You Want To See My Lineage Card?

Recently saw some online discussion on the importance of one’s lineage (which is a popular topic); however, almost immediately, the subject of rank became abundantly woven into the discourse with the question ‘do you care where the person who gave you rank received his rank?’

In my opinion, the concepts of “rank” and “lineage” are far too inter-twined these days – that’s not to say that one has nothing to do with the other, but I AM saying that they should have *little* to do with each other. Rank and lineage have both become (for the most part) social concepts – and in more cases than not, rank promotes ego and lineage promotes snobbery.

Consider this logic: if the standards (not just physical material) for black belt advancement are neither clearly defined nor consistent across the proverbial board (or down any particular lineage), then they become a subjective concept, which is both fallible and far-too-heavily influenced by social dynamics to uphold any true consistency, regardless of one’s good intentions. And as much as Kenpoists cling to this notion that “rank is only legitimate if it comes from *insert your favorite instructor’s name here*”, they also often complain about another individual’s ability not matching the rank they’re wearing.

Now for an example: If an instructor promotes himself to tenth degree, but has the knowledge, experience and ability to back it up…is he any less of a tenth degree?

Another example: Say an instructor promotes himself to say, sixth degree – and his own ability is questionable. If he has an exceptional student whose ability matches that of most thirds, fourths, and fifths out there, and the self-promoted instructor bumps him to third…is that student any less of a third degree?

Furthermore, why in the Hell is rank being made about your lineage back to Ed Parker??? But most importantly, why are we still making a big deal out of a subjective concept (rank)?   

Firstly, rank should (only) be an indication/reflection of the individual practitioner’s knowledge, experience and ability and NOTHING MORE – WHO gives them said rank shouldn’t hold a bearing on whether or not that individual receiving the rank deserves it. We all know Ed Parker promoted some that deserved it and some that perhaps didn’t, so why the big connection between rank and lineage?

Secondly, lineage isn’t just a chain of teachers on a portrait; it’s a downward flow of knowledge. For my own studies and perspectives, Ed Parker was the proverbial ‘fountain’, and in addition to his own works, he gave us both the example and the clues to follow to develop further innovations. For myself and my own lineage, I’ve studied under some great folks and am willing to learn from anyone (hence the phrase “Ed Parker Lineages” on my rocker patch). However, I don’t consider my ‘lineage’ to be any indicator of my dedication or knowledge, nor is it anyone else’s.

But to answer the question, yes, lineage is important – simply because it’s a solid path back to those who made what we do possible. But it does NOT define my worth as a practitioner or a teacher, which is why I keep it separate for the concept of rank…my rank is a reflection of myself and myself only, not who came before me.  

Don't let any lineage color how you view any individual practitioner or school, for better or worse - we've all seen great and sub-par practitioners come from "good" lineages; to that end, a lineage is just that, the line of what came before you. Sure, it can help you out in your training and knowledge, but it isn't the determining factor of the quality and value you possess - YOU are that primary determining factor.