some people on here seem to be obssesed with who taught who, and where the material for kuk sool won comes from. so i ask a simple question. is history/lineage important to you? please explain why you do or don't put any value on who taught what to your instructor/master/grandmaster. for me as long as the martial art/instructor is good i really don't care who taught who. if you look into my kuk sool past you will see instructors i have trained under who in my opinion contributed nothing to my knowledge and skills, where as some of the training partners i have had over the years contributed a great deal. so i a list of who taught/influanced me would be inaccurate and misleading, and if this is true for me it's not to outlandish to think this also might be the case with others.
It doesnt matter, You can have the best martial art instructor in the world, but if you dont put forth the effort to learn and apply that knowledge, its all useless.
Yeah I think there's something to be said about lineage and knowledge in the traditional Asian martial systems. However, I agree that you can learn a lot from your peers of even from others "below" your rank, especially while teaching.
Whether or not lineage is important depends on the claim being made. 1) My martial arts is fun, enjoyable, & brings me satisfaction. Lineage here is absolutely unimportant. The pleasure you derive from your practice is self-explanatory. 2) My martial art is effective at teaching combative skills. Lineage here is also unimportant. If you those combative skills are demonstrable, it's self-explanatory. 3) My martial art is derived from the practices of the ancient Hoodipoo Warrior Monks. Now lineage is important. You've made a claim of legitimacy that can only be demonstrated by lineage & transmission. Anyone interested in the history of your art has an absolutely logical right to demand proof of your claims. Question your lineage & historicity however in no way questions the pleasure or combat effectiveness of your art. It only questions the history.
couldnt of put it better, the only way history/lineage can affect your traning is if it is directly connected with the legitimacy of your art.
I guess once the franchise deal fails, there'll be lots of little ******* KS-ers running around. :jester:
Skilled fighters those Hoopidoo Warrior Monks:ninja2::ninja2: I hear they had mastered the art of the 5 rings of pain AND 7 points of fury.
I've answered this question on here numerous times in the past, but again... no. It's certainly curious, interesting, and has it's place, but history/lineage doesn't affect how well I kick, punch, lock, throw.
Seems to me things don,t stay the same even if the founder is still around...... I've only been with the won 17 yrs and it has had several changes already...... Same group of masters tought bong sparing / hyung 4 diferant ways 4 years in a row at seminar.....GM Suh was there every time. Lots of people like to judge belt level by whos Sig. is on the Dan Cert. But rarely did that person teach or even test the person before the cert. was handed over.....lot of jiberish just to say NO not to me.
Willow, you've obviously confused the Hoodipoo monks with the Hoopidoo monks. The former, mentioned by MadMonk108 in post #7, wear hooded robes (as much a "hoodie" as a hooded sweatshirt) which they rarely wash and therefore smell like sh!t (poo). The latter, which you mentioned in post #9, tend to make a huge fuss (hoopla) about nothing in particular (whup dee dew) which is rather silly indeed. The fact that people OFTEN get these two groups confused has led to the development of a rather spirited rivalry between both factions, and why they have come to be called "warrior" monks. But now that this misunderstanding is cleared up, back to on-topic discussion! :happy:
All I have to say is that I saw an old video of RB Harmon & T Atkinson doing their version of bong dae ryuhn that's similar to the Textbook/video prescribed by WKSA, and why I prefer to do it the way that SS-KJN Harmon taught me (he hasn't changed it in over 20 years, AFAIK).
i feel its a double bladed sword. On one had it is good to know that you are training the actual art that your teacher professes to know, on the otherhand everything evolves....and those who are stuck on the past get left behind. Someonbe once told me that i wouldnt want to learn baseball from the first guy that played it, i feel the same about martial arts
unknown, Yea he was there also... didn't seem to pleased with the changes either. PM me if you want more info.
Personally I don't think that history is important. Practicality and effectiveness are more important. You can learn an art with all the history you like but the scum who attacks you in the street isn't going to care about your history when they are kicking your head in. Having said that, everything has to come from somewhere.
I am proud of my teachers (in the "everyone should be proud of their teacher" sense, not the "whose better" sense). I am grateful for the people who taught them. I am always curious to learn more about who taught what to whom, when, and how it all came to be this way. Both the legends and the history. Partly because it illustrates the connections between divergent arts. Partly because the stories we tell say something about our values, even when they aren't historically true. But the historical nitty-gritty does not make any difference in how I practice.
My position is much the same as Ember's. Jus because I want to know the answers to my questions does not mean I do not appreciate the martial art of Guksul, or the contributions of its creators. Rather, I'd as this, PSBN Matt. Why are you afraid of what the answers to my questions may be?
afraid???:thinking: can't say i'm afraid of what any answers to any questions you may ask will be, and i doubt i gave over that impression by starting this thread.