personalities, you name it. 1500 years of development outweighs just about anything in the martial arts world as far as I can see. There simply isn't anything better. :D

now, if levitation and fire from the fingers is involved, i might be interested in that :D

peace

[guohuen]

I think that happened a long time ago in most schools. Taking karate and TKD as an example, thirty years ago the average brown belt would hand most black belts today their arse. Grading on a curve is a bad thing. The twelve year old black belt that can break a brick or a pine board is still going to be beaten by a large adult. In my observation the average eight dan today has less skill than a fifth dan did 25/30 years ago. It's the politics of money. In the long run if you do what you need to do and don't worry about the state of the art at large you will be honoring the idea of lineage and progressing.
This is why I'm glad there are no real rankings and governing organizations in CMA. CMA in the states seems to be getting better as a direct result of immigration. In Canada even more so. Up until recently most of the supposed CMA I have encountered has been bad Kempo gussied up with stupid flowery movements that have no real application. Real Kempo would be better.
The weird part is that this is happening at a time when atheletes are on the whole better than they have ever been.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by KC Elbows
Merry, hate to disagree with you on that, but there's nothing to stop this guy from changing his website, but still telling prospective students that he's a third degree in bjj. And once there's a hundred guys doing this, there won't be enough qualified bjj people with enough time and money to travel all over the country challenging all these folk. There's absolutely nothing to stop that from happening, challenges or no, and for every one person with a website making false bjj claims, there could be five doing it by word of mouth. It's a foregone conclusion that it will happen. Eventually, there's nothing to keep a bjj instructor from just showing techniques like many martial arts schools, and not rolling in the sparring sense. Then the students would just be learning techniques, and not live usage. Maybe they could even learn flows. That would seem like advanced stuff, and they could feel real tough. Maybe they could call them forms. I know it's a crazy concept/model for a martial arts school, but I have this weird feeling that it might make money.;) :D

When I signed on for kung fu, I did not become the kung fu police. I am not paid to travel the country kicking the butts of fakes. I cannot afford to do it on my own. Most people can't. I am busy debunking the fakes who I've directly dealt with. I don't have time for the others without giving up training and having a family life. When you've got twenty mcbjj schools to deal with, you'll understand. The first time I suggested the idea of a mcbjj school, I was sort of laughed at. I've heard of three now. It sucks, but that's life.

Wait until the first generation of students taught entirely at mcbjj schools are awarded teachers certificates/black belts. Then you'll loose all quality control over the process except at your own school. Sad but true.

Actually, I agree with merry, just due to the nature of the average bjj/mma guy I know. they are very humble and respectful, but as soon as you start sounding cocky, they WILL call you out. plain and simple. Also, it's usually pretty well known when someone gets a legit promotion to black belt level, who certified them and where they teach. As for what you said about flows, we actually do do those. you may work a series of techniques - an attack, what to do if the opponent counters, etc. we drill this repetitively. then we roll, where we get to work what we drilled. If you don't roll, it will definitely be apparent, especially if you compete. It's likely that ALL of the frauds won't be found out, but it will be a long time before that gets out of control. A fraud MMA guy was "busted" in my city - he no longer teaches, at least not as far as I know. If he does, he's teaching privately and his students aren't competing.

[Matt Irvin]

Seems I know what buttons to push around here. :)

BSH: When did I say that all I was interested in is fighting? You assume that because I've expressed no interest in esoterica and a great deal of interest in speaking out against psychological dysfunction that what I study has nothing else to offer? An ignorant assumption. You think all I care about is fighting? I'm a freaking hemophiliac. You won't see me out on the streets throwing down. It's interesting that you assume MMA is about "fighting." What kind of fighting? Isn't chinese martial arts about fighting? Is it better because so many people talk so much garbage about "Qi"? FYI, I'm not interested in studying MMA because it is not reality, it is extremely limited in both technical application and thought process, and those competitions endorse a spirit of competition through beating the crap out of each other that I feel is primitive and juvenile. All you have to do is watch one competition and see the women announcing the different rounds to see that it's misogynistic as well.

Kung Lek: There seems to be an assumption ingrained in your arguments that the "1500 years of development" in CMA has reached some kind of cumulative point in the modern day--as well as an assumption that methods now are the same as they were, that what is "traditional" is the same as it was. Quite frankly, I find that to be dubious. I think it's far more likely that throughout the development of martial arts, there have been periods where the general level of ability has fluctuated according to historical circumstance. During the warring feudal periods of Japan, for example, the fighting abilities of the samurai by all accounts reached an exceptional level. Once tumultuous periods come to an end, the fighting methods are formalized, ritualized, and become "traditional" cultural arts, rather than practical fighting arts. I think that modern CMA are at a very low ability level, relative to other periods. This has a number of mitigating causes--the secretiveness of CMA instructors, periods of relative peace, and of course the oppressive communist regime. Once again, I think the key to raising the level of ability is not clinging to lineages, but a process of comparison, evaluation, and theoretical formulation.

And STILL nobody is jumping on board to tell me just what the heck "authentic" is supposed to mean in context of martial arts. Let me ask you something: do you speak authentic english? What exactly does that mean? Did people 1000 years ago speak authentic english? Was it the same? What are you talking about?

[Merryprankster]

KC,

You read a little too much into my post.

Fraud can and will happen, but like Judo, Boxing, Wrestling, we will always, always know what clubs produce fighters, locally, nationally, and globally.

Look at San Shou--lkfmdc just pointed out that the big 6 are well known and nobody who WASN'T from one of those clubs had won a major event in years.

In an MA with a strong sportive component, it's put up or shut up. It has a serious chilling effect on unsubstantiated claims.

[David Jamieson]

Martial arts are as scattered as seeds in wind after 1500 years of developemnt. Many foundations remain, the top techniques change and of course the essence has been manipulated over time to improve it.

CMA is not and has never been about "clinging to lineage".
Those who think it is don't get it.

Also, many CMA are way more than about fighting. Again, they are holistic arts to bring health, harmony, mental balance and physical skill to the practitioner.

CMA does not exclude the sportive, it embraces it in many ways.

Ultimately, it is the generation that holds the arts now that will determine what the next generation will bring to them.

Why bash cma? that's what I'm asking. there aren't any other martial arts out there that have more in their sylabus to offer. there are many teachers who are great, but you have to have a great art to give to be really great.

I've been doing martial arts since I was 9 yrs old. I've done quite a few things and in the last 8 years I have been learning and practicing exclusively Chinese martial arts. My perspective is that cma has the most to offer, the most to learn and the most to employ out of all the things I have tasted. Including western boxing, wrestling, judo, okinawan karate, tae kwon do, and fencing. These latter things all seem to only have bits and pieces of the larger arts that are cma.

authentic is a definition, if it exists, then it's "authentic".

peace

[KC Elbows]

Seven,

Actually, I was aware of the existence of such flows. I was just pointing out the methodology of mcdojoism, and how there's very little, aside from competition and challenges, to prevent it from happening with bjj. And I'm not aware of a single kung fu mcdojo that takes challenges or competes, whereas most kung fu schools I know of do one or the other, so I really don't see those elements as being a means of prevention for all schools.

All I'm saying is that it's a foregone conclusion, it's already started, and there's no stopping it at this point. I was also making a point to merry's comment:

"The death of the challenge culture--the willingness of the CMA community to allow people to run around teaching garbage hurt the credibility.

From the outside looking in--take it or leave it."

because I felt that I was on the outside looking in at the dynamic he works under, which is an art young enough to be free of a lot of mcdojos. I felt that he underestimated the desire of people to feel tough without a potential loss of ego, or the desire of people to make a living no matter what it takes, or the total incapability of a core group of fighters to deal with the inevitable rush of mcdojos and the 'teachers' who come from them generation after generation. After all, it only takes one mcdojo to turn out fifteen+ unqualified teachers, and there is no legal case for teaching without a black belt. The challenge culture is insufficient to deal with the problem, and comes with problems of its own(I'm not saying anything against challenges, I agree with you to a point, but, in order for all the good kung fu teachers to get rid of all the bad ones, the good ones would have to perform challenges on a level where they would assuredly go to jail). Plus, it would be pointless. I could beat up all of the chung moo quan instructors I want, I'll never see their grandmaster, and that's where the lure is that drives their business. He'll just disavow said instructors and say they weren't practicing enough. And the whole thing will go on as before, except I'll be in jail.

Woops, mixed up my response to you with my response to Merry.:)

Merry,
Just taking exception to your making me the police for kung fu. It's an impossible task, and a pointless one. You'll see in twenty years. And I do know which schools in this area can fight, and which are paper tigers. The fact will remain that it is easier to open a bad school than a good one in any martial art, genuine ranking or no, and that more good schools go bad than stay good. I'm too busy training, working, having a family, and considering whether or not I want to compete. I debunk the one art that I feel is the worst offender in my experience as a matter of public service. I find this far more effective than risking jail, but it does not and cannot stop the real world from proving that for every ten people who put out great effort, there are 90 who slack.;)

However, you are right. I took what you said too seriously. Here, let me write a 1200 word essay on it.:rolleyes: ;) :D

[Merryprankster]

KC, you have a point, but it is also an issue of scale. The UFC, Pride and some of the smaller, but still prestigious events, are televised, for real, on pay-per-view, and not on local access. The internet is also a useful tool for identifying idiots. We have the Pan-Am's, the Mundials, NAGA, and GQ as established grappling circuits--you win your division at the Pan-Am's or the Mundials, or the advanced division at NAGA or GQ, and people know. We have large, organized tournaments in place and a large, vocal fan base/group of competitors.

Again though, I think you're missing my larger point. Fraud can and will happen. The availability of good BJJ/MMA training will be like the availability of good wrestling, boxing, Judo, etc, because of the comp mindset. On KFO, there is constant ****ing and moaning about how hard it is to find good KF training. That problem will not exist in BJJ--you will always be able to find good training, and do so easily--just watch the results of the major tournaments and find out where these guys are training.

CMA's are not nearly so organized, do not have the same fan base, and in some cases actually discourage competing.

Essentially will there be a lot of crap BJJ out there? Eventually, probably yes. But it will also be VERY easy to find the good schools, just like we know what universities have good wrestling programs, or where to train if you want to be an Olympic Judo champion, or what trainers put out top boxers. Can the same thing be said of CMA's? Given what I have heard, and read on this forum, the answer is no.

Again, just because I don't think I've said it enough ;) Even with all the bad wrestling programs, bad Judo dojo's and crappy boxing coaches, it's easy to find the gems and that makes those arts more accessable--and, it makes telling the chumps from the champs much simpler.

[KC Elbows]

Of course, that's assuming that the popularity of nhb continues. However, I do see your point. Unfortunately, if there comes a time where most bjj schools are really lame, won't most competitions be too lame to televise? And what about competing federations, and lineage wars? After all, the gracies seem to have as much a cult of lineage as any chinese martial artist. Sure, some of them earned it, but it is not likely that their children will endlessly have the same ability, but it is extremely likely that they will work to maintain control of a rather lucrative martial empire. There's already a claims of them withholding black belts from those who deserve it, and those same people opening their own schools and promoting themselves to black belt, and, as the story goes, telling the Gracies that they can challenge them for the belt if they want. Now, whether that story is true or not is immaterial. It is the sort of thing going around the bjj camp, and it suggests that unity under one set of competition rules, or one set of experts, is unlikely to persist forever.

You are correct on your point. I'm just saying that there's plenty of lineage problems going around the bjj circuit. The scale you speak of now is not the scale you will always have. Especially with all these tai chi hippy kung fu dancing freaks cross training in bjj.:D

It's only a matter of time before someone comes up with an eye gouging method of bjj too powerful for competition. Then, we'll be picking on you about your embarrassing bjj brothers.:p

[sweaty_dog]

Personally I think lineage is one of MANY things that need to be taken into consideration when you join a school.

Do they produce capable fighters (or masseurs/acupuncturists etc if you are into that part)?

Can they demonstrate their skills in any way?

Can they teach you the basics of self defense in a fairly short time? (because no ten year apprenticeship will save me if I get mugged tomorrow)

Is it a place where you are welcome? I could walk into a lot of gyms that might produce good fighters, but for various reasons they would never teach me much and some students could even try to injure me.

Will it teach you what you want? If you want good health into old age and a "cultural experience" then maybe a Muay Thai school run by westerners isn't what you want, even if they produce tough, able competitors.

As far as the Gracies go, who knows what will happen, but apparently the next generation of Gracies have started competing and they are doing OK, so they will have some kind of ability for a while to come (as long as Helio is around to kick them out of bed at 5am, anyway!).
Sadly, every style that is taught for money eventually seems to be watered down, since the people that are most interested in spreading the style seem to be the last people that should be doing it. While the McDojo-er is attending marketing classes to find out how to start his next blackbelt farm, the real master is training with a few loyal students who probably won't even teach the style.

[BSH]

Matt:

You title this thread, "The Cult of lineage." Yes, you pressed my buttons. Button pushing is generally the mark of a troll. I assume you don't mean to get that label. I have answered your question as to why authentic lineage is important. I thought I answered your question about what authentic means.

To clarify, authentic means the ability to get real results that meet the expectation of the student as created by the art. To cite an example, my art claims a lineage. I find that lineage and the teaching to be "authentic" because it has been giving me the results I was looking for and expecting. These are the results I discussed with my current Sifu before I began training. Authentic means being able to show that you can provide the results that you promise. To me, my results have been authenticated by my experiences.

My art can claim to be authentic, but without results, it means nothing. Authenticity is defined by the results. For some, other people's results are enough. For others, personal results are the only thing that can authenticate.

Is that sufficient?

[KC Elbows]

BSH,
I can see Matt's point. Some schools do take part in a 'cult of lineage'. Usually a false lineage, but I have seen practitioners of schools who have genuine lineage behave in the same uncritical way, and I think it does little for an art.

Just because the title is 'cult of lineage' does not mean your lineage is cultish. And just because yours may not be cultish does not mean there aren't some who are.

As for authenticity, to claim something is authentic has little to do with results. To claim something is authentic suggests that it has been passed down as it once was, which requires more historical knowledge than martial to verify. Since it is almost impossible to verify, since there is no visual record more precise than line drawings of static postures from forms, the authenticity of kung fu as it has been handed down to us is unverifiable.

Now, the usefulness, we can test. But the authenticity? All we can say is "It has the same static postures", which is far from it being the same. And in many cases, we cannot even do that.

Our only other source of info is from the people carrying on the traditions. Seeing as how no two practitioners do form in exactly the same way, this is not necessarily a reliable record of what was done ten generations ago. We only have a record of what one teacher remembers about the teacher before, and that is interpreted in the younger teacher's form, along with that younger teacher's revelations and strengths and weaknesses within that form. This is artistic interpretation, and while we can draw some conclusions from this, we cannot say anything certain about practitioners ten generations ago from this fact.

Now, people 100 years from now might be able to watch footage of us, but we cannot of the founders of various styles. We can only judge from what is known in a historical sense. In that sense, authenticity can only be established in very broad ways, and sometimes not at all in the early years.

Example:
The style I practice was supposedly taught to a doctor by an uncle of the emperor's bodyguards in return for a treatment that uncle had received. Then it was passed on through that doctor's family until, earlier this century, none of the family members were interested in kung fu, and so the art was taught outside of the family to a man who taught the man who taught the man who teaches me.

Now, I cannot verify most of that in a historical sense. It's even written into the history, how it was called Secret Fist for a time and such. Until this century when it was taught outside of the family, I cannot with any historical reliability refer to in any more than mythical terms, even though it might be true. However, I know that in some people's usage, I could say I'm part of a 150 year old lineage. However, that's kind of cheeky, as most of it is unverifiable, just like parts of most styles more than twenty years old.

Just because we can name who has been part of our school for many years does not mean that what they did in many ways resembles what we do now. It might, but there are likely some stylistic differences. Yet, at the same time, we get results. Which is more important to me than authenticity.

[Matt Irvin]

Thank you, KC Elbows, for saying what I was going to: "Just because the title is 'cult of lineage' does not mean your lineage is cultish. And just because yours may not be cultish does not mean there aren't some who are."

BSH: I reject your implication that I am in any way trolling, on two points: One, I have not purposely set out to offend anyone--I believe my evaluations to be fair, accurate, and free from open hostility. Two, I have not even in the most remote way offered any kind of personal attacks on anyone who has responded with a different opinion, despite the fact that there have been several people using language that suggests subtle person attacks and undermining on myself. If you are offended by my definition of lineage obsession as being somewhat cultish in nature, perhaps I should explore what I mean by "cultish."

Here is an exerpt on mind-control from the cult resource site Freedom of Mind (http://www.freedomofmind.com):

"My mind control model outlines many key elements that need to be controlled: Behavior, Information, Thoughts and Emotions (B.I.T.E). If these four components can be controlled, then an individual's identity can be systematically manipulated and changed. Destructive mind control takes the "locus of control" away from an individual. The person is systematically deceived about the beliefs and practices of the person (or group) and manipulated throughout the recruitment process- unable to make informed choices and exert independent judgment. The person's identity is profoundly influenced through a set of social influence techniques and a "new identity" is created- programmed to be dependent on the leader or group ideology. The person can't think for him or herself, but believes otherwise."

It seems to me that the idea of one's identity being dependent "on the leader or group ideology" is somewhat applicable in this situation. Let me clarify that I do not believe all traditional martial arts schools to be cults. However, I do believe many of them engage in cultish behavior. Let's look at the B.I.T.E. paradigm from the quote. Many martial arts schools fit this model. For example, there exists within the field of martial arts:

1.) Limitation of action and behavior through formality and regulation--Particularly in Japanese and Chinese cultures, where it is considered inappropriate to question an elder. Regulation in competitive venues also applies here, by limiting your technical application. (B.)

2.) Manipulation of information through organization of styles--"We don't use that movement/technique in my style, we only do it this way." (I.)

3.) Control of thought through the culture of tradition--"We do it this way because it's the way it's always been done. We do it this way because my teacher told me to," etc. (T.)

4.) Emotional control through athletic performance--the desire for conquest over others and to be "the best" is not only an egotistical, self-destructive psychological state, but its endorsement by schools and competitions is reflective of emotional manipulation. (E.)

Again, let me emphasize that I am against the use of lineage as a method of avoiding explanation, evaluation, and demonstration of real skill. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with having a specific lineage, or even that there's anything wrong with being proud of it! I am simply saying that from the point of view of your own personal skill, your lineage is ultimately meaningless.

BSH, I find your definition of "authentic" to be problematic; if it means "ability to get real results that meet the expectation of the student as created by the art," then what are "real results"? How does the art create those expectations? And considering the fact that all martial arts were initially developed exclusively for combat, shouldn't that be the expectation generated for every art? If not, why? This goes back to what I was saying about general deterioration in skill level, as well as an increasing focus on sport-fighting methods--these two points undermine your definition of authenticity because they have resulted in the overall independability of evaluating combat ability based on lineage and stylistic identification.

Kung Lek, I am not "bashing" CMA altogether. I practice them! I love CMA! What I am "bashing," once again, is the use of lineage as an explanatory short-cut, and the exclusive elitism of stylistic division. I am discussing CMA specifically in this regard for a few reasons: one, this is primarily a CMA forum, and we are primarily CMA practitioners. Two, the focus on lineage and stylistic elitism, while far from exclusive to Chinese culture, are strong elements of it historically.

What is "harmony?" What is "mental balance?" There are a lot of etherial supposed benefits of martial arts that are floated around the public consciousness with the same level of understanding as the phrase "television is bad for you." And since you stated that "you have to have a great art to give to be really great," I have to ask you what exactly makes an art "great?" Is it self-defense applicability? Health? Discipline? All of the above? And even those "benefits" are not something we can all necessarily agree on. For example, in regard to health, I have strong disagreements with the common association of strenuous, high impact aerobic exercise (including martial exercise) with overall good health. I also find the topic of discipline to be problematic for a range of sociological reasons, the discussion of which is probably not appropriate to this forum. Regarding self-defense applicability, I would like to quote Mark MacYoung's No Nonsense Self Defense Site (http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/):

"Self-defense/professional use of force -- Of all focuses, this is the most limited. It serves only one purpose and that is the application of force to resolve a violent situation... We cannot stress enough that this focus is a dead end. Unless you are actively involved in a lifestyle where you are constantly in danger, soley focusing on this aspect over the long term is both paranoid and, literally, a macho fantasy. There is so much more to the martial arts and dwelling exclusively on this focus is a horrible squandering of something that can be much, much richer and deeper."

I think that is fascinating insight considering Mr. MacYoung's antipathy towards many claims in the martial arts field.

Kung Lek, I should tell you that I strongly agree with you on one point: that the CMA have the most to offer overall. That has been my discovery after 9 years of martial arts study. However, I believe that along with the myriad of benefits CMA has to offer, there is also a quagmire of B.S. accompanying those benefits that must be waded through and deconstructed in order to realize the true beauty and essence of martial arts.

[BSH]

We seem to agree more than we disagree. My quote on trolling remains the same, "If your goal is to push buttons, you will get the reputation of being a troll." Make sure your motives are apparent to others or you may be labeled. Not that it matters. Personally, I enjoy trolls.

KC was correct that lineage of any length can never be verified as authentic according to acceptable scientific methods. On that same point, the author of the works of William Shakespeare can also not be verified as authentic works of a single individual by that name.

People claim a lineage to show where their art comes from. With each generation, an art must evolve. Traditionally, the entire system is passed from Grandmaster to Grandmaster alone. No one else will receive the entire system. This is all theoritical of course, and I agree with KC that the system will change with each generation.

But the important thing about lineage is that it is closer to the original than anyone else could be. Once a non-Grandmaster breaks off from the direct lineage and starts their own system or sub-system, It then becomes a new lineage which can only be as complete as the creator of the new system/sub-system.

You are right, there is no way to scientifically authenticate this. That does not mean I cannot claim it to be authentic to my standards.

It's funny. You asked me to define authentic. When I told you it was that it was different for each person based on their expectations, you said that it was problematic because it was not consistent for all Martial Arts.

It will never be consistent both across different arts or from individual to individual. I would love to pigeon hole everything into a black and white definition, but I think that is risky.

End result, if my belief that lineage is important is different than yours, I am content with that. We are looking for different things. If you need a more concrete definition of authentic, you will not get it from me. Authentic is subjective as are most things in this world.

IMHO, people try too hard to prove something isn't possible. I prefer to open my mind to the unlimited number of possibilities that exist in the universe.

[Matt Irvin]

"Closer to the original?" In what? Form? Application? How do you know? The point of me asking these questions is to illuminate one simple fact: what you're doing is NOT original, because you are NOT the original grandmaster. There seems to be an assumption in your argument about lineage that the "entire system" is a kind of frozen entity that is passed down in an identical fashion. You claim that the art must "evolve" with each generation, but then you place importance on being "closer to the original" through lineage. Well, what is the difference between a system changing over time and it branching out into supposedly different "lineages?" This is why the notion of stylistic division is troublesome, because it creates a tendency to box things in.

Let's go back to the language analogy for a second. We speak english, which is the language of the british colonists who first came to North America. It seems to me that our language is somewhat different from british english. Does that mean we've broken off our "language lineage?" We don't have british accents, so does that mean we didn't inherit "the entire system?" Who are our grandmasters, then? British grammar teachers? Are we still original? Are they? Even british english is an amalgamation of Latin and Saxon languages, so it's not "original" in its present form. Seems its "lineage" has been severed from whatever "original" source there might have been for some time now. And yet, people still manage to communicate.

And what about dialects? Do black people speak "bad english" because they use different verb forms, conjugation, vocabulary, and accents? Why is it bad? Is it not "original?" Has it deviated too far from its "lineage?" What about creole languages? Cajun? Chicano spanglish? What grounds is there to say that these are "wrong" when the languages maintain linguistic complexity and people are still able to communicate? The fact is that any linguist will tell you that there is no such thing as a "bad" variation of a language, in dialect form. There are simply variations. Attaching qualifiers of "good" and "bad" to them is a function of social hierarchical structure--one of many false and invalid methods of claiming some degree of superiority to others.

The point of this is simple: there is nothing original, and nothing authentic. The only reason I harped on it so much is to show that people throw around these terms that essentially have no meaning, simply because it's what they've heard at their schools and from other people. I was never in need of a definition; I was seeking an analysis. I know that calling something authentic is subjective. That's the point. Because it's subjective to individual experience and historical development it has no solid basis as a means of comparison under any circumstance. That is to say, once again, that in terms of your ability in martial arts, it means nothing. That is the point I was trying to make, and nobody has yet presented a reasonable argument to suggest otherwise. Perhaps now you will understand why I seem to be, in your words, trying so hard to prove something "isn't possible."

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with respecting or acknowledging "where your art comes from." What I am saying is that the ability of your martial ancestors is not, in any way, a solid basis or claim for evaluating your own ability. If you acknowledge this fact, then it follows that placing as much importance on that lineage as many CMA practitioners do is irrational self-deception. This is why I believe the theory and function of a particular fighting method is far more important than it's specific technical methods (because these, like language, will inevitably change over time) or who is supposed to have originated it (because that person is not you, and does not necessarily have anything to do with your own personal level of ability.) Let's look at an example from the internal arts: if you acknowledge Dong Hai Chuan as the founder of Eight Trigrams Palm, and you practice that method, then technically he is the grandmaster and originator of your lineage. But so what? What do I have to gain by emphasizing that? If I don't understand the theory, it makes no difference.

You're right, we are looking for different things. For example, if your idea of "opening your mind to the unlimited possibilities of the universe" is to cling to a strict regimen of lineage, "complete systems" (which seems to almost always mean the rote memorization of countless techniques), and stylistic limitation, then we are definitely not on the same wavelength.

As for my path, I'll return once again to the language analogy to tell you a bit about it. There are and have been countless distinct languages and variations of them. These differences have depended on a range of evolutionary forces, including culture, historical conditions, religion, region, and--to a lesser extent--physical structure. However, the school of linguistic study suggests that there is a fundamental structure to these languages that is consistent through all variations of language.. The study of that structure creates a basis for understanding, documenting, teaching, and passing down these languages, as well as promoting cross-cultural understanding. This linguistic study and evaluation is of utmost importance in teaching, which is why speaking a language is not the sole requirement for teaching it.

If you learn a foreign language simply by being exposed to it, you may be able to communicate, but it would be difficult to teach because it would be difficult to explain the reasons for certain patterns and intricacies. You would find yourself responding to questions with answers like "I don't know," and "because everyone does it that way." That may carry you successfully through many encounters, but if there is no consistent theory, then there is no way to adapt to a changing circumstance or unfamiliar situation. In order to have a consistent theory, you have to both carefully examine and strip away the particulars of a given language, digging for an essence by paying careful attention to what languages have in common. In the language example, understanding how the human brain works is also of utmost importance--your mind is the key to everything.

In the end we may agree more than we disagree, but I believe our points of contention are of fundamental importance.

And in the end, linguistics is not for everyone. :rolleyes:

[HuangKaiVun]

Lineage never saved anybody's butt in a real fight.

Besides, anybody who strictly copies anybody else will NEVER reach his full potential.

This is a large reason why kung fu is so watered down today.

[MightyB]

"Lineage never saved anybody's butt in a real fight.
True to a point because fighting is an individual endeavor... But, good kung fu that gives a person the right tools always comes from a respected lineage.

"Besides, anybody who strictly copies anybody else will NEVER reach his full potential."
Again, true to a point. But, why waist effort rediscovering what can be learned, applied, and modified? It's like having to reinvent the wheel just to drive. It's far better and simpler to modify good kung fu to work for us for how we intend to use it. --Innovation.

"This is a large reason why kung fu is so watered down today."
I disagree. McDojo's and people imitating what they think is kung fu and calling it kung fu is the main problem. Again--> good lineage = good kung fu. ;)

[KC Elbows]

"Lineage never saved anybody's butt in a real fight.
"True to a point because fighting is an individual endeavor... But, good kung fu that gives a person the right tools always comes from a respected lineage."

I disagree. Choy Li Fut did not even have an established lineage when it went toe to toe with styles that did. That wasn't that long ago. There are identical dangers to closing our minds to possible advancements in kung fu as to opening our minds too wide to any change of our kung fu. Both involve the withering death of kung fu as an art. With one method, we will always be repainting the Mona Lisa. With another, we will be adding Starry Night to the Mona Lisa. Both would be lame art.

Of course, that's just my opinion.

[SevenStar]

"I disagree. McDojo's and people imitating what they think is kung fu and calling it kung fu is the main problem. Again--> good lineage = good kung fu"

That's exactly the problem. Some slacker half trains in a school with a good lineage. He leaves the school early and opens one of his own. He came from a good lineage, so does that naturally make him good? No, he was a slacker. His lineage can't fix that. BUT people see his lineage and say "Hey he trained under master Wun Dum Gai, so let's train with him" Then they get certified under him to teach. They come from a good lineage also, but they trained under a slacker - now they suck, and don't even know it because they have good lineage.

[Matt Irvin]

Good lineage = good kung fu????

Am I talking to myself?

[dezhen2001]

good lineage + good teacher + good student = good kung fu :)

dawood

[rogue]

IMO lineage only matters between you and your immediate instructor. Does it matter if my instructors masters master was a great fighter or great teacher? Not unless he's somehow picked up all of the life lessons of his master who picked up everything from his master and is willing to share the knowlege and can convey it to you.

[Shisio]

Good post Matt,
Here's some points for linage-

If any of us focused are whole life on Martial arts we'd be proud and would want to leave something behind. I.E. I just spent my life pretending to beat people up, I've only got a few stories of conflict- what did I accomplish?

Others with little confidence or faith in MA want to know/believe that what there hearing is worth there time and money. Then there are those who loved or admired there teachers and thus want to remeber there achievements.


So, linage usually has good foundations, when its not used for a sales pitch. But that's the prob, it almost always is, it can be tough to tell if it's for real. It becomes an overused tool- but it still has a purpose. I agree with you Matt, as well as others with contrary opinions. Sux but it sounds like you've run into alot of BS in MA.

[quiet man]

Really. It doesn’t matter one single bit. Your lineage isn’t going to stop any punches. The only thing that matters is what YOU can do. The only thing that matters is your level of ability.

I agree, that's the most important thing. Why am I with my sifu? Because he's a good fighter (he kicks my a5s), a good teacher (thanks to him, my sihings kick my a5s), and an even better person.
But lineage IS important (and yes, I'm from Wing Chun forum :D ). I can't speak for other MAs, coz I know nothing 'bout them, but WC is a family system. I respect my sifu ("father") and my sigung ("grandfather", in my case the late WSL) very much. My sifu didn't find his knowledge in the street, it had to come from somebody. And I think WC is a gift, not just something you buy for 50$ a month; a gift given to you by your sifu, who in turn received his gift from his sifu. Long tradition of passing knowledge truly is something to be proud of. Work hard and always remember your ancestors. That's lineage in my book. My sifu always asks: "Do you know who your teacher's teacher is?"


! I want to explore and get good stuff from any source.

Exploring is good; but IMHO at some point in your MA life you have to settle for something final. If I want to study WC, then I have to accept it and put my faith in it, because I may never stop searching and end up old and miserable :D . I think any MA has to be a complete system: don't add anything, don't subtract anything. MAs aren't shopping malls: Yeah, I'll take this Judo throw, that Kung Fu punch, a couple of these TKD kicks... it simply wouldn't work. If you're not satisfied with your MA, find something else, don't try to improve it by adding or removing stuff (it'll only get worse).

[Matt Irvin]

Once again, I never said there was anything wrong with respecting the masters that have come before you, i.e. your lineage. How could I not respect them? I'm not saying to just forget them.

But I refuse to "settle" for anything, and there isn't a martial arts "style" that is a "complete system." A "style" is limited by definition. However, I think you're correct in saying that accumulating different techniques from a mish mash of different styles without taking the time to really master any of them is foolish. That's why my point is to emphasize that one needs a consistent theory of physical principles that transcend styles and particular techniques, in order to reach your full potential as a martial artist. As my teacher is fond of saying, there's only really two kinds of martial arts: the soldier's art and the general's art. A soldier's art is the pursuit of limitation. The general's art is the pursuit of possibility. If you stay within just one style, you will always be a soldier.

[dezhen2001]

id rather be a good foot soldier who can do his stuff and adapt when the battle happens, than a bad general :)

dawood

[Shadow Dragon]

Lineage:

It only shows the path between the founder of the Art to you.

Good or bad lineage does not exist, those are labels assigned by the person viewing it and are based on his perception.

Personally, I don't care who my Sifu's Sifu was, as I study under my Sifu and not his teacher.

The Skill that interests me is the one that my Sifu can cultivate in me, even if my Sifu was the greatest fighter it does not mean that I will be good as well.

The past is in the past and we can learn from it, but it does not matter who did what in the past as those events have come and gone.

All founders of any Art prooved themselves without having a lineage, they might have had other lineages from which their skill sprung.

All the exploits of past Masters appear to be wrapped in mystic stuff, with many of those claimed challenges and similar not being documented and often purely invented.

Example:
Miyamoto Musashi is credited with between 20 and 70 Challenge matches.
How many really happened and ended the way they were recorded?
It does not matter.

What matters is the here and now.
Lineage, what style you study, what anybody else sez mean nothing compared to your training today and now.

Past skills and exploits don't matter either unless you can repeat them NOW.

Just a few thoughts.

[BSH]

Matt,

You seem to read too much into what I write. You take that which is simple, and make it complicated. My guess is that your life will always be complicated.

To everyone, you are correct that lineage is worthless if the end of the line sucks. In this day and age, so many people claim to have learned from so-and-so and therefore, their Kung Fu is the best.

In my opinion, a complete system of Kung Fu will only be taught to the future grandmaster. The further you get from a grandmaster, the less the instructor has to provide. For the basics, that may be fine. Your instuctor may be better at imparting knowledge and making others learn. If, however, you are interested in the more esoteric parts of Kung Fu, you might want to get closer to the source.

That is just my opinion. Trying to relate Kung Fu to linguistics does not make me want to change my opinion.

If someone's definition of Kung Fu is purely the external movements and fighting ability, lineage means nothing. Some of the best fighters have no Kung Fu skill. My opinion is that the best Kung Fu fighters from an "authentic" lineage will be the best fighters. Just my opinion.

[Shadow Dragon]

One problem I often see today is the following.

Many MA study under a known lineage holder or even the grandmaster as they thing this will increase their changes of becoming a Disciple or an in-door student.

Another common problem I see:

Many MA want to get known name into their lineage to boost their MA school image when they finally open it.

I often speak to newcomers and one of the first question is how long will it take before I can open my own kwoon, start teaching, etc.

For many today MA is a way of starting your own business and getting that pesky boss of your back.

Most appear to be studying MA not for the MA's sake anymore, but because they got some kind of agenda.
And that IMNSHO is a pity.
Just some thoughts.

[Serpent]

People that say that lineage is unimportant are people with no or crap lineage! ;)

Besides that, you have to be able to fight and demonstrate that your instructor is deserving of his lineage and you are deserving of him and the mantle he is handing down to you.

If your teacher was good and his teacher was good and you are being taught well and becoming good then you have good lineage.

What's all the discussion about?!

[dezhen2001]

good point SD...

for me lineage is just something i can use to help me learn... i learn the skill from my Sifu, less often my Sigung, and on occasion my Tai Sigung. if i didnt have this 'lineage', i wouldnt have the chance to learn from such experienced martial artists - the link is lost. Also if there was something my Sifu couldnt answer, he can fall bakc on his seniors and my Sigung, and even further back than that. To me thats why a 'lineage' is so important.

But really the understanding of the skill, and abilitly to apply it speaks for itself, no matter where you came from imo...

dawood

[omegapoint]

I understand what homey is trying to say, and he does make sense. Lineage doesn't matter sometimes. It's the old "a diploma is a diploma, as long as it's from an accredited university" argument. The thing is, how is accreditation conferred in the MAs? Is there a single governing body (or at least only a handful), that tests the "knowledge" and "validity" of claims for all MAs schools? The answer to that is of course "no". There are hundreds. Therefore, the way that a student can be sure if the MA school they are attending is legitimate is to observe and evaluate based on their experience, and research the lineage of the system in question vs. what you know about or are told by the instructor of the school in question.

Here's an hypothetical scenario: Say, "Rulio's BJJ" school opens up a mile from your crib, and you get a chance to check out some classes. The students and their techs, based on your knowledge and experience of BJJ, look pretty solid. You have visited a few school before, and although the order and emphasis of training are different, the techs and other aspects of class emphasis are quite similar. You talk to the instructor, as your interest has been piqued. You do so after class, and he explains his lineage. You find he is a Machado JJ 3rd degree BB. You are shown his certificate with Jean-Jaques Machado's signature on the bottom. You may surmise that you are at a legit school.

If the situation was reversed, and the school claimed to be "Fulio's BJJ"- i.e. the techs looked sloppy, the class bowed in and counted in japanese and practiced something that looked like rough Aikido with punches and kicks- you would start to wonder. You talk to the teacher and he claims to have learned a secret form of non-Gracie JJ based BJJ, by some jungle dude named 'Milio "Blanka" Hayszey, who conferred Grandmaster status on Fulio in a dream 3 years after "Blanka" died. This should make you think "aww, hell no"!

All that foolishness being said, lineage does make a difference in any academic situation ( there are exceptions). MAs training is a learning process taught by schools and academies, therefore there is something to be said about a strong, proven lineage. Just ask any Harvard, Yale, Oxford or M.I.T. alumn. Peace...

[Matt Irvin]

BSH: Though it is certainly the least subtle, this is not the first time you have stooped to making a personal snipe at me. This seems to come from your inability to provide any reasonable counterpoints to my arguments. Despite the fact that I know nothing about you and it would be arrogant of me to assume much about your existance from a handful of posts, I'm afraid your life will always be simplistic. :rolleyes:

At any rate, I've made my points and the challenges are drying up. BSH, if it pleases you to have the last word here, feel free--I'm moving onto my next set of grievances in a new post. Be on the lookout. ;)

[MightyB]

Choy Li Fut Lineage chart (http://www.plumblossom.net/ChoyLiFut/history.htm)

Choy Li Fut practitioners are pretty proud of their lineage;)

[BSH]

Matt,

I am sorry to hear that you are done on this string. I am also sorry that you feel that I made a personal snipe at you. If disagreeing with you is a snipe, I am guilty.

I have tried simplifying my point and you have yet to tell me what is wrong with my logic. I have answered each of your questions. You are apparently an intelligent person, but you have not been able to persuade me to change my opinion that lineage is important only if it is authentic. It means nothing if it cannot provide the results I am personally looking for.

Thank you for the warm thought that my life will be simplistic. Although you may not see this as a good thing, it is something I strive for.

If you ever plan to make it down to San Diego, send me a PM.

Peace