If you had the opportunity to train with the founder of your Art (assuming time travel was possible in many cases), or a current big name instructor in your Art, who would you choose & why? Don't forget to mention what Art it is in which you train.
The founder of your Art, or a current big name?
- Thread starter IcemanSK
- Start date
I am fortunate, that the founder of our particular system is still alive to this date, and that I did have a chance to train with him when visiting Hawaii last year. That, plus they also brought in the chief instructor for the Kobudo system that I train in, for a wonderful series of seminars in bojutsu and saijutsu.
For me, it doesn't get much better than this.
We've also been fortunate, that a couple of the senior sensei from Hawaii come over here to conduct clinics for us in both Karate and Kobudo as well.
For me, it doesn't get much better than this.
We've also been fortunate, that a couple of the senior sensei from Hawaii come over here to conduct clinics for us in both Karate and Kobudo as well.
Bruno@MT
Senior Master
Genbukan ninpo.
Tanemura sensei is both. He founded genbukan, and he is the current headmaster It would be awesome to get taught directly by him. Of course, since I am a newbie and the head sensei of our dojo is a renshi 5th dan, the difference would be invisible from where I am standing.
If I could time travel, perhaps I'd try to get lessons from another headmaster, like Takamatsu sensei, since he stands at the basis of all legitimate current ninpo organizations. Or perhaps back to Seiko Fujita sensei, and learn koga ryu, if only for the fact that that interesting line is now dead and will never be revived.
Tanemura sensei is both. He founded genbukan, and he is the current headmaster
It would be awesome to get taught directly by him. Of course, since I am a newbie and the head sensei of our dojo is a renshi 5th dan, the difference would be invisible from where I am standing.If I could time travel, perhaps I'd try to get lessons from another headmaster, like Takamatsu sensei, since he stands at the basis of all legitimate current ninpo organizations. Or perhaps back to Seiko Fujita sensei, and learn koga ryu, if only for the fact that that interesting line is now dead and will never be revived.
Xue Sheng
All weight is underside
Well since all the alleged founders of the arts I train or would train are dead I guess I won't be training with them. So that leaves big name and to be honest as far as Taiji (in Yang style) goes other than my sifu it would have to be Tung Kai Ying. In Chen either Chen Zhanglei (who I have trained with before) or Chen Xiaowang. In Xingyiquan that is a tougher question to answer there are about 3 in Beijing (that I know of) that I would consider one in Canada and another in Boston but beyond that we are back to dead guys
JadeDragon3
Black Belt
The style(s) that I train in is Sil Lum Kung Fu & Ng Family Style Kung Fu. Ng Family Style Kung Fu is a family art that was founded by Great Grandmaster's uncle. It is heavely influenced by 6 Harmonies Kung Fu. I would love to train with Great Grandmaster John Wing Lok Ng again. I had the chance to train with him for 3 years back in 1985. It was great. He is the teacher of my Sil Lum Kung Fu teacher.
Although I have met Sijo many times, I have never gotten the opportunity to actually train with him as my teacher. My dad and uncle are lucky. I would go back and train with Sijo and Joe Emperado. Old school Kaju!
searcher
Senior Master
I would love to get the chance to train with Chitose in Chito-ryu and Shimabuku in Isshinryu and Choi in TKD and Mr. Parker in Kenpo.
Of all of those, I want them all. But I want to train with them at a very different time. I want to train with Chitose when he was training with Aragaki. I want to train with Shimabuku when Angi Uezu was just starting. I want to train with General Choi while he was in prison. I want to train with Mr. Parker when he was training with Mr. Chow or with Mr Wong.
I feel that if I could see them at those times, I would get a better understanding of the influences that they had on them.
Of all of those, I want them all. But I want to train with them at a very different time. I want to train with Chitose when he was training with Aragaki. I want to train with Shimabuku when Angi Uezu was just starting. I want to train with General Choi while he was in prison. I want to train with Mr. Parker when he was training with Mr. Chow or with Mr Wong.
I feel that if I could see them at those times, I would get a better understanding of the influences that they had on them.
Langenschwert
Master Black Belt
Johannes Liechtenauer died many centuries ago. But if I could go back in time to train with him, I would. Of all the current well-known Western sword luminaries, I'm fortunate enough that my teacher Johanus Haidner (himself one badass swordsman and one of the finest teachers I've known) has trained with many of them.
-Mark
-Mark
tellner
Senior Master
That's a tough one. In my considered opinion I already train with the current "big name" in the style. He's an excellent teacher. We've worked together for so long that he knows exactly how to motivate me and get the material across. And he's so far ahead of where I am that it's not like I'd be able to learn more with someone else.
Maybe the putative founder of the system had the Super Special Mojo. Maybe even with the gap between cultures he could transmit it better. I have my doubts.
The question as phrased leaves a couple important things unspoken. It assumes that you can identify a single founder. I'm not sure that's correct in most cases. Helio Gracie took Ju Jitsu in some very interesting directions and put his personal stamp on it. But he built on what he learned from Meada-Sensei who was a student of Kano-Sensei who drew on old Ju Jitsu and brought it into the modern world. Parker's Kenpo is clearly a first cousin to Kajukenbo and the general martial arts environment of mid-20th century Oahu. And those are styles with clear defineable roots. Where do you draw the line?
What happens when you move into a culture whose martial arts family tree more closely resembles a mangrove swamp? My current practice is from Indonesia where syncretism is a defining characteristic of the national character. The martial arts draw from every foreigner who got in a fight with a local which includes Chinese, Indians, Dutchmen, Englishmen, Portugese, Japanese, Arabs, Persians and the inhabitants of thousands of islands. Even narrowing it down to Western Java all the styles mix, match, draw and borrow from each other. Saying that one person founded the particular style I do is sort of arbitrary.
My Unholy Trinity of Real Martial Arts Motivations - Legitimacy, Mystery and Specialness - comes into play here. By studying with The Source you're supposedly learning the best material from the best teacher. You've got the Legitimacy of being near the originator which means it's pure and unsullied. And you've got Specialness going big time. That assumes that the putative founder is also the best teacher, something which often isn't true. Lots of these guys could fight but couldn't teach. Or they had students whose skill and understanding surpassed their own. Or what they started evolved into something better than what they created. All are possible.
To my way of thinking they are the sign of a healthy, vital martial art. If students never go beyond their teachers the art will inevitably degenerate. 80 percent of 80 percent of 80 percent leads to the thin end of nothing whittled down to a point in a fairly short time. If the art doesn't change and improve over time it will not be able to deal with current conditions and will become a ritualized club increasingly irrelevant to the students' lives.
So would I rather study with my teacher or the founder? The answer to that is I'd like to understand what the founder was trying to get at. But I'd prefer to study with the teacher who can best help me advance my skill and understanding regardless of when and where he or she lived.
Maybe the putative founder of the system had the Super Special Mojo. Maybe even with the gap between cultures he could transmit it better. I have my doubts.
The question as phrased leaves a couple important things unspoken. It assumes that you can identify a single founder. I'm not sure that's correct in most cases. Helio Gracie took Ju Jitsu in some very interesting directions and put his personal stamp on it. But he built on what he learned from Meada-Sensei who was a student of Kano-Sensei who drew on old Ju Jitsu and brought it into the modern world. Parker's Kenpo is clearly a first cousin to Kajukenbo and the general martial arts environment of mid-20th century Oahu. And those are styles with clear defineable roots. Where do you draw the line?
What happens when you move into a culture whose martial arts family tree more closely resembles a mangrove swamp? My current practice is from Indonesia where syncretism is a defining characteristic of the national character. The martial arts draw from every foreigner who got in a fight with a local which includes Chinese, Indians, Dutchmen, Englishmen, Portugese, Japanese, Arabs, Persians and the inhabitants of thousands of islands. Even narrowing it down to Western Java all the styles mix, match, draw and borrow from each other. Saying that one person founded the particular style I do is sort of arbitrary.
My Unholy Trinity of Real Martial Arts Motivations - Legitimacy, Mystery and Specialness - comes into play here. By studying with The Source you're supposedly learning the best material from the best teacher. You've got the Legitimacy of being near the originator which means it's pure and unsullied. And you've got Specialness going big time. That assumes that the putative founder is also the best teacher, something which often isn't true. Lots of these guys could fight but couldn't teach. Or they had students whose skill and understanding surpassed their own. Or what they started evolved into something better than what they created. All are possible.
To my way of thinking they are the sign of a healthy, vital martial art. If students never go beyond their teachers the art will inevitably degenerate. 80 percent of 80 percent of 80 percent leads to the thin end of nothing whittled down to a point in a fairly short time. If the art doesn't change and improve over time it will not be able to deal with current conditions and will become a ritualized club increasingly irrelevant to the students' lives.
So would I rather study with my teacher or the founder? The answer to that is I'd like to understand what the founder was trying to get at. But I'd prefer to study with the teacher who can best help me advance my skill and understanding regardless of when and where he or she lived.
Aikicomp
Purple Belt
I have had the honor to be trained by the founder of my art Gen Lee Ju-Jitsu as well as his top instructors (Dom and Teddy). He is the one who convinced me to become an Instructor, and I will for ever be in his debt. Thanks Nick...I and my family owe you my life. (more than once, BTW) and we will miss you. I will never forget his kindness, humility and friendship.
Michael
Michael
dancingalone
Grandmaster
Definitely my own sensei. Miyagi Sensei did not permit questions during his instruction and he rarely demonstrated any of his own kata. I imagine it would have been very frustrating being his student despite his lofty status as the founder of the Goju tradition. If I were to pick someone now deceased, I would like to train with Toguchi Sensei who was a direct student of Miyagi's. He eventually emigrated to Canada to teach there, and by all accounts was much more accessible than Miyagi was.
Bruno@MT
Senior Master
The head sensei of my class told me that in Japan, the gap between sensei and student is much larger. Asking questions during practise like we do would be a nono. He said that below 4th dan, you are not really on the radar, and you should just shut up and train. Even after class, this distance is maintained.
Different cultures.
