Lineages?

[Yung Apprentice]

I would like to hear your responses to this.

Lineages, do they really matter? While reading the San Soo thread, it occured to me that many people get wrapped up with the whole lineage thing. Because a lineage is suspicious or faulty does it mean it's no good? Does this mean that someone from San Soo or Shaolin-do can't fight or defend themselves? Or have anything to offer? Why do people steer clear of suspicious lineages?Does the lineage make the art?

[taijiquan_student]

Lineages do and don't matter. If someone has really good skill, it doesn't matter who they learned from. You're studying with them, not their teacher's teacher, right?
However, if they were a good student, and they have a great lineage, that is sort of like a guarantee that they know something more than the average student (especially if they were a disciple student). With a good lineage, you have access to something that has been passed down from teacher to student for generations, involving many of the old masters everyone hears about all the time.
That being said, just cause someone has a good lineage doesn't mean you should study with them. If they are no good, then they are no good. If you know someone is in a great lineage, you might decide to check them out first, but really it's not a good idea to pick a teacher JUST because of their lineage.

[Cody]

It's complicated, and I'm sure others here can supply more detail.

For me, lineage should imply credentials based on a solid foundation of proven methodology/practice in whatever martial art, and responsible teaching of that art. In as such as the lineage is the tradition of the art, it can be said to be the fabric of the art. For, without able practitioners, the art would be on paper only, if that much.

I think of the above as reasonable. It leads to expectations of being taught properly, according to the ways of the past, and possibly with the expectation that each student with sincere interest and a good heart will be strengthened and led to succeed either to master that traditional system, or to learn to the extent of his/her abilities (which might include advanced work). However,

that a teacher is of a respected lineage, and acknowledged as such, does not guarantee the above. It just lets you know that a teacher is part of the family tree and has knowledge as it was passed down, and practices it. It doesn't mean that the current training is identical to, or comes close to that received by the teacher, or, that different teachers from the same lineage are equivalent in terms of ability, or other individual traits. People are people.

So, for instance, if a student wants to learn Eagle Claw, he'd be advised to get as close to the source as possible, and that's where lineage comes in. When a modern, composite art is put together, knowing the teacher's roots is also advisable. What you have then is a hybrid of sorts, which either succeeds or doesn't. I don't think of this as being faulty or suspicious, except if deception is involved.

The issue of questionable lineages, especially in terms of modern day practitioners and those of recent past, gets on my nerves. If a person is flat out lying, I have no use for him. It is likely that there will be other dishonesty, and a greed for recognition or economic gains that is harmful to all. That is one reason to steer clear of this kind of suspicious situation, in my view.

If the history of a system as a whole, or a supposed offshoot of a martial system, appeared to be on quicksand, would you step in the quicksand? You might research to see if critics have a case, and why.

As for who can or cannot defend themselves, well, the proofs become easy. Please note that I did not read the thread you referred to before writing.

Cody

[nospam]

Granted, Lineage played a greater role in our respective styles' history, but as we move forward, the importance has and is lessening.

For good or bad is up to the individual to judge.

What I find interesting is that many out there will place their alignment to a particuar (usually well known) lineage when all they might have done is learn a pattern or some techniques from a seminar once attended.

Lineage only plays a role when one can say they have been recognised frim a Master within that lineage, otherwise, it is a claim whispered into a summer's breeze.

For most of us, lineage ties us to another's skill and ability. Often times I've heard, 'his teacher was a good fighter or had real gung fu'. That speaks to the gung fu of another, not mine, per se.

Lineage is like reputations given to Universities. Because my sigung had real gung fu means my sifu is more likely to have learned real gung fu, which paints my gung fu from the same brush. Recognition is where Lineage bares any weight. Otherwise all I can claim is I once learned from him and him or from her..etc. Unrecognised Lineage is worth as much as the paper it is written on.

In the end, it is my gung fu ability that will speak clearly. Lineage means a particular system has been learned. It is up to me to show what has been done to maintain and advance that association.

nospam.
:cool:

[Water Dragon]

If you go to a good school, it means you had access to good instruction. Everyone knows what a Harvard Law degree implies. But most colleges have a lot of poor students and a whole lot of dropouts. You still need to check out the indiviual student.

[NorthernMantis]

Does this mean that someone from San Soo or Shaolin-do can't fight or defend themselves?

Let's put it this way.If I pay to learn a style where I get down on all fours and fight like a dog ,no matter how ridiculous it may seem, then I better get my moneys worth and get the real deal.

I don't care how good they are.They can be the best in the world for all I care but I want to fight like some smelly old pooch.:D

In other words its false advertising and they are stealing my money.It's a ripp off and violates people trusts.

The whole argument is not about wethere they can fight or not.The argument is about wether your learning the real tiger, the real leopard,tai chi. etc

Who cares if they can fight?Will you learn what you origianlly wanted to learn?

[Shaolindynasty]

I guess what you consider true lineage depends on what the instructors intentions are. Some people just make up a long mysterious story for their kungfu which is actually kenpo with some wierd moves thrown in for looks.

Some of the more well known and recongised lineages have grey areas. Look at CLF, they have allot of different branches that go back to the same founder and there is allot of infighting amongst themselves about that. I bet some of the old time masters may have made up or exagerated their lineage, look at the number of arts Yue Fei was said to have created.

The main thing is that you have to look out for fantastic claims like "I have the only original version" or that "I am the only westerner to train at shaolin and I had to fight 30 monks and a bear to become an instructor". Also beware of people who advertise as being direct lineage holders cause from what I've seen most people who really have this title don't really put it on flyers that much. If you walk into their school and they tell you about their lineage more than they practice that is also a sign of a charleton

I ultimatly judge practitioners based on performance not whatever there history is. Everybody has their own story anyways.

[Yung Apprentice]

Here is an example I was thinking about.

Say one would like to train as a baseball player. You see an ad for a baseball camp that has said to have trained greats like Tony Gwynn, Cal Ripken, Mark Mcgwire e.t.c But many seem to disagree that they trained THOSE greats. But the camp IS one of the best, and would make you a better player than any other camp out there. But they probably used that ad as an attention grabber. Why wouldn't one want to train there? Because of false advertisement? Even if no one can prove that they didn't train those people? Even if they can train you to be the best one could be?


The only reason I would be weary about MAs with questionable lineages, is that it may not be tried an true.

[Ray Pina]

I'm suspicious of anything suspicious.

Having a good lineage is great, you see what you're learning has not been too watered down, but I care more about skill.

With that said, one would have to wonder about a teacher that seemed shady, made claims that were suspect. I like having a sifu that walks the walk. If he says it, he'll do it. It's just a bonus that his lineage is impeccable.

[Badger]

The thug on the street could careless about your lineage,you just better beable to do something that works.





Badger

[guohuen]

I think that wherever you learn your art that it's vitaly important that the fundamentals and principles used are mostly those from the classics because these are what has been passed along and tested by time. This to me would be lineage. You would also be bound by tradition to modify the style (not the system) to your liking. Just an thought.

[Tigerstyle]

"Why do people steer clear of suspicious lineages?"

I think the simple answer (probably too simple) is trust. The amount of time (and money) that many people invest in their MA training means that there should be a level of trust between teacher and student. You have to trust that the teacher is doing things in yout best interest.

If there are suspicions of a "false lineage", it's hard to establish trust. Is the teacher hiding something (true lineage)? His he/she hiding anything else from me? How important is what is (possibly) being hidden? Can you trust everything you are being told or taught now?

It's a small and subtle thing, but it can also a big deal at the same time.