On Mastery, the Martial Arts, and Authenticity
Too often, you will hear someone claiming that a particular teacher is not “authentic” or otherwise unqualified as a result of not having spent a requisite number of decades or dollars with a particular system, teacher, or organization. This practice is extraordinarily common and has a deeply negative impact on the martial arts as a whole and practitioners individually. To understand why and see the right path forward, a short history lesson is in order.
Most forms of traditional karate can trace their origins back to China and made their way westward through Okinawa. On Okinawa, a traditional Chinese martial art (the name of which has been lost to history – or at least to me), merged with a local form of fighting called Te resulting in a new system of self-defense called Kara-Te (empty hand). From there, several individuals (Gitchen Funakoshi being one of the most notable) migrated to mainland Japan where the style was adopted and again transformed. What was Shorin Ryu and was taught to Funakoshi a certain way was changed, adapted, and became a new system called Shotokan. By the mid-1900s, the single teacher that moved from China to Okinawa had spawned at least 100 different styles of karate. What happened next was even more interesting – karate and kung fu both jumped from their respective homes to Hawaii.
In the melting pot of Hawaii, a man named Ed Parker learned a form of Kenpo with grounding in Chinese boxing from William Chow. Ed Parker had already earned a black belt in Judo and had experience with western boxing, as well. Ed Parker moved to California and founded a style he called American Kenpo – blending circular and linear motions into a new, incredibly effective style. Around that same time, another man took the Chinese art of Wing Chung and adopted it to his own philosophies ultimately founding a style called Jeet Kune Do. That man was Bruce Lee.
Through the history of the martial arts, students have studied under different teachers, learned katas and pulled together the katas they liked and went on to teach those to their students. This is just as evident in modern times as it is in looking through the history of Okinawan Karate. Let’s consider the evidence. There are 5 Pinan kata and 3 Naihanchi kata. Different styles of Okinawan karate (even different branches of Shorin Ryu) teach different combinations of these kata. Some traditional styles even teach only one version of Naihanchi (Shodan). Hohan Soken, a direct student of Nabe Matsumora and founder of Matsumora Orthodox Shorin Ryu, taught Naihanchi Shodan, Naihanchi Nidan, Naihanchi Sandan, Pinan Shodan, Pinan Nidan, Passai Sho, Passai Dai, Chinto, Kusanku, Gojushiho, Sesan, Rohai Jo, Rohai Chu, Rohai Go, and Hatsukuru. One his students, Seiki Arakaki added the katas Fukyu Ichi and Fukyu Ni to teach high schoolers. Fukyu Ichi is the Gojo Ryu kata Gekisai Ichi. Katsuya Miyahira was a student of Chokki Motobu, Choshin Chibana, and Anbun Tokuda and a one-time president of the Kobayshi system of Shorin Ryu. Katsuya taught the kata Naihanchi Shodan, Naihanchi Nidan, Naihanchi Sandan, Pinan Shodan, Pinan Sandan, Pinan Yondan, Pinan Godan, Passai Dai, Passai Sho, Kusanku Dai, Kusanku Sho, Chinto, Okan, Wanshu, Seisan, Jion, and Gojushiho.
Shotokan is a mainland Japanese adaptation of Okinawan Shorin Ryu with deeper stances (strongly advised against by traditional Okinawan teachers), more rigid movements, and katas that have been changed in name (Pinan to Heian, for example), style, and substance. Yet, these schools are some of the strictest with respect to not changing or evolving their system and preserving uninterrupted lineages – despite their style’s own origin and evolution.
With all the variation between styles and even families within the same style, one must ask what is “authentic”? To be clear, I am absolutely not suggesting that a person who has spent a little time here, a little time there, and crops up later teaching a mish-mash of techniques as their own “system” is qualified – they are not. However, people move, lived experience has value, and teachers retire. Change is the only constant in life. A teacher with 10 years of experience in a single style and 20 spread out across others is arguably more qualified as an instructor than a teacher who has 30 years of experience in a single system. Both are good. Both have value. One has extremely deep knowledge in a particular system and is the guardian of a tradition. The other is an agent of change who integrates different teachings that they found to work well for them, grounded in expertise in a particular tradition.
To close, Hohan Soken, the founder of Matsumora Orthodox Shorin Ryu was interviewed by Mark Bishop and relayed to him that “due to the commercialization of karate the students are encouraged to learn only the one style, resulting in too narrow a scope of training that could eventually lead to an overall stagnation of the fighting art”. Let us not let that happen.
