LINEAGE

 by Phillip Starr

How important is one's (especially a teacher's) martial arts lineage? Nowadays, it seems that being able to trace one's lineage is extremely important and those who cannot necessarily do so are often snubbed by other practitioners and teachers who seem to have become something like “lineage snobs.”

They want to know who your teacher was, and his teacher, and his teacher, and so on. This, they feel, ensures that what you're teaching is the real deal and follows the line of authenticity.

To be sure, lineage is important as far as the maintaining of a traditional way is concerned but I believe that the most important thing is whether or not the martial art (or style thereof that's in question) is whether or not it works. I am fortunate in so far as lineage is concerned but I have experienced some problems with it over the years...

I can follow my teacher's lineage back to Zhang Zhaodong (aka. Zhang Zhaokui) who learned from Cheng Tinghua (baguazhang) and Li Cunyi (xingyiquan). Cheng's teacher was Dong Haiquan (the revered founder of baguazhang), while Li's xingyiquan teacher was Liu Qilan...and so on. Some say that Zhang also trained with the founder of baguazhang but the truth is that Dong would have been very old when Zhang came along, So it's more likely that Zhang met and spoke with him, but it's very doubtful that he ever trained with the aged Master.

Now, my teacher worked in the covert world of U.S. Intelligence back in the late 1950's and 60's during the height of the Cold War. There are really no records of him (I know, because I looked) and I have only a single photo of him, which I stumbled upon some years ago. Back when I trained with him taking photos of one's teacher wasn't thought of as being very important and most young teens didn't own a camera (we were several decades away from cellphones with cameras built into them- my parents owned an Instamatic and an old “box” camera). Only one of my students (who trained with me while I was teaching during my college years) ever spoke to Master Chen on the phone.

As the result of an argument I had with the editor of Black Belt Magazine (who was Japanese) in about 1969 or so (he insisted that no Westerners had as yet ever studied gong-fu) I asked my sifu to provide for me some kind of proof that I had trained with him. This was actually my good fortune; he brushed (in Chinese) a certificate of sorts that stated that I was his seniormost pupil. I sent a copy of this to the editor who then immediately apologized and retracted his earlier statement. But for that argument, I would never have received such a statement from my teacher! I still have it. But I understand and sympathize with those who have difficulty in validating their lineage.

The founder of the USKA (United States Karate Assn.), which was the largest karate organization in the U.S., and who opened the first karate school and conducted the first karate tournament in America, provided a lineage that was a total fabrication (I may lose some friends over this statement...sorry.). The style he taught, Shuri-ryu, was not a traditional Okinawan form as he stated. However, the Shuri-ryu karateka were some of the best that I ever encountered. Their kata was very strong and precise and their fighting skill was excellent. On the tournament circuit, they were known as fierce, aggressive fighters who never backed up.

At the same time, back in the early 70's there was a supposed karate teacher who proudly displayed his certificate on the wall of his office. It was written in Japanese but lacked any “chops” (seals in red ink) that would authenticate it. One day, a Japanese fellow came to his school to inquire about classes. Seeing the “certificate” proudly displayed in a beautiful frame, he read it. He then asked the instructor (in front of a number of students) why he had a laundry list on his wall!

On the other hand, I know many gong-fu and karate practitioners who are blue-bloods but whose martial prowess is severely lacking. So lineage certainly doesn't necessarily count for a great deal in so far as ability goes.

What's important to me is not lineage (I'm a far cry from being a snob of any kind), but whether or not what an individual teaches is effective or not and whether or not he teaches in a traditional way.