Authentic Martial Arts

So what are “Authentic Martial Arts”? Ask 10 martial artists and you’ll get 10 different answers, each one with a passionate answer for why they believe the definition they do; and most likely each will strongly disagree with the other 9. Authenticity is authentic only if you think it is, or you are operating in a culture that thinks it is, and then only to the degree that you accept it as valid.

There are those that feel lineage makes a martial art authentic, that lineage provides credibility. A traceable lineage neither guarantees a quality training environment, nor a legitimate training experience. Lineages are often in debate. Add to that, Asian cultures have a tendency to embellish their relationships and lineages; it’s just part of their culture. Here is an example; a well-known martial art with kenpo lineage has a man who states he trained under one of the American Pioneers of the art. This makes his reputable his martial arts teaching legitimate… And though this is not a lie, what he does not say is that he trained with said individual when he was a mere child of under age 10 or so… does this change the picture?

Then there is a fellow who had appeared in a popular news stand martial arts magazine several times claiming lineage as an ambassador to the Shaolin Temple. He even shows his certificate in the articles. Funny thing is a training partner I had several years ago had the same certificate, he became an ambassador to the Shaolin Temple when he visited and provided a small donation to the monks… One of this instructor’s students walks by our school often and I hear him tell others that his teacher, yes the one I have mentioned, teaches the only authentic tai chi in the area and we are a joke. Neither the teacher nor the student has ever set foot in our school.

Just because someone can claim a lineage, it doesn't mean that they have been taught everything in that art. There is a distinction between one's teacher and a full lineage. For instance, in judo, it's common to say "I study under Joe Blow", or "I train at Acme Dojo", whereas it's very rare to hear a judoka lay out the full lineage-chain back to Jigoro Kano. The same situation holds true in many Western arts such as boxing, and schools that focus on practical application. The perspective here is that the quality of one's teacher matters a great deal, it can be judged on itself, without needing to reach back further in history.

The opposite can be said of the many schools of karate, all Japanese koryu, and schools that focus on history and tradition. Being able to trace an authorized teacher-student relationship to the founder of the style is considered in those circles as the sine qua non of legitimacy.

Another form of legitimacy similar to lineage is membership in an association. In some martial arts, affiliation with a greater body is extremely helpful in establishing a basic level of credibility. In judo, you can ask (and double-check) if a school is affiliated with USJF, USJA, or USA Judo. In Brazilian jiu-jitsu, you can ask (and double-check) who they got their rank from, and in some situations, whether they are part of an association like Alliance, a Gracie branch, Atos, et cetera.

Truth is, that lineage is frequently claimed, but difficult, if not impossible, to actually demonstrate and prove. Sometimes the claim clearly has merit but there's no documentation (e.g., he clearly learned the martial art somehow but there's no record of where or even when); sometimes it is because there is no written record that even indicates the style practices resemble the modern forms; sometimes because "trained with" has cultural meaning that may not imply what we think it does (e.g., "took a class with the grandmaster but mostly trained under one of his students); and sometimes it is just because it was made up. And we mustn’t forget the phenomenon of "yes, X studied P under Y, but what they practice has been borrowed from other traditions and now looks very different."

Sometimes the best teachers will have no confirmable lineage, or won't even claim a lineage to speak of (beyond possibly referencing their instructor who may very well still be alive and active). As a general rule, effectiveness and practice of the teacher are more important than any claims from the lineage aspect itself. Keep in mind that most modern martial arts systems have a short lineage. For example it was not until 1935 that “Karate” becomes official name of the Okinawan martial arts, based on the traditional art of te (hand) and the term kara, in 1942 Morihei Ueshiba begins using the term aikido to describe his art, which is related to aiki-jujutsu, in 1945 Choi Yong-sool travels back to Korea after living in Japan with Sokaku Takeda and he begins teaching Dai Dong Yusool (daitō-ryū aiki-jūjutsu), later to become known as hapkido, it wasn’t until 1957 when 9 Korean training halls united under the name taekwondo (way of the foot and fist), in 1969 the Greek-American Jim Arvanitis introduced a modern reconstruction of pankration, and then in 2009 Modern Arnis was declared as national sport of the Philippines. Many popular martial arts today are modern versions, someone else’s recreation, of something else. Do they have a rich lineage? Are the ineffective?

A lineage's importance in relation to credibility depends on what you are looking for in martial arts training. For some people, that aspect of the traditional culture, fellowship, family, and the values of passing down knowledge from one generation to the next can be very meaningful. For others, those values aren't as important or meaningful as they just want to train simply for exercise or health, the school may be close to where they work or live, or people might have very involved lives in areas outside of martial arts. You don't have to force those values upon them and "convert" them so to speak (doing so might actually push them away), but it is something people can develop an appreciation for if they so choose.

I have trained with many people over the years. Some for a substantial amount of time, some only for a weekend holiday. Over all I cannot say any time was wasted in my training. Some of my teachers were famous, and some little known. Some were sought after and some despised. I believe we all have lineage but, for me, I cannot prove anything beyond any of my teachers. I am not Asian so to say I practice a Japanese or Chinese family art I cannot say that. I sought my teachers out after seeing what they could do and how I could add it to my own bag of tricks. I claim my teachers based on what they have shared with me, not for who people think they are, or what others feel they do or do not teach. The Way Tai Chi System© has a basis in traditional Chinese internal forms like Yang Tai Chi, as well as chi kung from many systems that I have picked up over the years. I include martial concept from tai chi, bagua, Kosho Ryu Kempo, and ninjutsu to name a few. I only have 20 or so years in martial practice 30+ years in healing and almost 40 years in the esoteric studies- basically I am a newbie. This culmination of material has been systematized so that it can be shared with others and replicated; I have made all I learned my own and now share it with others who wish to learn what I have to teach. Is what I share authentic? You will have to decide on its authenticity based on what you define as authentic for yourself. I invite you to come to class and see what we do and then judge us of our authenticity before judging us without knowing us; we teach from a restorative and healing perspective, a combative application, and an esoteric and spiritual standpoint. In essence we teach more than kicking and punching. Are we a commercial martial art with a name that brings one to think of 20-30 year olds fighting in an octagon cage on TV? No. We are the “Old Fart Martial Art” and admit only to that.

Let me end this rant with some advice often credited to the Historical Buddha; use this in determining authenticity in your martial arts... I do:

"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.”

http://dovertaichinh.jimdo.com/