Secret Masters, secret knowledge

When undertaking research into any aspect of the Martial ArtFs of the far east it is difficult not to get drawn in to the dubious world of secret masters with secret teachings known only to the master’s personal student. I have seen both sides of this argument. One side will say that there is knowledge still kept hidden from the Hoi Polloi and that’s the nature of the art! Another will argue that this is a smokescreen to obscure the fact that we are all doing things without anyone really knowing what it is all about. Whenever I hear either of these two views I'm automatically suspicious.
If only life, history, cultural traditions and human relations were that simple!

I would say that both theories hold an element of truth.

Inevitably with any long standing tradition, ritual, or any body of knowledge that has to pass through many hands and numerous generations, not only are things added, but they are also lost. A possible example of this is quoted by Nathan Johnson in his book “Barefoot Zen”,

“Mark Bishop, an eighth-dan Karate-ka and author, told me that Shinpan Shiroma (a student of Itosu) often admitted to not knowing the technical functions of some movements of Karate kata, and would quite blankly state that Itosu had not known the functions either, merely explaining that they were for show.”

The balance between what has been lost and what has been gained is open to speculation. Obviously there is no way to be able to peer into the past and examine the earlier manifestations of the forms or katas we know today. It is difficult enough to attempt to pin down who, when and where these forms originated from. Some researchers have attempted to identify what Johnson calls the "antique kata", but no one can know with any certainty beyond the period of living memory, and even then controversy rages between various groups claiming to have the original form of this kata or that kata. Some would ask, does it matter?

For the other side it is also clear that knowledge is still held back by martial arts masters. The established system within the Koryu (old school) martial traditions in Japan has a set of levels clearly defined. These are levels of transmission, ending with the Menkyo Kaiden, acknowledgement of full transmission. These are found within the weapons schools and schools of Jujutsu.

All too often modern researchers impose their own values and experiences on historical events, assuming that the same codes of human relationships are constant between eras and cultures. Hence speculation of the relationship between an ancient martial arts master and his student(s) tends to be coloured by the researcher's own experiences inside a modern Dojo. The old style of teaching involved a very different relationship between master and student than that usually undertaken today. The aspiring student didn't just sign up for a course!

Also the method of transmission was very different. I doubt you would have experienced the same kind of verbal and aural teaching that is used in the modern Dojo. No, it would be primarily based on bypassing the verbal, with students expected to explore the techniques they were learning by body feel, and in some areas working things out for themselves. As explained in a treatise on Japanese swordsmanship written by Chozan Shissai in 1729.

Shissai lamented the decline in traditional teaching of swordsmanship and in quoting the Chinese Classics had this to say about teaching and student master relations,

"The Master first teaches technique without wasting a word about its significance; he simply waits for the student to discover this himself. This is called "drawing but not shooting". Not because he is wicked does he withhold explanation. He does it simply because he wants the student to attain mastery through practice and the involvement of his Heart. If the student has worked with his whole Heart and achieved something through his own power, then he departs and comes before the Master. And the Master, if his Heart tells him to, merely confirms it to him. There is no instruction on the part of the Master. This is not only true in the arts. K'ung Tzu says: "If I draw one corner, and he cannot transfer it to the three others, I do not repeat it"⁶

Certainly no spoon-feeding in those days!

It is also common for researchers and commentators to assume that these same ancient masters were driven by evangelical zeal to popularise their chosen path, as if there was some kind of written obligation to do so. Altruism was not a factor.

It is perhaps interesting to speculate on a specific example within the history of the Internal Chinese martial arts.

In China in the early 19th century a certain Yang Lu-ch'an managed to infiltrate an obscure but very effective martial art system that until his arrival had remained secret to a particular clan. The Ch'en family village had developed a form of "soft" boxing which, through the catalyst of Yang Lu'ch'an, was to sweep China. This was to be the emergence Tai Chi Chuan.

Yang made his fame and fortune by spreading this once secret art throughout the provinces and was tested to the extreme by the boxers at the Chinese Imperial court. He became known as "Yang the Invincible" and developed a family lineage that produced fighters of awesome ability.

Taking this example one cannot help but speculate what would have happened if Yang was denied access or the opportunity to open the art to the world. Perhaps the Ch'en family soft boxing would have sunk into obscurity. Perhaps the art could have escaped the popularisation of Tai Chi today. (There are senior Tai Chi practitioners who will not forgive the Yang family for the decline of Tai Chi into a gentle form of gymnastics).⁷


credits, footnotes and sources
next: Kata

© WadoWorld/Tim Shaw