.png)
In traditional Japanese and Okinawan martial arts, legitimacy is not an abstract concept.....it is lineage, authority, and technical inheritance. Everything within a martial arts organization, from rank structure to curriculum, ultimately flows from one source: the founder. For this reason, the founder’s signature, seal, and authority are not symbolic; they are the core of the system’s legitimacy.
When a modern administration declares that the founder’s signature is “invalid,” they are not merely challenging a piece of paper. Whether they realize it or not, they are severing their own lineage to the founder and invalidating the foundation upon which their own rank, authority, and positions were built. This is a serious break historically, technically, and ethically.
1. The Founder Is the Point of Origin for All Legitimacy
No matter the size or age of an organization, all ranks,
titles, licenses, and governing structures originate with the founder. Rejecting
that authority is a rejection of the lineage itself.
2. An Administration’s Authority Exists Only Through the
Founder
Presidents, directors, councils, boards, and committees do
not inherently possess martial authority. They receive their position from the
founder:
a.) Their rank is granted by the founder.
b.) Their teaching license traces back to the founder.
c.) Their seat on any governing council exists because the
founder created the structure.
d.) Their decisions are legitimate only because they operate
under the founder’s mandate.
Without that connection, an administration becomes nothing
more than a self-appointed group acting outside the traditions of budo!
3. Declaring the Founder’s Signature Invalid Is a
Declaration of Independence (Whether They Admit It or Not)
In Japanese budo culture, to deny the founder’s signature is
to deny, his authority, his lineage, his legitimacy and his right to issue rank
or validate curriculum. This means the administration’s own credentials, signed
or issued by the founder, are simultaneously rendered invalid by the same
logic. You cannot claim; “His signature is invalid on certificates…but valid on
my rank. Invalid on others…but valid on appointing me.”
This is internally contradictory and unacceptable in budo. If
the founder is not qualified to sign one certificate, he was never qualified to
sign any certificate, including theirs.
4. Severing the Founder Means Severing Their Own Lineage
Once the administration declares that the founder’s signature has no authority, their own ranks become self-referential rather than lineage-based. Their positions (President, Vice President, Director, etc.) collapse because the founder created those posts. All authority they wield becomes illegitimate from a traditional standpoint. The organization becomes a breakaway group, no longer representing the founder’s system. In effect, they have announced a schism, intentionally or unintentionally.
5. Historical and Cultural Consequences
Traditional martial culture treats lineage with utmost seriousness. When a group rejects the founder, they cannot claim to be the original organization. They cannot claim to preserve the founder’s art. They cannot claim to represent the founder's curriculum. They become a new organization with no direct historical legitimacy. This is why in every major Japanese/Okinawan system, administrations never invalidate the founder’s authority, even after the founder steps down, retires, or passes away. Because doing so collapses the foundation on which they stand.
Modern administrations may misunderstand budo precedent or
overlook the implications of their claims, but the truth remains. To reject the
founder’s authority is to reject the source of their own authority. This
principle is universal across legitimate martial traditions. Once an
organization denies the founder’s signature, they are no longer connected to
the founder’s lineage and can no longer claim the legitimacy that lineage
provides.
