opinions on maasaki hatsumi as koryu?

[everest]

first the reason i'm posting this here is i would like a wider response then if i posted under a ninpo heading.that being said....

what's the general opinion of the bujinkan as taught by hatsumi among the koryu practitioners out there?

i feel like i'm going to be stirring the proverbial pot!

thanks,
scott altland
itten dojo,mechanicsburg,pa.

[nicojo]

I would be very surprised if there is a general opinion. I have nothing useful to say about this myself. Good luck getting any opinions at all.




(That's not to say it's a stupid question. It's one I've wondered too. But I am not sure what people would say apart from diplomacy. This may not be a bad thing.)

[nicojo]

Looks like there is ample stuff to read if we do a search in this forum on Hatsumi...I spoke too soon trying to help you out. I just never bothered to look it up myself. Figures that it has been talked about!

[JakobR]

Koryu.com sums it up fairly well;
http://koryu.com/library/ninjutsu.html

[pete lohstroh]

Mr. Atland,
this may not be the best place to get a satisfying answer. The Koryu.com article is definitely worth reading, whatever your final opinion. E-budo members Ben Cole, Dale Seago, and Dan Weideman are reliable sources of information. Also, people active in the Koryu community in Japan like Jason Jennings (Buyu Books)would have have useful perspectives as well. There are actually very few people in the Bujinkan close enough to Hatsumi sensei to have an informed opinion and...I am not one of them. I am a curious guy myself (scientist) and I am quite happy with the Bujinkan and its background.

I really enjoy the KB Journal atthe Itten Dojo site. I look forward to the monthly re-caps. One in particular featured Kaze Arashi Ryu made me a little curious.

[everest]

i'm not looking for info. to train in bujinkan just general opinion from practioners in other arts. actually i trained in that system about 6 years ago.currently i'm smr jo and aikido.

scott altland
itten dojo,mechanicsburg,pa.

[pete lohstroh]

Mr. Atland,
I have talked with one koryu practioner who was formerly in the Bujinkan. His opinion of the organization was low with a key few exceptions. I enjoyed talking to him though the discussion never got aroung to historical veracity.

In my own experinence, there are not many people who claim to be Bujinkan members who have anything useful to say on the subject. I certainly don't! For your most reliable outsider opinions, ask the people who spend a lot of time training in Japan, read and write Japanese, and are not so busy.

What was your Bujinkan experience like?

[El Guapo-san]

Three pounds of flax! Not increasing, not decreasing; just as it is!

Old topic. Pppptthhhhhttttt.

J. Vlach, Amsterdam

[pete lohstroh]

Mr. Vlach,
your response was not all that helpful. It's a fair question that I have heard many really interesting and informed answers to. Give Mr. Atland a chance to read some.

[JakobR]

Is the question whether Bujinkan is koryu or not, or whehter Bujinkan is a good organization or not? The latter can only be a matter of subjective opinion.

[Jonathon Sumner]

I would have to ask first of all, why even ask the question? I mean if you are asking in terms of academics... I would say that in Japan there is a standard in terms of aceptence by the Koryu comunity at large. Things such as lenage and historical documents are important, so is the acceptance of the the Koryu community in Japan. One might be able to show some documents and what not, and there are groups in Japan that think of themselves as Koryu who do not belong to the two main organizations. The point I am making is that it might depend largely on who you ask.

Also, as for a Ryu being Koryu or not, this point has nothing to do with a systems effectiveness. Some Koryu systems have been compleetly reinvented by people with no combate experience to base the reinvention on.

That was longer than I had hoped, just wanted to say that the answer depends on the motivation of why you are asking. The strength of any system isn't based on if a group is concidered koryu or gendai... but rather on the whole of the individuals who are part of the group. Lousy people can make a good system bad, and good people can make an "ify" system in a decent system.

Just my two cents worth...

[JakobR]

Originally posted by Jonathon Sumner Some Koryu systems have been compleetly reinvented by people with no combate experience to base the reinvention on.
"Completely reinvented" and then accepted as koryu? What koryu system might that be?

[Mekugi]

Originally posted by pete lohstroh
Also, people active in the Koryu community in Japan like Jason Jennings (Buyu Books)would have have useful perspectives as well.

Who-da-what-da-huh?

[pete lohstroh]

Mr. Ebert,
may I ask you for clarification or are you poking fun at my wacky sentences?

If it's latter, I blame sticky keys and a loose macaque.

By the way, I would really be interested in your perspectives because of your Kukishinden Ryu affiliation.

[Mekugi]

Originally posted by pete lohstroh
Mr. Ebert,
May I ask you for clarification?

Sure!
First, call me Russ. Mister Ebert is my dad.

What koryu community are you talking about?

[renfield_kuroda]

Ask any legit Japanese koryu sensei about Hatsumi and he'll tell you what they've told me:

Japanese:
"Hatsumi-wa ninja-gokko o yatteiru."

English:
"Hatsumi is the guy who plays ninja."

Regards,

r e n

[Alex Meehan]

There was a good thread with some interesting and constructive arguments on both sides on budoseek a few months ago. Click here (http://www.budoseek.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=4672) to go to it.

(This debate has been had again and again, however in the thread linked to above, there is very little sillyness, and it should help to explain the points of view of the varying vested interests in this debate.)

Alex Meehan

[Mekugi]

Originally posted by Alex Meehan
There was a good thread with some interesting and constructive arguments on both sides on budoseek a few months ago. Click here (http://www.budoseek.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=4672) to go to it.

(This debate has been had again and again, however in the thread linked to above, there is very little sillyness, and it should help to explain the points of view of the varying vested interests in this debate.)

Alex Meehan

I would take that thread with a grain of salt.

Always,

-Russ

[Hissho]

Originally posted by JakobR
"Completely reinvented" and then accepted as koryu? What koryu system might that be?

You might be surprised.

Isn't it Tanaka Fumon that re-invented Hoki ryu jujutsu based on the old densho?

It hardly seems uncommon, at least in listening to the koryu practitioners I have known when critical of other teachers/groups. Behind closed doors, of course. That kinda thing is not aired in public.

There is also a lot of reviving of old portions of ryu that stopped being practiced or died out. Now, from what I came to understand that is considered perfectly okay in koryu terms if done by a qualified instructor - but it does leave us with the fact that it is generally a person without combat experience, and almost certainly a person without combat experience actually using the traditional weapon/form, doing the reviving.

[Mekugi]

Originally posted by Hissho
There is also a lot of reviving of old portions of ryu that stopped being practiced or died out. Now, from what I came to understand that is considered perfectly okay in koryu terms if done by a qualified instructor - but it does leave us with the fact that it is generally a person without combat experience, and almost certainly a person without combat experience actually using the traditional weapon/form, doing the reviving.

What, should they hire Marines and Airborne to help them revive the kata? I knew of a prominent koryu practitioner who had plenty of combat experience....beheading prisoners of war, that is. I suppose he is qualified...ewww. ;)

Maybe I am totally missing something in this?

[pete lohstroh]

Russ,
duely noted.

Mr. Kuroda,
I have certainly heard this but I do not think it represents a consensus opinion. Would you agree?

[George Kohler]

Originally posted by Hissho
Isn't it Tanaka Fumon that re-invented Hoki ryu jujutsu based on the old densho?

Actually, that would be Nakashima Atsumi.

[El Guapo-san]

Originally posted by pete lohstroh
Mr. Vlach,
your response was not all that helpful. It's a fair question that I have heard many really interesting and informed answers to.

Three pounds of flax!

Go read some Zen. My answer was helpful.

J. Vlach, Amsterdam

[Hissho]

Thanks, George, I was thinking about that and realized I mixed them up.



Originally posted by Mekugi
What, should they hire Marines and Airborne to help them revive the kata? I knew of a prominent koryu practitioner who had plenty of combat experience....beheading prisoners of war, that is. I suppose he is qualified...ewww. ;)

Maybe I am totally missing something in this?

Russ-

Yes, in a manner of speaking... if the idea is to continue the tradition with its originally intended purpose, and that is as a combat effective method.

Somewhere around here someone recently posted that many people seek to practice a "legitimate" koryu mainly because then, at least, they can rest assured that what they are doing is combat tested and combat proven.

There are a whole slew of reasons why this is simply not true, yet it does not discourage some from having as their primary goal in seeking out a traditional "battlefield" method the fact that it was used in combat and therefore is superior, at least in theory, to mere aesthetic budo or (EGAD!) combat sports. Just look at the views of many Daito-ryu people RE: aikido, and many classical JJ people RE: judo. They want to believe its older, nastier, more dangerous and ultimately far more effective because it was used in combat.


My contention is that as the vast majority of martial artists are no longer combatants in any measure, if they want to believe that what they are doing is combat effective, or if they strive for combative realism in any kata they endeavor to recreate or revive, they would do better to seek the assistance of someone who has actually "seen the elephant," in addition to poring over old scrolls and listening to stories about a fight that happened 450 years ago.

Simply put, there are many who may in fact be highly qualified instructors of whatever ryu that are handicapped in a sense because they have no practical experience. They might not even have the eyes to see where this or that movement or kata or whatever has strayed from the path of combative realism over however many generations, and is now a mere shadow of what it once was.

Someone with experience - along with a thorough grounding in the ryu, what its intrinsic characteristics are, and with access to original densho and kuden, may in fact have a very different interpretation of what the combative application of this or that kata or move might represent, and may in fact be more correct in their assessment because they have done more than simply sweat in the training hall - they have bled, and caused others to bleed in real battle, and know what its like.

For example, Col. George Bristol is Marine Recon AND a koryu practitioner. I would much rather listen to his point of view on the combative application of Shinkage-ryu than I would someone without that dual experience. I would also say that he probably would get far more out of certain teachings than someone with equal time in the ryu but without concomitant experience in harm's way.

It means nothing to the preservation of the tradition, *if* the combat application no longer really matters (and in almost all cases it does not) and if that is not what people think they are getting.

It also does not mean that the experienced man cannot learn from the elements of the tradition, even from a master teacher who has never been in a combat situation in their life.

It does mean that, strictly in terms of combat application, the guy with experience will ultimately bring a deeper understanding to that aspect of the tradition by virtue of experience than anyone, no matter how much time is spent in the system, without comparable experience.


BTW, cutting the heads off people who are already prisoners is not what I call combat. It can teach you a lot about what swords do to necks, I think, but as far as cutting them, it has as much relevance to combat as test cutting does.

But I think we are hijacking the thread...

[everest]

pete,
my experience was positive as i trained for about 6 years with jack hoban in new jersey.due to personal non training circumstances my once or twice a month trips to nj.became impossible.training partners drifted away ,finally ceasing training for 5 years until recently training in aikido at itten,and traveling to nj to train under meik and diane skoss in smr jo.we also have a jo study group at itten.

i enjoyed the bujinkan training ...weapons etc. weapon training was most times using the kata of the various ryu learning the flow,distancing and timing.

one thuing i noticec is a huge gap in bujinkan pracitioners.many people go to japan with previous MA training train maybe once a year there and mix previous knowledge into the bujinkan stuff.you end up with a hodge podge of !!!!. thats why so many bujinkan i feel are not respected.then on top of that they throw in some black masks ,and survival skills.

not once did we don black masks,ninja tabi ,camo or do outdoor psuedo survival training.so many of the clowns out there ruin it for real practitioners.to mix things up would b like me adding tae kwon do kicks to my aikido or smr jo!

i read the budoseek articles and their very good.with all the bad budo ninja crap out therei just wondered if the general non bujinkan practioners thought as little about the real system.thanks for input.

scott altland
itten dojo,mechanicsburg,pa.

[kabutoki]

Ask any legit Japanese koryu sensei about Hatsumi and he'll tell you what they've told me:

Japanese:
"Hatsumi-wa ninja-gokko o yatteiru."

English:
"Hatsumi is the guy who plays ninja."


Dear Ren,
I always respected your posts but this one doesn´t make sense to me. The use of "any" implies every koryu teacher in Japan thinks so, yet you go on saying that actually "he", one teacher told you that.
I don´t think that this generalization depicts Hatsumi´s image in Japan. There sure are a lot of those like the one you stated, but also otherones who do respect Hatsumi for what he is/does. I felt that his reputation in Japan wasn´t that good but I always found that he is much more famous outside of Japan and some people in Japan base their opinion on very few "facts" they believe to know.
This is of course only my personal opinion which is based on conversations with MA teachers and students in Japan (definetely not enough for a statistic analysis).

Karsten

[renfield_kuroda]

Let me qualify my statement: I do not know EVERY koryu sensei in Japan, so obviously I cannot speak for everyone. But the few I have spoken to, and who claim to/seem to represent the majority opinion, think in general the following:

* Hatsumi is most famous for his role in entertainment. Similar reputation to Sonny Chiba, who runs the most famous stuntman school in Japan (anyone who dies in a ganster/martial arts movie in Japan probably graduated from Chiba's school.) He's organized ninja shows and ninja camps, etc. that look likes lots of fun.

* The issue of whether ninjitsu is koryu or not is moot. Ninja were the special ops/CIA/black helicopters troops of the time. You don't walk around going "I'm a secret agent!" and you don't walk around going "I'm a ninja!"

* The few ninja in Japan I do know in Japan realize they are 'playing at ninja' and in fact don't mind one bit. It's difficult to understand in a Western mindset, but there's nothing wrong with seriously pursuing at playing ninja. For some reason, in the US in particular, everyone seems so concerned with establishing the 'legitimacy' of their ninja art.
Do you enjoy it? Does practicing it make you a better person? Fine then, leave it at that. But take the invented 'history' with a grain of salt. It serves a purpose; it's dramatic, it's compelling, it's romantic, and ninja popularity isn't going down (latest ninja anime Naruto is very popular, etc.)

BUT, I seriously doubt you will find any legitimate koryu sensei who would consider Hatsumi as they would consider their own Soke.
Hatsumi HAS done alot for martial arts; got alot of people off their butt and moving around and thinking and having fun and entertaining, and I think that's good -- net net it makes the world a better place. But that doesn't make it koryu. Same goes for kendo, tae-kwon-do, tate, sport-fishing.

And now I'll stop, because the biggest issue with the 'ninja debate' is it's not a debate, it's religious. No matter what arguments either side makes, no one will ever convince me ninjijtsu is koryu, and I'll never convince a ninja that what they do isn't. So say I'm democratic and your republican, I'm pro-tobacco tax and you're anti, I'm privatized health care and you're nationalized...we can still be friends, eh?

Regards,

r e n

[Hissho]

Ren-

Serious question, I am legitimately interested in the answer.

If people are considered to be "playing" at ninja, are then koryu practitioners considered to be "playing" at being bushi?

If not, why/how is it viewed differently?

Are the folks that participate in the mock battle re-enactments in full period armor viewed differently than those who demonstrate something like Yagyu Shingan-ryu in full armor?

[renfield_kuroda]

The problem I think is with the English word 'play'.

Professional athletes play baseball. That's certainly a more serious engagement than when a bunch of kids play baseball in the park on Sunday.

I guess we could use the word 'do', but it doesn't really sound right. In Japanese the term I've heard over and over again is 'ninja-gokko', and I translate that as 'playing at ninja' or 'playing ninja'.

For the record, I do not play at being a samurai: 'samurai-gokko', I study a koryu art: 'koryu-o keiko suru'. the Japanese term 'keiko' is translated as study/dedicated pursuit.

So again I think it's both an issue w/the English language and the 'Western mindset' (to make an overly broad and sweeping generalization) -- koryu folks in Japan have no problem with the ninja folks, and in general neither aspires to the other. Another fine example of conceptual harmonious juxtaposition that seems possible only in Japanese society.

Regards,

r e n

[Earl Hartman]

As I was eating my bento in my cubicle yesterday, a co-worker stopped and said "What's that?"

"My lunch", I said.

"What's in it?"

"Well, let's see...steamed rice, breaded and deep fried freeze-dried tofu, cucumber with miso, brolied salmon, burdock root with carrots, and deep-fried tofu pockets simmered with green onions."

"How cute!"

What has this got to do with budo? For me, this is what I eat pretty much every day. It's food. To her (she had, needless to say, never heard of gobo (burdock root), Koya-doufu (freeze dried tofu), or abura-age (deep fried tofu pockets), it was not really food, in a way, it was "cute".

For people who don't know or care about budo and see it as exotic, whatever we do (especially if we wear armor and stuff) will be "cute", like a re-enactment of the jousts and what-not put on at the Renaissance Pleasure Faires.

For people who actually do it, it is not "cute". It's what we eat for lunch every day.

I still think that the koryu.com definition of koryu is still the best we've got: a legitimate koryu is a living tradition of fighting techinques and associated practices that orignated in a certain period of history, has a documented and provable lineage, and has been continuously practiced since that time.

No one doubts that ninja existed and pacticed a body of techniques that we refer to today as ninjutsu. The main bone of contention is that the lineage is not proven and documented. The result is there is a strong possibility that the techniques are either created out of whole cloth (worst case) or reinvented based on whatever historical documents might be available (best case).

Of course, even the most distinguished koryu with the most impeccable pedigree will still be greeted with skepticism by people who don't know or care, and will be seen as being the same thing as "ninja-gokko" ("Yeah, I know it's an old and venerable Japanese tradition, but so what?"). This is an argument that will never be solved.

[Hissho]

There still seems to be a clear differentiation with what Hatsumi is doing compared to what people who are koryu practitioners are doing - evidenced in the comment by the teacher you noted.

Your own statement also clearly differentiates your own training (keiko) in a koryu from "playing at samurai." Would I be correct in surmising that other serious koryu practitioners in Japan would make the same distinction?

So....if the teachers are making the distinction, and practitioners are making the distinction, it seems clearly more than a problem in translation to the English language and the Western mind.

Note I don't know that you are saying that the Japanese view it condescendingly as compared to "legit" koryu, though your original post comes across as if they do, the way I read it.

Thanks

[Hissho]

Thanks, Earl, I think that made it a little more clear.

[Earl Hartman]

Well, Kit, it's just my opinion. These definitions all go back to Draeger and have been refined by his disciples in such places as koryu.com. Whatever one may think of them, they are still the best starting point that I have seen.

Nothing can ever be perfectly defined. But you gotta start somewhere.

I think the main thing is verifiability. Taking the Yagyu Shinkage Ryu as an example, while one may think whatever one wants of Yagyu Shinkage Ryu, it is impossible to deny the authenticity of the ryu's documents and their historical provenance. In additon to that, due to the social position occupied by the school, the doings of the school and the activities of its members can be corroborated through third-party historical sources in addition to the writings of members of the ryu such as Yagyu Munenori and Yagyu Jubei. In other words, whatever one's opinions of the ryu itself, no one can really take issue with the FACT of the EXISTENCE of the ryu and the verifiablity of its history.

In the case of ninjutsu, none of this applies. Indeed, seeing as how ninjutsu was supposed to be secret, I would imagine that the "headmasters" of ninjutsu, if there even was such an institution among ninjas, did their best to hide everything they could about it. This makes it a perfect vehicle for scoundrels and charlatans, since their claims can never be disporoven. All they have to do is wink one eye, put a finger to their lips, and whisper "Shhhh! It's a secret".

To take another example, as you know, I studied Nagao Ryu Taijutsu when I lived in Kanazawa. My teacher was a student of the legitimate headmaster, Maeda Kogetsu, (whom I later discovered was something of a laughingstock in the koryu world in Japan) but broke with him when his own research (extremely extensive and thorough, BTW) revealed that Maeda was not transmitting the techniques correctly. So he started his own group.

So, was I studying a legitimate koryu, since I was the student of a renegade?

Good question.

[Hissho]

Hmmm, sorta throws a wrench in the whole idea of what "legitimate" actually means, doesn't it?

[Peter Carlsson]

Gentlemen,

To ninja or not to ninja, that's the question....

This thread started out with the question if Hatsumi sensei teach koryu or not, and drifted towards a discussion of ninja.

I have been training in Bujinkan for almost 20 years, and I've never encountered ninja-gokko.... :rolleyes:

Strange, isn't it?

Most of the training I have encountered have been Taijutsu, sword, staffs, yari, naginata etc.

If you are going to discuss if Hatsumi sensei teach koryu or not, then the discussion maybe should stem from what is actually trained in Bujinkan, and not what has been showed in television shows etc. It's not necessarily the same thing....

just my .2 cents

Peter Carlsson
Malmö Taijutsuklubb - Bujinkan Dojo
Sweden

[Robert Miller]

Which Bujinkan ryu-ha are listed in the Bugei Ryu-ha Daijiten , and who is listed as their legitimate inheritor?

[Mekugi]

Originally posted by Hissho
Hmmm, sorta throws a wrench in the whole idea of what "legitimate" actually means, doesn't it?

There is a difference between legitimate and orthodox though, isn't there?

-Russ

[shinbushi]

Ireally like Ellis Amdur's post on http://www.budoseek.net in the ninpo forum found here (http://www.budoseek.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=38726&postcount=23)
Just opened this thread, and I wanted to correct a few small misconceptions.

Dale, I recall your student - a really fine guy. He did not ask me about "koryu.com." I see a tendency in this thread, and I certainly seen it far more pronounced in others to write about Diane and Meik Skoss' website as if it is a collective organization. It's not an organization at all. It's their business website, and they post a few articles on it - some really good, some less so. I won't speak for Meik and Diane, but my own (mostly) disinterest in the Bujinkan is perhaps the same as theirs - that what you do is not what I do. (And as I will try to establish, I think the feeling from Hatsumi is mutual).

What your student asked me was what was the viewpoint of orthodox koryu practitioners re Bujinkan, and why was it held.

Let's preface what follows by saying I'm not going to write anything here about effectiveness, skill or strength. I don't think much is accomplished by fanticizing how strong you are or are not, or how good your sword waza are, compared to x-ryu, sitting at a keyboard.

What I said was that the Bujinkan (and Genbukan, for that matter) and it's subsidiary practices are not carried out in a manner congruent with that of any other koryu system in Japan. It's method of teaching, ranking, etc. is different. This is not merely a matter of innovation - I have an essay in the third of the Skoss' books regarding innovation, and describe my own role in some significant innovation in two ryu I'm involved in.

"It's not koryu" in Japanese has two interpretations - the first is rigid and the second is an adjective. For example, Jikishin Kage-ryu naginatajutsu was not admitted to the Kobudo Shinkokai for many years (the criteria have loosened over the last couple of decades) because it was not founded before the Meiji period cut-off. That's an example of the rigid criteria.

I have presented kata of old ryu that I have had a hand in reviving or recreating, according to the technical parameters of the school in question. No outsider has ever realized that these are not old school kata, because they look and move exactly the same. But were I to present a new kenpo section to my Araki-ryu, using parameters from the hsing-i I"m practicing a lot now, and the muay thai I used to do, even though, as a licensed instructor I'd have the authority to do so, every traditional Japanese looking at it would say, "That's not koryu." The adjective criteria.

Now, as for Hatsumi and the Bujinkan - the formal criteria. I will assert with some confidence that the Kobudo Shinkokai does not demand that one give one's own makimono to them. My teachers, members, had their own makimono in their own house. But if the lineage of their school were questioned, they would request to see the makimono. The outsider (non-Bujinkan) understanding is that there are no makimono in existence of any of the (9??) Bujinkan ryu which establish a lineage pre-Takamatsu. In other words, there are no scrolls with pre-date him. NOT that the ryu don't exist - but that the lines claimed as going to Takamatsu are not established. Hatsumi may have such scrolls - but they have not been viewed by outsiders who are the "arbitrers" regarding joining the "club."

As for the "adjectival criteria," I've visited Hatsumi, trained with Terry Dobson, observed Bujinkan and Genbukan training, including formal kata, done some sparring with weapons and empty-handed as well, and speaking personally here as a "traditionalist," it just doesn't look like or feel like koryu - timing, ma-ai, weapon usage, etc. is just different - sometimes subtly, sometimes grossly. To reiterate, I'm not talking about strength! Some of the most legitimate koryu are sterile societies of a few hobbiests who preserve a rote version of kata and couldn't fight their way out of a junior high school schoolyard fight.

The best way to explain the difference is this. There are classsical music societies that only use period instruments. You get to hear Mozart and Bach the way their own audiences probably did. Then there are classical musicians in modern orchestras, with far more instruments, a piano with a vastly different sound. Still "koryu," but somewhat innovated. Then there are ensembles which use electric violins, add some jazz figure, some coda's with modern dissonences. They would say that the old music is stultified and that they, the innovators have returned to the spirit of the founders (the Sengoku jidai of music, so to speak). The traditionalists would say, "That aint classical." To me, that's the position that Hatsumi is in (he reportedly blends the techniques of the different ryu, for one example), and he obviously can care less about the classisists, or he'd invite them over to his house, show them the makimono going back seven generations, etc., and join their club. But he doesn't - he either doesn't have such records, or he does, but he has nothing to prove to people he feels are stuck in rigid sterile training. This is a man who has stated, per other posters, that he does and knows Katori Shinto-ryu far better than practitioners of the actual ryu (I can't cite this thread's location, but I recall it). I would infer that, to him, an assertion that "We, the Bujinkan, are koryu" means a DROP in status, not a rise. (And this was certainly my impression of him in my meeting with him in 1977 and in a subsequent phone call in 1980 where he refused to let me see a makimono of Araki-ryu that he definitely had, saying, "I don't show my material.")

In sum, (sorry for the length), why would you guys want to join a club that he clearly feels is beneath him and you?

with respect

Ellis Amdur

[pete lohstroh]

I'd like to suggest that Quentin Chambers' relationship to Hatsumi sensei deserves consideration though it may not provide much clarity.

[Hissho]

Originally posted by Mekugi
There is a difference between legitimate and orthodox though, isn't there?

-Russ

That's probably a better way of casting it.

[pete lohstroh]

My previous post was in reference to "Stickfighting" which was co-authored by Hatsumi sensei and Mr. Chambers.

Apologies all around for any confusion.

[ChrisMoon]

Originally posted by pete lohstroh
I'd like to suggest that Quentin Chambers' relationship to Hatsumi sensei deserves consideration though it may not provide much clarity.

What consideration would that be? That what Hatsumi does is koryu because Mr. Chambers trained with him for 7 years and co-authored a book with him? Chambers studied with Ueshiba for several years as well.

[Mekugi]

Originally posted by ChrisMoon
What consideration would that be? That what Hatsumi does is koryu because Mr. Chambers trained with him for 7 years and co-authored a book with him?

On this note, I would like to point out that the Kata demonstrated in that book are NOT KORYU KATA. That being said, if anyone doubts their effectiveness they should ask to have it `plied to them and see...

[ChrisMoon]

Hey cool picture Russ! Thank you for posting that.

[Mekugi]

Originally posted by ChrisMoon
Hey cool picture Russ! Thank you for posting that.

You betcha! The real thanks goes to "Addo" for snapping that pic. Totally awesome.

[pete lohstroh]

Mr. Moon,
In response to your query:
No. I did not suggest that because of the co-authorship koryu status was implicit. I implied that Mr. Chambers would have an worthwhile and informed opinion. It was a discussion point to illustrate the complication of the issue. Reasonable, yes? I have already discussed this with another gentleman by e-mail and have nothing more I care to add except that I think the "Stickfighting" book is good.

[ChrisMoon]

I agree I think he would have a worthwhile opinion. I will ask him when I see him a week from tomorrow. I also agree the book is really good. =)

[JakobR]

Hmm... what hurts most? The hanbo-technique or the clinker floor?

[Ron Beaubien]

Hello,

Originally posted by Peter Carlsson:

I have been training in Bujinkan for almost 20 years, and I've never encountered ninja-gokko.... :rolleyes: Strange, isn't it? Most of the training I have encountered have been Taijutsu, sword, staffs, yari, naginata etc.

Are you sure?

Isn't one of Masaaki Hatsumi's most famous quotes: "Understand? Good. Play! (http://www.bushinbooks.com)"?

Regards,

Ron Beaubien

[Peter Carlsson]

Originally posted by Ron Beaubien
Are you sure?

Isn't one of Masaaki Hatsumi's most famous quotes: "Understand? Good. Play! (http://www.bushinbooks.com)"?

Regards,

Ron Beaubien

Of course "play" is important in the training in Bujinkan....but, I've still not encountered the concept of "playing ninja", i.e. nothing like running around in masks, sneaking around, disappearing in puffs of smoke etc.

The only type of training I've encountered have been taijutsu, sword, staffs, naginata, yari etc. and there, we have been "playing" with the katas and methods, breaking them down, making variations, adaptations etc.

That was what i meant. I'm sorry if I didn't explain myself in a way that could be understood.

Best regards

Peter Carlsson
Malmö Taijutsuklubb - Bujinkan Dojo
Sweden

[Mekugi]

Word up that book totally rocks. My sensei in jo here stole my copy and he doesn't read any English....(note to self...have Mister Moon talk to Mister Chambers about reverse translation.)
Originally posted by ChrisMoon
I agree I think he would have a worthwhile opinion. I will ask him when I see him a week from tomorrow. I also agree the book is really good. =)

[MarkF]

Hi, Ron,

I don't know anything about the book, but that's a gem, I have to admit.

Of course, I probably would have said "Understand? Good, Now go play in the middle of the road."

But it is a nice one, at least to this old judo-"player."


Mark

[siralec]

Hi all,

I have been a Bujinkan student for quite a while and the whole koryu.com issue has weighed very heavily on my mind for several years since I became aware of the website (koryu.com). The reason it upsets me is not because of wanting to be accepted by any "koryu community" but because of the implicit accusations of dishonesty somewhere in our recent history.

I have searched for a long time to try understand this issue, but most arguments and rebuttals seem to miss the point totally. There are many many long threads on the topic all over the forums, but they always seem to get derailed and are never conclusive. Looking at how many threads on e-budo on the topic got shut down by the moderators seems to prove my point.

I have recently found what is probably the best thread on this topic over on Budoseek

http://www.budoseek.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=4672&page=1&pp=20

It looks like we may finally be getting somewhere. The discussion is civil and focused and had some great input from people who know what they are talking about.

Remember, the original question on koryu.com was "Is Ninjutsu Koryu?" and NOT "Is the Bujinkan Koryu?"

So we need to ask whether Togakure Ryu dates back before 1868 or not?

By talking about the Bujinkan, it gives far too many get-out clauses for people on both sides. It allows them to avoid confronting the real question.

What type of get-out clauses am I talking about?

Well, it allows the so-called koryu people to avoid having to come out and actually say anything is fake and to talk instead about things like organizational issues and teaching methodology.

At the same time it allows the Bujinkan side to exclaim that there is
much more than Ninjutsu in the Bujinkan system and then to point to
Kukishin Ryu and Takagi Yoshin Ryu.

To put it another way, the problem with most internet discussions that I've seen on the topic has been that people mistake the question “Is Ninjutsu Koryu?” with the following questions:

1) Is the Bujinkan system koryu?
2) Is Hatsumi a member of the koryu organizations?
3) Is the Bujinkan training good?
4) Is it being taught in the koryu manner?

That is why so many discussions don't get anywhere. I would urge people to stick to the subject and would also welcome any information from people either by PM or by posts.

Regards
Alec Courtney

[siralec]

Hello,



Are you sure?

Isn't one of Masaaki Hatsumi's most famous quotes: "Understand? Good. Play! (http://www.bushinbooks.com)"?

Regards,

Ron Beaubien

BTW this is what is meant by Hatsumi Soke when he says "Play!"

An exclamation that reminds us of the fun-loving heart we must bear in order to grow. This is something that Sōke says before we try out a new technique. It is a proclamation reminding us to smile and laugh, to enjoy training, to bond with others...to play!

Source www.bushinbooks.com

[cxt]

Siralec

I just read thu the koryu.com article in question.

I could find no implication of "dishonesty" on anyone's part.

Perhaps you could be more specific?

Just seems to me that they took great care to frame the statements opinion, and that opinions could be different for different folks.

Maybe I'm wrong.


Chris Thomas

[fifthchamber]

Hi all..
Of course "play" is important in the training in Bujinkan....but, I've still not encountered the concept of "playing ninja", i.e. nothing like running around in masks, sneaking around, disappearing in puffs of smoke etc.
I don't mean this in any way to be a criticism or anything other than what it is..But what I, and a majority of the Japanese that go to the Enbu have seen is precisely this..Ninja vanishing in smoke and catching arrows in the eyes and running around in masks..I agree that training is training but this image IS out there..And is supported in Enbu put on by those high enough in the organisation to have a good idea about what to show..These photos are from the recent Enbu put on in the Tokyo Budokan in Ayase..Make of them what you will.
Regards.

[Steve Delaney]

WHAT in the name of all that is HOLY???

*Rubs eyes*

Man I need another Guinness after that!

[niten ninja]

Dear god...

[hyaku]

Which Bujinkan ryu-ha are listed in the Bugei Ryu-ha Daijiten , and who is listed as their legitimate inheritor?

Not all the ryu are in there.

[Hattori]

I have noticed that Hatsumi refers to ninjato quite a lot despite many sword experts insisting that such a sword NEVER existed.

Also, Hatsumi studied Asayama Ichiden ryu (a recognised koryu) did he not? Anyone know if he attained any substantial grading in that school and why he never mentions it?

[niten ninja]

I've noticed that "straight sword" often refers to a sword not quite as bent as usual.

[Steve Delaney]

I have noticed that Hatsumi refers to ninjato quite a lot despite many sword experts insisting that such a sword NEVER existed.

Also, Hatsumi studied Asayama Ichiden ryu (a recognised koryu) did he not? Anyone know if he attained any substantial grading in that school and why he never mentions it?

Uh-oh, that question's gonna open a can o' worms

[George Kohler]

Also, Hatsumi studied Asayama Ichiden ryu (a recognised koryu) did he not? Anyone know if he attained any substantial grading in that school and why he never mentions it?

Yes, he learned Asayama Ichiden-ryu and received MK from Ueno Takashi. He does not mention Ueno or Asayama because they had a falling out. I believe Hatsumi Sensei still teaches Asayama, but does not mention the names (kata and school). If you look at some of the techniques in Hatsumi Sensei's stick fighting book (co-written with Chambers) there are several techniques (Hishigi - short stick) from Asayama Ichiden-ryu.

[siralec]

Siralec

I just read thu the koryu.com article in question.

I could find no implication of "dishonesty" on anyone's part.

Perhaps you could be more specific?




Hello Chris,

It is not said explicitly. You need to read between the lines.
If Ninjutsu is not Koryu, it means that Togakure Ryu does not date back any further than 1868, right? (note they don't say "is not certain" but rather they say "it IS NOT koryu." They also say "ninjutsu as a ryuha does not exist." Very concrete terms they are using.

But we say it stems back 34 generations. So already we have an accusation that our lineage is false. Not just fake, but grossly fake.

But you can narrow it down even further. Because the cut off date for koryu is 1868, they are accusing one of three men of lying: Hatsumi-sensei, Takamatsu-sensei or Toda-sensei.

Only if one of these three men made it up, would Togakure Ryu not be koryu.

The dates of birth and death are such that even if Toda's father were to have made the art up and lied about it, it would still be koryu because it was made up before the 1868 cut-off date.

Similarly, if a member of the Toda family made it up in the mid Edo period, it would still be koryu, even if he lied about its origin.

So the finger of blame is being pointed at someone who lived in the period after 1868, which doesn't leave a lot of room.

Alec Courtney

[saru1968]

If you look at some of the techniques in Hatsumi Sensei's stick fighting book (co-written with Chambers) there are several techniques (Hishigi - short stick) from Asayama Ichiden-ryu.


I thought the Hanbo tachniques were from Kukishinden Ryu in that book??

[cxt]

Siralec


But thats exactly the point.

"They" say no such thing---that's you "reading between the lines"--as you, yourself suggest that you must do.

And to be fair--I "think" (meaning that I am not 100% sure but the last time i checked it was so) that the position taken by Koryu.com is more or less the same position taken by the Japanese Governement themselves in terms of dates and "koryu" status.

If I am correct--would that mean that you think the Japanese Government is also "lying?"

They are not "really" calling anyone names, merely listing the criteria they use and whom fits the criteria.

And again, I don't think that they are alone in that.


Chris Thomas

[Hattori]

And to be fair--I "think" (meaning that I am not 100% sure but the last time i checked it was so) that the position taken by Koryu.com is more or less the same position taken by the Japanese Governement themselves in terms of dates and "koryu" status.

If I am correct--would that mean that you think the Japanese Government is also "lying?"

Chris, what's the government got to do with anything concerning martial arts and such? Members of the government wouldn't know karate from ballet. How does the government come into a discussion of martial arts?

If you look at some of the techniques in Hatsumi Sensei's stick fighting book (co-written with Chambers) there are several techniques (Hishigi - short stick) from Asayama Ichiden-ryu.

The Asayama Ichiden ryu DOES NOT include any "crushing stick" (hishigi) methods. The hishigijutsu techniques that Hatsumi covers in his book are from Shindo Tenshin ryu according to Hatsumi. Ueno Takashi was the 8th head of Shindo Tenshin ryu.

He does not mention Ueno or Asayama because they had a falling out.

That's a pretty lame reason to not mention receiving a menkyo kaiden in a koryu art.

[cxt]

Hattori

Please be so kind as to read the posts.

Sirelac has accused the folks over at Koryu.com of "lying" about TN because of the dates and methods they use to decide whom is koryu and whom is not.

Point is that as far as I am aware, they use the same defintions/satndards as the Japanese Government.

So if one is "lying" then so is the other one.

And I would love to hear a rationalization as to why the Government of Japan would "lie" about something like that?
What would be the motivatiuon to do so?

Heck, why would the folks over at Koryu.com?

Like it or not, "buy" it or not--the government of Japan has a method of classifiying what is and what is not "koryu."

(AGAIN--thats my understanding--could be wrong)

If you have a problem with it---I suggest that you take it up with them, as I am in no way qualified or authorized to speak for the Government of Japan.


Chris Thomas

[Hattori]

the government of Japan has a method of classifiying what is and what is not "koryu."

Chris, I was merely asking how the government has anything to do with the classification of a koryu art?

Can you point me to any Japanese government departments that have any idea what constitutes a koryu martial art? Can you point me to Japanese government departments that have anything to do with deciding what is and is not "koryu?"

My father-in-law works for the Japanese government, he tells me that the government has nothing to do with the classification and practice of traditional cultural arts. The Japanese cultural arts are controlled and regulated by their own (independant of the government) organisations under the guidance of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology.

It designates cultural properties in the following categories: National Treasures; Important Cultural Properties; Historic Sites; Places of Scenic Beauty; and Natural Monuments. It also conserves, restores, and protects cultural properties from disaster, conducts excavations of buried cultural properties, purchases and restores historic sites, and formulates various other measures.

You seem to infer that the government itself has a set of standards for determining what is and is not a koryu. Can you point me to these standards as laid down by the government? I'd very much like to see them.

[fifthchamber]

It's the various Koryu organisations here in Japan that decided the cut off point that Koryu.com has been using...Not the government..Thank God..But the point is the same..The line is there and is generally accepted as such..For all intents and purposes it is about right..Some Ryuha may still slip by...Several I can name off the top of my head in fact..But they don't demo at the Koryu organisations taikai or enbu..And probably don't care about what they are labled as outside of their own groups...But then neither does Hatsumi..In general the only ones making a fuss about this are those in western countries...The Japanese in the Ninpo organisations have stayed relatively silent about the issue..
The bottom line is that the Bujinkan is not considered Koryu by two organisations in Japan (The only two with any real backing) and by one website..What individuals think is their own idea..You can ask them about that...Or ask Koryu.com...But you won't get a reply because they don't care to talk about it anymore..That also is their own choice..I don't think it's koryu either..And whatever you say won't convince me..But that's me..And it matters not at all..To anyone other than me.
Why are we discussing this?Wait until Hatsumi decides to fight for it to be included because until then it's all speculation that means and changes nothing at all.
Regards.

[George Kohler]

I thought the Hanbo tachniques were from Kukishinden Ryu in that book??

Yes, the hanbo techniques belong to Kukishin-ryu. We are talking about the short stick.

[DDATFUS]

I went back and re-read koryu.com's explanation of why they do not include ninjutsu. Interestingly enough, they do say that

"What is commonly taught as ninjutsu, in Japan and elsewhere, is a fairly recent collection of unarmed and weapons arts, two of which are independent koryu."

That seems to indicate that they question not the age of the arts, but the packaging of them. In other words, the arts themselves are old, but the umbrella organizations (such as Bujinkan) are a modern creation.

I remember reading somewhere, I suspect on this forum, that the fact that Bujinkan has evolved and adapted over time, with techniques adjusted to fit modern circumstances, also plays a role in some people's choice to view ninjutsu as something other than koryu. As I understand it, true koryu are those that exist unchanged from the pre-Meiji years.

Just my opinion, which may not be worth much, as I know very little about Bujinkan, koryu, etc.

[jfkcotter]

As I understand it, true Koryu are those that exist unchanged from the pre-Meiji years.

Anybody who believes that is just fooling themselves. All Koryu have changed over the years (generally becoming more and more stylized, formal and inflexible) simply because they have no chance to actual test their techniques.

You see guys in Japan doing Iai, Jo, Naginata etc who *really* think they would be able to wield them in an actual fight.

Do them as a discipline but never take yourself too seriously. You could get hurt.

[DDATFUS]

Anybody who believes that is just fooling themselves. All Koryu have changed over the years (generally becoming more and more stylized, formal and inflexible) simply because they have no chance to actual test their techniques.

You see guys in Japan doing Iai, Jo, Naginata etc who *really* think they would be able to wield them in an actual fight.

Do them as a discipline but never take yourself too seriously. You could get hurt.

I'm not even remotely qualified to pass judgement over whether or not koryu practitioners could or could not perform in actual combat, nor do I know nearly enough about the history and evolution of the arts to speculate on how much they have shifted over time. It was my understanding, based on some things that I have read, that the stated goals of koryu is to remain static, to keep as true to the old traditions as possible, while Dr. Hatsumi wants his art to evolve and change to fit the modern era. If true, this would represent a substantial philisophical difference between Bujinkan and the traditional koryu approaches, and this difference might explain how some people could say that Bujinkan is not koryu without necessarily doubting the origins of the style. Is that remotely ballpark, or am I completely off-base?

[Brian Owens]

...this difference might explain how some people could say that Bujinkan is not koryu without necessarily doubting the origins of the style.
Excuse me for butting in here, but I think I'm seeing people getting confused on terms.

As I understand it, the Bujinkan is a post-Meiji (even post-WWII) umbrella organization, and I've never heard of it being called a koryu -- or even a ryu at all -- before. Nor, from what I understand, does the Bujinkan represent a single "style."

But within the Bujinkan, Togakure Ryu is taught, along with other systems. So the question is, I believe, "Is Togakure Ryu a koryu?"

[Hattori]

..............the stated goals of koryu is to remain static, to keep as true to the old traditions as possible,...........

Really? Where is this stated?

Intentionally or not, all the koryu have changed and been modified down to today. I can't see a reason why samurai would practice a system of combat if it has become outdated and anachronistic. The original "goals" of the various ryu was to WIN in a combat situation I thought. Combat invariably changes.

I don't think the inventors of the various ryu intended their systems to become stagnant and frozen in time.

I think that Hatsumi and his Bujinkan (and the Genbukan and Jinenkan) are perhaps carrying on the original intention of the various schools - to adapt and reinvent themselves to be able to be constantly effective combatively.

I dunno, a bit of me wants to protect them unchanged, but when does one stop the "tradition," at what point does it "freeze in time?" If one adds something that one deems necessary to make it effective today does it loose its "koryu" label? Isn't it the "essence" and the "lineage" that makes it a koryu rather than the individual techniques?

Forgive my rambling.

[cxt]

Hattori


Your missing the point.

The issue is NOT if a government agency has an in-depth understanding of koryu.

(not even sure that its the govenment that makes such rulings)

Maybe they don't--then again maybe they do.

Were talking about Japan after all--whose to say that folks making the rulings are not folks with generations of training.

See, WE DON'T KNOW---we can speculate, we can guess, but we simply don't know.

And in any case that is utterly NOT the point.

Point is that an "offical" classification system exsits--we can argue all day about its "validity" but it changes nothing.

Koryu are cultural arts from Japan--and the Japanese have a system.

Love it, hate it, disagree with it, all you want---changes nothing.

The bottom line here is that the folks in the nation that created the arts in question have a system of classification.

You don't like it?

Take it up with them.


Chris Thomas

[cxt]

JFcotter

"All koryu have changed over the years."


And you know this exactly how?

You have that much information on "all koryu" going back generations do you?

Love to see your data on that.

See, its one thing to assert something----quite another to be able to back it up.


Chris Thomas

[jfkcotter]

Love to see your data on that.

Chris, firstly I started training Koryu in the 60's and have noted how many things have changed in the Ryu I practice over the past 40 years.

Secondly, look at some of the stuff filmed pre war and you'll can see how different it is from what is done now.

Sorry if this sort of upsets your 'I'm practicing the way the ancients did' theory but things change, one teachers personal idiosyncrasies become dogma in one line whereas another teachers favorite moves become more exaggerated in another line. Everyone knows this happens. No big deal. It's just a hobby remember. :)

[George Kohler]

My father-in-law works for the Japanese government, he tells me that the government ...

David,

James Kelmo (brother ?) also has a Japanese Father-in-Law. You also seem to have the same IP address. Would you care to elaborate before your sent to E-Budo Hell?

[cxt]

JFKcotter

So basically all you can "really" speak to is that things have "changed" in the art you practice.

Can't springboard your personal experience to include everyone.

Well, I mean you "can" its just not logically valid.

And no, the idea that things might change does not really bother me.

What does bother me is folks being sloppy with the logic.

I also notice that you confine yourself to rather thin assertions--rather than specific examples.

Things I can check to see if your opinion is supportable.

Very easy to assert that---very hard to prove it--even harder to effectively apply it across the board.
Harder still to use it support addtl lines of reasoning.

See, I am perfectly ok with the concept of koryu "possibly" changeing over time or to fit the indeosencratic nature of people teaching it.

The question become how much change and in what area?
And that is what really can't be answered.

Also pretty comfortable with the concept of Koryu--despite all its supposed flaws and unsupported claims of "changes" its STILL the nearest thing we have to period arts.

As a western saber fencer--I would kill for even a fraction of the period info preserved by the koryu.

Do I see it as "perfect"--no.
Nothing and no-one is.

Still the best we have to work with.


Chris Thomas

[DDATFUS]

As I understand it, the Bujinkan is a post-Meiji (even post-WWII) umbrella organization, and I've never heard of it being called a koryu -- or even a ryu at all -- before. Nor, from what I understand, does the Bujinkan represent a single "style."

But within the Bujinkan, Togakure Ryu is taught, along with other systems. So the question is, I believe, "Is Togakure Ryu a koryu?"

Thanks, Brian. Excellent clarification.

[siralec]

Sirelac has accused the folks over at Koryu.com of "lying"
about TN because of the dates and methods they use to decide whom is
koryu and whom is not.

Point is that as far as I am aware, they use the same
defintions/satndards as the Japanese Government.

So if one is "lying" then so is the other one.

And I would love to hear a rationalization as to why the Government
of Japan would "lie" about something like that?
What would be the motivatiuon to do so?

Heck, why would the folks over at Koryu.com?


Huh?

I never said anyone was lying about the dates and methods. I know
that the cut-off date is 1868 and I agree totally with it.

(Even if I didn’t agree with it, I hardly think anyone is going to
move the Meiji Restoration because of me :) )

No; I don’t have a problem with the way koryu is defined. 1868 is
1868 – period.

What I did say is that if Togakure Ryu Ninjutsu does not
date back beyond 1868, it means that one of three people had to have
made the school up (and been dishonest about doing it): Toda-sensei,
Takamatsu-sensei or Hatsumi-sensei.


I hope that is clearer.

Alec

[siralec]

I went back and re-read koryu.com's explanation of why they do not
include ninjutsu. Interestingly enough, they do say that

"What is commonly taught as ninjutsu, in Japan and elsewhere, is a
fairly recent collection of unarmed and weapons arts, two of which
are independent koryu."

That seems to indicate that they question not the age of the arts,
but the packaging of them. In other words, the arts themselves are
old, but the umbrella organizations (such as Bujinkan) are a modern
creation.



It's not that simple I'm afraid. They have recently changed
their website. Originally it included the following text. I have
highlighted the parts of direct interest.

Not long after E-budo was launched an insightful observer asked on
one of the forums why none of the Hatsumi-derived arts ever
demonstrated at the major classical martial arts demonstrations. My
colleague Ron Beaubien, a martial arts researcher, resident in Japan,
posted the following reply (reprinted with his permission):
Maybe I can shed a little light on the subject. I am a member of both
the Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai and the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai here in Japan,
although I am not speaking officially for either of the two
organizations here. It is my understanding that a school must be a
member of the respective organization to be able to demonstrate at
their embu (although there has been a one time exception in the past
for some Chinese martial arts I believe).
A person cannot join either the Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai (the oldest
koryu organization) nor the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai as an individual. The
entire school joins as a whole. The soke of a koryu school here in
Japan wishing to join either of these organizations applies for
membership must submit their school's documents (history, lineage,
and other important information usually in the form of scrolls) for
verification. The documents are independently scrutinized by a panel
of experts for accuracy. As a general rule, it seems that any ryuha
wanting to join either of the aforementioned organizations, must be
able to document their claims to at least prior to the beginning of
the Meiji Period (1868). I also believe that the historical claims of
the school wishing to enter are also checked as well in order to be
accepted.
Now there are a few schools in the Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai and Nihon
Kobudo Kyokai that do have for lack of a better word, "ninjutsu" in
their respective curriculums (and thus have been verified). Katori
Shinto-ryu does have some ninjutsu (can also be read shinobijutsu)
teachings and Tatsumi-ryu Hyoho apparently also has some as well
(although I am unsure at this time if they are classified under
"monomi" in the curriculum or just not labeled at all). These
techniques are reserved for high level students of the school and are
not demonstrated to the public.
None of the ninjutsu organizations mentioned (Bujinkan, Genyokan,
Jinenkan) are members of either organization to the best of my
knowledge. [However, it seems that Dr. Hatsumi of the Bujinkan did
try to become a member of the Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai in the past.
Ellis Amdur, who is a well known martial arts research and has spent
13 years in Japan and is the holder of a shihan license in Toda-ha
Buko-ryu Naginatajutsu and inkajo in Araki-ryu, had something to say
on this topic recently on rec.martial-arts:
Dr. Hatsumi was asked many years ago to provide documentation of some
of his lineage for admittance to the Kobudo Shinkokai, perhaps the
most reliable of the major organizations of traditional Japanese
martial arts, and according to Donn Draeger, in a conversation to me,
he was not able to provide documentation which proved his lineage to
their satisfaction. Thus, there are uncertain areas in Dr. Hatsumi's
lineage.

(Amdur, Ellis. "Re: KOGA NINJITSU or NINJUTSU (whichever you prefer
)" rec.martial-arts. 1999/06/09). You can double check this by
searching the past messages of rec.martial-arts at: deja.com.
There are also quite a few inaccuracies with the histories of many of
the schools that teach "ninjutsu" as known in the West. The following
is a part of a conversation between a Mr. Vlad Zotta and Dr. Karl
Friday of the University of Georgia, who not only is a history
professor specializing in Japan but is also a menkyo kaiden in
Kashima Shin-ryu, on the subject of Dr. Hatsumi and ninjutsu:
Q: Sensei Hatsumi never synthesized espionage techniques into
Ninjutsu. Sensei Hatsumi is soke in 9 Ninjutsu schools: TOGAKURE RYU
NINJUTSU 34TH SOKE, GYOKKO RYU KOSSHIJUTSU 28TH SOKE, KUKISHINDEN RYU
HAPPO HIKENJUTSU 26TH SOKE.

Dr. Friday: These are just 3 out of 9. Problem is that if he is the
34th soke it means logically that there where 33 more sokes before
him. If this school were a modern one it means they'd have to switch
every almost three years which didn't happen.
That might be persuasive logic if there were any
documentation to substantiate Hatsumi's claim to 33 predecessors. But
there is none--as I noted earlier, no document for the Togakure-ryu
that predates the Meiji period (or rather, none that survived the
scrutiny of independent experts). Moreover, the genealogies claimed
by H atsumi (and by his teacher Takamatsu Toshitsugu) are highly
suspect.
The Katori-Shinto-ryu and the Kashima-Shinryu, two of the
oldest classical bugei schools in Japan, are currently in their 20th
and 19th generations. The Owari branch of the Yagyu Shinkage-ryu is
in its 21st. The Jikishin-kageryu is in its 18th. All of these
schools date back to the late 15th or mid 16th century, the very dawn
of the organized bugei ryuha phenomenon. How is it that the
Togakure-ryu has passed through 34 generations. And why has the
Kumogakure-ryu passed though only 14?
The Takamatsu-Hatsumi genealogy for the Shinden Fudo-ryu traces
things back 25 generations to the mid 11th century, which is at least
400 years earlier than any historian accepts the existence of any
bugei ryuha--and at least two centuries before the scale and
organization of warfare in Japan would make espionage activity
valuable enough for anyone to seriously consider developing methods
for carrying it out.
Hatsumi's titles to most of the ryuha he claims to be soke for
come from Takamatsu Toshitsugu, who in turn claimed to have inherited
them from Toda Masamitsu. It's worth noting, in this context, that
in the third edition of the Bugei ryuha daijiten Watatani Kiyoshi
stated that Takamatsu (who was, BTW, a personal friend of his) had
created his "ninpo" ryuha and teachings from "ninja-gokko"
("childhood ninja games")..."

(Friday, Karl Dr. "Re: Ninja and Ninjato" on the Japanese Sword Art
Mailing List. May 19th, 1999.). You can search the archives of the
Japan Sword Art Mailing List at:
http://testinfo.uoguelph.ca/cgi-bin/wa?S1=iaido-l for more
information on the subject. This exchange also appeared in the
June-July-Aug 1999 Journal of Japanese Sword Arts.
So to answer the question, no. None of the ninjutsu organizations you
mentioned are recognized by the Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai nor the Nihon
Kobudo Kyokai to my knowledge.
Although the histories of many of the schools claiming to teach
ninjutsu are apparently less than accurate , it does not mean
that what these people do is without merit. Dr. Hatsumi may be a
wonderful teacher and the Bujinkan's techniques may be very
applicable as well. The same goes for the other ninjutsu
organizations. For some people these points may be more important to
them than their school's historical claims.
[quote]

Also, if you read here:
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/rec.martial-arts/msg/b1b572c43b3a87aa?

You will find the following text (emphasis mine):

[quote] Dr. Hatsumi is regarded by the mainstream (researchers and
practitioners in koryu) as a reconstructor and fabricator , as well as a
researcher - depending on the person, this has various decrease of
positive or negative approbation. Some give him some respect for his
skill, others think he's doing "showtime" martial arts. Although he is
called a ninja in martial arts journals (the Japanese equivalents of Black
Belt), this is not true among scholars. He was a member of the Kobudo
Shinkokai (the major authoritative group for Koryu) for a time, but
according to Donn Draeger, was disinvited when he was not able to provide
the historical substantiation to support his claims of an unbroken
lineage.
To make my own prejudices clear, I¹ve met Dr. Hatsumi and Mr.
Tanemura. I did not like Dr. Hatsumi, and I did like Mr. Tanemura. I
believe that the follower/successors to these two men are sincere and
dedicated, and have brought a real creative energy to their practice. I
think they are ³for real² in the sense that they practice intensely and
continue to research, and some, like Steve Jennum, even lay it on the line
in NHB competition. From what I have observed of practice and demos, what
I felt in my visit in 1977 to Dr. Hatsumi's dojo with his first foreign
student, Terry Dobson (deceased), and what I have read of Japanese
history, I do not believe that they are ³for real² in the sense of an
unbroken tradition for ninjutsu . I think that Dr. Hatsumi is an
immensely
talented, creative man and using what he learned from his various
teachers, and reconstructing through research and practice, created a
modern-day "ninjutsu." I doubt that it looks much like what was
practiced
in the mountains 400 years ago, but that, of course, is just my
opinion.


Alec

[siralec]

Excuse me for butting in here, but I think I'm seeing people getting
confused on terms.

As I understand it, the Bujinkan is a post-Meiji (even post-WWII)
umbrella organization, and I've never heard of it being called a
koryu -- or even a ryu at all -- before. Nor, from what I understand,
does the Bujinkan represent a single "style."

But within the Bujinkan, Togakure Ryu is taught, along with other
systems. So the question is, I believe, "Is Togakure Ryu a koryu?"


Hallelujah! Someone understands what I am getting at.

Brian, you hit the nail on the head.

Everyone, please FORGET ABOUT THE BUJINKAN for the purpose of this discussion.
Otherwise we will just go round in circles.

Alec

[cxt]

Siralec

Then please explain the first paragraph of your post of 11/11 at 05:58 (page 4 on this topic I think)

You use the phrase--and I quote "but because of implict accusation of dishonesty"
In direct context with the folks over at koryu.com

Key words being "accusation"--"dishonesty" linked in context with "koryu.com."
Not any of the three people you name above.
But you do name koryu.com.

It read to me like you were accusing the folks at Koryu.com of being dishonest.

Since NONE of the three people you name above appear in the paragraph in question BUT koryu.com SPECIFCALLY is mentioned in context with "dishonesty."

Maybe I simply mis-read it?

Would not be the first time I made a mistake.

And if so, sorry for doing it.



Chris Thomas

[niten ninja]

"Toda-sensei, Takamatsu-sensei or Hatsumi-sensei."

If Takamatsu taught more than just Hatsumi, how can Hatsumi have been the origin of the Togakure Ryu?

[George Kohler]

"Toda-sensei, Takamatsu-sensei or Hatsumi-sensei."

If Takamatsu taught more than just Hatsumi, how can Hatsumi have been the origin of the Togakure Ryu?

You are correct. There was another person, Fukumoto Yoshio, who was taught Togakure-ryu by Takamatsu Sensei.

[niten ninja]

My point was that people are saying Hatsumi made it up, but if Takamatsu taught other people it, then Hatsumi couldn't.

[cxt]

Niten

Or it opens the doors as to what if anything Hatsumi DID "make up."

Not saying that did of course--merely suggesting logically that the question shifts back a generation--then comparing what Hatsumi and the "other" folks do might answer some questions.

Then again, if the arguement is that ninjutsu changes with the times---then there is no way to tell if Hatsumi did or did not make stuff up.

They might be doing things exactly the same--thus supporting the posit.

But what if they are not?

The "changes" arguement hurts as much as it helps.

Can't very well claim stuff being a legit koryu--if at the same time your saying it "changes" all the time.

I DON'T MEAN "YOU" PERSONALLY--just referring to the arguements listed already on this issue.

NOR DO I MEAN ANY OFFENSE TO ANYONE---just talking about the logic used.

Chris Thomas

[niten ninja]

I give up... Ninpo whatever (my new name for the art) is made up from some identifiable Koryu bits and lots of unidentified bits put together. Is this even nearing the truth?

[cxt]

Niten

Works for me.

But then again, my opinion has not been worth much since I bought all that stock in companies that made 8-Track tapes :)

Chris Thomas

[Hattori]

David,

James Kemlo (brother ?) also has a Japanese Father-in-Law. You also seem to have the same IP address. Would you care to elaborate before your sent to E-Budo Hell?


Why would I be banished to e-Budo hell? I haven't broken any of e-Budo's rules.

I am married to a Japanese as is my brother, so?

I used the PC at the dojo (my brother's house) to post, because my brother is out of town, is there something wrong with that? You could always check with Howard Quick sensei if you don't believe we are indeed two people who are both married to Japanese and have lived in Japan. Although Howard doesn't know us that well having only met once, he can at least tell you we are not one entity!

I will check on the hishigijutsu techniques of Asayama Ichiden ryu with Hattori Makoto. As I said, I am unaware that there are any. Perhaps a different branch or perhaps I haven't been introduced to them yet? Or perhaps it's a case of things being added to puff up the curriculum?

Regards

[K. Cantwell]

Hello Mr. Thomas,

You said earlier:


"But what if they are not?

The "changes" argument hurts as much as it helps.

Can't very well claim stuff being a legit koryu--if at the same time your saying it "changes" all the time.

I DON'T MEAN "YOU" PERSONALLY--just referring to the arguments listed already on this issue.

NOR DO I MEAN ANY OFFENSE TO ANYONE---just talking about the logic used."

I don't believe this is a problem of logic so much as it is of definition. As I understand it, the hallmark of a legitimate koryu is a traceable lineage of the transmission. It's not so much about being immutable as it is about being able to trace the line back over time.

As was mentioned earlier, koryu change for a number of reasons. Sometimes the changes are unintentional. For example, a taller student copies his shorter teacher and ingrains his technique so well, it becomes the standard when the student becomes the teacher. (I've heard a few anecdotes about this type of thing.) A generation of his students does the technique that way until the next authorized teacher changes it.

Sometimes the changes are intentional. A menkyo kaiden, or the head of a line technically "owns" the ryu and has the authority to do whatever he wants. He can add/subtract kata or change any number of things to suit his whims. Now, I would posit that most that are entrusted with a ryu take great care in changing things. However, if changes are made it does not in any way detract from the "legitimacy" of the ryu, or somehow make it less of a koryu. As long as the person making the changes is the recognized and verifiable "head honcho" then the tenets of koryu are being followed.

There is definitely an issue of preservation involved in the modern-day study of koryu, but I'm not sure that equates to fossilizing the ryu. It's quite a difficult balance to strike, and I don't envy those with the responsibility. How much change is too much before the essential "flavor" of the ryu is compromised? Is it more about the study of history and culture or killing your enemy? What's more important? Does the ryu or the individual make this decision? These are the tricky bits in my opinion.

Also, a good portion of this thread seems to be quite concerned with what Meik and Diane had to say about the ninja issue on their website. I'll be seeing them today at training and I’ll let them know about this thread. Maybe they will want to contribute directly, but they don't really do alot of that anymore.

Kevin Cantwell

[George Kohler]

Why would I be banished to e-Budo hell? I haven't broken any of e-Budo's rules.

Well, if you hadn't explained the reason for the confusion you would have been sent there for breaking our "real name" rule, but your explanation is ok.

[cxt]

K Cantwel

You may be exactly right.

I don't have a dog in this fight--I don't practice ninjutsu or even know anyone that does.

I was speaking specifically to the public statments made and quoted on this particular thread.

And I see a number of problems with the quoted material here on this thread.

And one of them deals with "change" and the koryu.

From where I sit I think it would be hard to both claim that you change and adapt your art with the times and make claims that it should be counted as a koryu.

Again, maybe my take on things is wildly wrong--but I always looked at one of the basic ideas of a "koryu" was that it, at least in part, involved the preservation of a period art form.

Not saying its perfect or course--nothing and no one is.

Just that am I not sure a view that includes the concept of preservation can also use change as one of its strong points.

I consider a very real differnce to exsist between "change" due to inevitable personal, ideosyncratic diffrences in people and "change" as delibrate, motivation/philosophy within a given school.

Totally possibly that I am overthinking things--wouldnt be the first time.

It just sounds to me like people trying to have their cake and eat it to.

Maybe that sounds overly mean or harsh---only expression that I can think of that seems to fit.

Also could easily be talking out of my a** here too.

Like I said above---my opinion is worth the exact ZERO amount that was paid for it. :)

Chris Thomas

[K. Cantwell]

Hello Mr. Thomas,

Just that am I not sure a view that includes the concept of preservation can also use change as one of its strong points.

Man, have you hit the nail right on the head!!

How do we keep these vessels of Japanese combative principles from 400 years ago alive here in the 21st century West without changing them to the point that they lose their vital ontological quality?

The mere fact that they are being practiced here is an a priori indicator of massive change. The question is not if they will change, for they must to survive. It’s a matter of the nature and quality of the changes they are undergoing now, and will continue to undergo.

Unfortunately, I'm pretty good at asking these kinds of questions. I have no clue as to the answers. I don't really have enough experience training yet to construct an informed opinion.

Kevin Cantwell

[Shinobi]

Not all the ryu are in there.

Someone needs new reading glasses :p

From the 1978 edition which is the most recent:

Gikan-ryû (koppô) - page 214 - Hatsumi

Gyokko-ryû (kosshijutsu, !!!!ôjutsu, ninpô) - pages 229 - 230 - Hatsumi

Gyokushin-ryû (yawara, ken, iai, koppô) pages 230 - 231 - not Hatsmi but a related branch to the ninjutsu.

Kukishinden Happô Bikenjutsu (ken) - page 240 - Hatsumi

Kumogakure-ryû (nin) - page 247 - Hatsumi

Kotô-ryû (koppô) - page 296 - Hatsumi

Shinden Fudô-ryû (dakentaijutsu) - pages 414, 415 - Hatsumi

Takagi-ryû (yawara, bô, yari, naginata, senban nagejutsu) - pages 524, 525, 526 - Hatsumi listed among the other branches including Kakuno-den (Tsutsui and Minaki), Mizuta-den (Takamatsu and Satô Yonejirô), Takamatsu-den (Hatsumi, Satô Kinbei). This ryûha is like a maze, many branches today, 2 offically part of the Nihon Kobudô Kyôkai, Takagi-ryû (Kusuhara) and Hontai Yôshin-ryû (Inoue) both including Kukishin-ryû bôjutsu, Takagi-ryû being the purest of all the branches.

Togakure-ryû (Nin) - pages 626, 627, 628 - Hatsumi, and no it doesn't say that Takamatsu made it up from childhood ninja games. Does say the lineage has errors though.

Hontai Takagi Yōshin-ryū (taijutsu) - 772 - Hatsumi, says "see Takagi-ryû"

So that's 8 out of the 9 that Hatsumi-sensei is head of that is listed, with the other being related. Other related styles listed as well are the Kukishin-ryû honke line, the Kijin Chôsui-ryû daken line, Kitô-ryû Kuki-ha bunke line, etc.

Only ones that are fully verifiable are the Takagi-ryû and Kukishin-ryû bôjutsu which is inside Takagi-ryû, everything else isn't. Toda-den (Gyokko, Gyokushin, Kotô, Kumogakure, Shinden Fudô and Togakure) can't be verifiable since we don't know if Toda Shinryûken existed until further proof is found.

I will also say this, ninjutsu itself as an art is not koryû in the sense of the organized structure as the bushi koryû. In Katori Shintô-ryû, the ninjutsu is considered an auxillary section as in other koryû that had it. There is no shoden, chûden, okuden, etc in ninjutsu that we know of including the Togakure-ryû. I'm not even sure if Takamatsu-sensei got kaiden in it from Toda-sensei. Sôkeship or some form of it is all that one might have recieved. Hatsumi-sensei might be the first ever to get a kaiden license in the art of ninjutsu. Is ninjutsu pre-1868? Yes you bet! Is Togakure-ryû pre-1868? We have no proof at this time, but maybe. Does it go back to the 1100's? We just don't know at this time. We do know ninjutsu goes back to about the 900's and the Iga-gumi and Kôga-gumi being from around the same time. But they might have just been kumi/gumi "groups" and not a specific ryûha perse until later on.

So as you can see, lots of room for debate and speculation.

[Shinobi]

That's a pretty lame reason to not mention receiving a menkyo kaiden in a koryu art.

For what its worth, Asayama Ichiden-ryû is one of those "koryû" that isn't a member of the Nihon Kobudô Kyôkai and not listed on their website http://www.nipponbudokan.or.jp/shinkou/html_1/index9.html but is considered to be a legit koryû. Hmmm maybe aliens made it up since it's not accepted or a member, its gotta be after 1868 then, just kidding. Oh yeah neither is Bokuden-ryû jûjutsu, another art Hatsumi-sensei learned from Ueno-sensei and is considered a legit ryû with some of it being lost. Sounds to me like the Nihon Kobudô Kyôkai's standards are very high and not all koryû can get in and another factor to why Togakure isn't and others.

Maybe someone should make a list of koryû that aren't members of the Nihon Kobudô Kyôkai but are believed to be legit so we can debate about all of them instead of just what Hatsumi-sensei has. And why is Daitô-ryû a member and listed when they claim their ryû goes back to 1100's or earlier but Takeda Sokaku is considered the founder. More hypocrisy sounds like to me!

[cxt]

Shinobi

I know your just kidding.

But to answer your question---were not talking about "other" schools/ryu right now.

Shifting the arguement to whom "else" might not fit a given set of criteria does not improve the standing/situation of the guys in question.

If I get busted for trying to rent a hooker (its a mistake--I SWEAR I was FRAMED :) ) having a bunch of company in my cell hardly makes me innocent.


Chris Thomas

[niten ninja]

Shinobi... your arguements going to be eaten alive...

ctx, shinobi does have a point though, if (and the main point there is IF) other Ryu are being given the benefit of the doubt then why not Hatsumi and co. ?

[Shinobi]

Shinobi... your arguements going to be eaten alive...


Which are what? Not sure if i was arguing with anyone, just posting some facts, probabilities and listings from the BRHDJT and listed the page numbers if you don't believe me. If you wanna disagree with my opinions of probability, listings from the brhdjt and facts then that is fine. Sounds to me like you have already made up your mind on the topic(s) so why bother replying if you have no data to contribute to dis-proving Hatsumi-sensei's BJK isn't made up of koryû arts.

The topic is "opinions on masaaki hatsumi as koryû" and not just Togakure-ryû or ninja, so that includes all the ryûha, some verifiable, others not.

And for what its worth, Ishitani-Jr might be more guilty then Toda Shinryûken, only difference is we know Ishitani-Jr existed. If you know the lineages of the various schools you'll know what I mean and why Kakuno-den is considered the mainline for Takagi-ryû (Kuki bôjutsu).

[cxt]

Niten

Like I said--the specific "whys" and "wherefores" of other ryu have nothing to really do with the topic.

Its not a bad question--and that very well may be something folks will want to explore.

But like I said--"other" folks being guilty of something does not make "me" innocent.

(Just an expression--I AM NOT saying anyone is "guilty" of ANYTHING.)

And while that might make me feel better to have company--it hardly solves the problem at hand.

Like I said, I don't have a dog in this fight.

So I probably should just leave it alone.


Chris Thomas

[Jason Chambers]

David,

James Kelmo (brother ?) also has a Japanese Father-in-Law. You also seem to have the same IP address. Would you care to elaborate before your sent to E-Budo Hell?

And the plot thickens...

[George Kohler]

And the plot thickens...

He explained the reasons for both.

[heretic888]

We do know ninjutsu goes back to about the 900's and the Iga-gumi and Kôga-gumi being from around the same time.

We do?? :confused:

My understanding is that groups like the Iga-gumi did not emerge until the Muromachi Jidai. Would you mind elaborating upon this??

Laterz.

[Jason Chambers]

He explained the reasons for both.


;)

So I see...

[Shinobi]

We do?? :confused:

My understanding is that groups like the Iga-gumi did not emerge until the Muromachi Jidai. Would you mind elaborating upon this??

Laterz.

From Don Roley via a online article he wrote about 4 years ago ------

"The ancestors of some of the families might have been vassals to these men who then had to flee and hide after their masters were killed. But as historical documents the family traditions of the Kôga and Iga are not given much credit. Part of the problem is that the ninja of Iga and Kôga were not really part of a ryûha. The name Kôga-ryû was applied later to describe them, but in period accounts they were always known as the Kôga group (Kôga-shû, Kôga-gumi) or Iga group. A ryûha is a political and social organization as well as a means of teaching a particular skill."

I have seen it listed elsewhere but I dont recall seeing when the term kumi/gumi was used for them as you noted. Point me in the right direction if you know please as I would like to refresh my brain.

[niten ninja]

"Which are what? Not sure if i was arguing with anyone, just posting some facts, probabilities and listings from the BRHDJT and listed the page numbers if you don't believe me."

My point was in relation to this part

"And why is Daitô-ryû a member and listed when they claim their ryû goes back to 1100's or earlier but Takeda Sokaku is considered the founder. More hypocrisy sounds like to me!"

I've seen it before, and it didn't seem to be seen as a question worth answering by anyone then and I doubt anything will have changed.

"If you wanna disagree with my opinions of probability, listings from the brhdjt and facts then that is fine."

Not at all, just stating what the reaction is likely to be.

"Like I said--the specific "whys" and "wherefores" of other ryu have nothing to really do with the topic."

It does, to use your analogy, if the other people in your cell get away with doing the same thing as you then why are you being singled out?

"But like I said--"other" folks being guilty of something does not make "me" innocent."

Except it appears they are getting away with it. so following the same analogy you would question the justice system.

"So I probably should just leave it alone."

why?

[cxt]

Niten

I should leave it alone because people are starting to get upset.
And since I don't practice the art of ninjutsu, and I don't know anyone who does, its really none of my business.

Trying one last time to explain it why it a bad idea to argue about "other" ryu.

And the best way to do that is use your OWN statements above.

You say--and I quote:

"Except it appers that they are getting away with it"

Again--"getting away with it."

See that is an ADMISSION that something is fishy.

To keep with the analogy, no matter what anyone else does--YOUR STILL GUILTY.

To use that arguement--in the context with this topic--would require you admit that things are just as fishy with the TR.
Which does NOT help TR case--at best, all you have done is pull a few more fish into the net WITH YOU.

Look at it like this---throwing a lot of dirt on someone does not make you any cleaner.
And pointing fingers at other schools, does NOTHING to help bolster the claims of the TR.

It like someones mom asking "Billy did you break this vase??" and Billy pointing a finger at his sister and saying "Well Mandy broke one TOO!!!"

See what I mean??

As to the "justice" of the system---don't know--its not my system.
Its the system of the culture that produced the arts in question.

Kinda like someone from Japan being ticked off because we have a "system" for determining what is considered "legit" Native American crafts.
And one of the criteria is that maker needs to have proof of affilation with a recognized tribal group.
They can be as mad as the like, they can come with all sorts of arguements and posits and examples as to how "unfair" the system is----but the bottom line is that is OUR system.
And we are probably not going to change it because it makes some folks in Japan unhappy.


Chris Thomas

[niten ninja]

I'm not argueing about other ryu I'm arguing about the system that is defining what's koryu or not. whether it changes anything or not is besides the point. (the point does of course assume that there is a valid comparison to be made.)

[heretic888]

From Don Roley via a online article he wrote about 4 years ago ------

"The ancestors of some of the families might have been vassals to these men who then had to flee and hide after their masters were killed. But as historical documents the family traditions of the Kôga and Iga are not given much credit. Part of the problem is that the ninja of Iga and Kôga were not really part of a ryûha. The name Kôga-ryû was applied later to describe them, but in period accounts they were always known as the Kôga group (Kôga-shû, Kôga-gumi) or Iga group. A ryûha is a political and social organization as well as a means of teaching a particular skill."

I have seen it listed elsewhere but I dont recall seeing when the term kumi/gumi was used for them as you noted. Point me in the right direction if you know please as I would like to refresh my brain.

Eric,

There are a couple of problems with your interpretation of Don's Koga Ryu article here:

1) The "these men" in question are Minamoto No Yoshitsune and Kusunoki Masashige. Yoshitsune lived in the late 1100's, and Masashige lived in the middle 1300's. These men, as well as their vassals, are both centuries removed from the 900's.

2) In the context of the aforementioned paragraph, Don is saying that the ancestors of the families that made up groups like the Iga-shu and Koga-shu may have been vassals to Yoshitsune and Masashige. To use this possibility to retroactively project the existence of the Iga-gumi in the 10th century is nothing short of historical revisionism.

3) In the very article you are citing, Don states early on that the first documented use of ninjutsu a la the Iga/Koga groups is in the 1480's, when Ashikaga Yoshihisa invaded Omi Province. He goes on to say that any theorizing about what shape ninjutsu may have taken before this time is conjecture and speculation.

Outside of the context of Don's article, there are further problems to the claim that the Iga-gumi or Iga-shu existed in the 10th century. At this time, the majority of the territory in Iga Province was a shoen to the Todaiji monastery in Nara. While there was a long history of what the shoen administrators described as akuto activity in Iga Province (beginning in the 13th century), one would be hard-pressed to logically conclude this to be evidence of the existence of later groups like the Iga-shu (although these so-called akuto, led by the powerful Oe and Hattori families, were undoubtedly their predecessors). The jizamurai of Iga Province did not organize themselves into a regional alliance or federation (or ikki) until sometime in the mid-14th century (most likely taking advantage of the turmoil caused between the war between the northern and southern courts), and they don't seem to have begun hiring out their warriors to the daimyo of other provinces until the mid-15th century (most likely as a reaction to the Onin wars).

Therefore, I don't think we can comfortably conclude that the Iga-shu as a military organization existed earlier than the 15th century. Of course, that's just my perspective.

Laterz.

[heretic888]

You say--and I quote:

"Except it appers that they are getting away with it"

Again--"getting away with it."

See that is an ADMISSION that something is fishy.

To keep with the analogy, no matter what anyone else does--YOUR STILL GUILTY.

Chris,

Metaphors and analogies aside, I think what Michael is trying to say is that there is a double-standard being applied as to which ryuha are and are not considered authentic koryu. And, in this context, I'd have to agree with him.

Laterz.

[cxt]

Trent

And he may have a perfectly legitimate point.

I honestly don't know.

I'm just pointing out that weither or not a double standard exsists---it STILL does not change the status of TR.

In any case, its an arguement with limited use--in the best possible case its only a "double standard" with POSSIBLY a fraction of the extent ryu.
The rest of them can't be questioned on that score.

More to the point---you can scream "double-standard" until the tiles fall off the roof.
Even if your right---that does NOT provide any backing to the claims of the TR.

Try it like this:

You come to me as say "you claim your kenjutsu style is a koryu that dates back to 1820? Please show me the proof of that"

If my answer is "Those guys over there are called koryu schools and they can't prove it either!!!!"

What does that sound like to you???

The use of that arguement is not putting your best foot forward.

In any case we do not know the specifc's as to why one is viewed as koryu and why the other is not.
So its kinda hard to establish if a double standard even exists.


Chris Thomas

[niten ninja]

True, problems with other ryu don't make TR koryu, but it does cast some doubt on the organisation who's decision alot of people base their views upon.

[cxt]

Niten

Only insofar as a couple of "other" ryu.

We don't really have "real" numbers and % here.
So I am clearly just playing with MADE UP numbers here.
But if 98% of what you do is fully supportable---and 2% is at best "arguable" then that does not really translate to "doubt" in the organization.

(again, clearly these numbers are bogus--I am using TR and Daito to VERY inaccurately represent the "arguable" schools)

That just means that they are not perfect--and no-one and nothing is.

Or to spin it around---

If "questions" automatically "cast doubt"--then is not TR in the same boat?



Chris Thomas

[niten ninja]

of course.

[ChrisMoon]

For what its worth, Asayama Ichiden-ryû is one of those "koryû" that isn't a member of the Nihon Kobudô Kyôkai and not listed on their website http://www.nipponbudokan.or.jp/shinkou/html_1/index9.html but is considered to be a legit koryû. Hmmm maybe aliens made it up since it's not accepted or a member, its gotta be after 1868 then, just kidding. Oh yeah neither is Bokuden-ryû jûjutsu, another art Hatsumi-sensei learned from Ueno-sensei and is considered a legit ryû with some of it being lost. Sounds to me like the Nihon Kobudô Kyôkai's standards are very high and not all koryû can get in and another factor to why Togakure isn't and others.

Maybe someone should make a list of koryû that aren't members of the Nihon Kobudô Kyôkai but are believed to be legit so we can debate about all of them instead of just what Hatsumi-sensei has. And why is Daitô-ryû a member and listed when they claim their ryû goes back to 1100's or earlier but Takeda Sokaku is considered the founder. More hypocrisy sounds like to me!

Eric,

Another explanation is that some schools do not want to be a part of it. There are several lines of Araki Ryu that have been invited to join and have turned down the invitations. It is my understanding that one of the headmasters loathed the idea of joining an organization made up of schools that his ancestors fought in battles against. Do not assume that just because one school is not a member that it means they were turned down or excluded.

[Shinobi]

Eric,

There are a couple of problems with your interpretation of Don's Koga Ryu article here:

1) The "these men" in question are Minamoto No Yoshitsune and Kusunoki Masashige. Yoshitsune lived in the late 1100's, and Masashige lived in the middle 1300's. These men, as well as their vassals, are both centuries removed from the 900's.

2) In the context of the aforementioned paragraph, Don is saying that the ancestors of the families that made up groups like the Iga-shu and Koga-shu may have been vassals to Yoshitsune and Masashige. To use this possibility to retroactively project the existence of the Iga-gumi in the 10th century is nothing short of historical revisionism.

3) In the very article you are citing, Don states early on that the first documented use of ninjutsu a la the Iga/Koga groups is in the 1480's, when Ashikaga Yoshihisa invaded Omi Province. He goes on to say that any theorizing about what shape ninjutsu may have taken before this time is conjecture and speculation.

Outside of the context of Don's article, there are further problems to the claim that the Iga-gumi or Iga-shu existed in the 10th century. At this time, the majority of the territory in Iga Province was a shoen to the Todaiji monastery in Nara. While there was a long history of what the shoen administrators described as akuto activity in Iga Province (beginning in the 13th century), one would be hard-pressed to logically conclude this to be evidence of the existence of later groups like the Iga-shu (although these so-called akuto, led by the powerful Oe and Hattori families, were undoubtedly their predecessors). The jizamurai of Iga Province did not organize themselves into a regional alliance or federation (or ikki) until sometime in the mid-14th century (most likely taking advantage of the turmoil caused between the war between the northern and southern courts), and they don't seem to have begun hiring out their warriors to the daimyo of other provinces until the mid-15th century (most likely as a reaction to the Onin wars).

Therefore, I don't think we can comfortably conclude that the Iga-shu as a military organization existed earlier than the 15th century. Of course, that's just my perspective.

Laterz.

Please list all your sources on the above "facts" and i will believe what you state more. I tend to believe what other sources have written about on the founding's of Iga-ryû and Kôga-ryû then what you have stated. And just because Don's article mentions the first documented use doesn't mean Iga/Kôga ninja didn't exist before then. So why can't Iga/Kôga ninja exist before the invasion of Ômi province in the 1480's? If it's your perspective then it's your opinion, we're trying to get some facts here, not opinions. I listed page numbers for reference in the BRHDJT; I wish others would do the same when debating something like this. I made a error is trying to verify a source on Iga-gumi/Kôga-gumi, you tried to clear it up, but are also in error by speculating they didn't exist prior to the 1480's.

[Shinobi]

Eric,
Another explanation is that some schools do not want to be a part of it. There are several lines of Araki Ryu that have been invited to join and have turned down the invitations. It is my understanding that one of the headmasters loathed the idea of joining an organization made up of schools that his ancestors fought in battles against. Do not assume that just because one school is not a member that it means they were turned down or excluded.

Hi Chris,

I have heard of this about Hatsumi-sensei wishing not to be a member for whatever the reason. I never heard that about some branches of Araki-ryû and find that interesting they turned it down.

I still think we should make a list of ryûha that aren't members but are "considered" legit and somewhat legit including Togakure-ryû but don't have the full documentation to prove it. Bokuden-ryû jûjutsu being one, maybe Asayama Ichiden being another, I believe they lost some of their maki also. Another is Fûsen-ryû who aren't members, we all know their legit but don't have a sôke anymore, just shihan I believe.

Would be a interesting list.

[ChrisMoon]

I do not know it for a fact but I am pretty sure the line of Asayama Ichiden Ryu headed by Ozaki Kiyoshi is a member of one of the orgainzations as they have demonstrated at a major enbu before.

[heretic888]

Please list all your sources on the above "facts" and i will believe what you state more.

Some of the sources for my information include:

Eiko Ikegami, The Taming of the Samurai: Honorific Individualism and the Making of Modern Japan.

Pierre Francois Souyri, The World Turned Upside Down: Medieval Japanese Society.

Stephen Turnbull, The Lone Samurai and the Martial Arts.

Stephen Turnbull, Ninja: AD 1460-1650.

Masaaki Hatsumi, "Ninjutsu Discussion - Everything Concerning the Ninja, Part I." (http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mza/UM_articles.html) Ninja/Ninpô Gaho, 1964.

Don Roley, "History of the Koga Ryu." (http://www.jigokudojo.com/koga)

Morten Oxenboell, "Images of Akuto." (http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/monumenta_nipponica/v060/60.2oxenboell.pdf) Monumenta Nipponica, Volume 60, Number 2, Summer 2005.

Alexei Gorbyliov, "Unknown ninjutsu." (http://cclib.nsu.ru/projects/satbi/satbi-e/statyi/ninjutsu.html) Kempo, N4/1996.

Iga Ninja - 49 True Stories (http://www.igabito.jp/ninja_map/en/index.html)

Iga Ueno - The Birthplace of the Ninja (http://www.geocities.jp/general_sasaki/igaueno_eng.html)

Iga Ninja (http://sekichiku.freehosting.net/j_iganinja01.htm)

You may also wish to review an [url=http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showpost.php?p=372846&postcount=13]earlier post[/i] I wrote in which I describe my position in more exact detail.

I tend to believe what other sources have written about on the founding's of Iga-ryû and Kôga-ryû then what you have stated.

There are a couple of problems here:

1) The information you are referencing is oral tradition, legend, and folklore --- it is not documented history. You will notice that whenever Hatsumi cites such information in his writings (such as Essence of Ninjutsu: The Nine Traditions), he always includes qualifiers such as "some insist that", "according to the legends of", "oral tradition states that", and so on. He never equates them with historical fact.

2) The information you are referencing actually contradicts known historical facts on certain points. For example, the legend surrounding the founding of Iga Ryu has its 4th soke, Iga No Heinabe Yasukiyo, being granted the land of Iga Hattori by Minamoto No Yoritomo, founder of the Kamakura shogunate. The problem with this legend is that Yasukyo is believed to have been active around 1096 CE, more than 100 years before the Minamoto family finally defeated the Taira (then going on to establish the Kamakura government). Clearly, there is a contradiction between documented history and oral legend here.

3) As Don points out in his Koga Ryu article, "But as historical documents the family traditions of the Kôga and Iga are not given much credit. Part of the problem is that the ninja of Iga and Kôga were not really part of a ryûha."

4) The first documented reference to the "ninja" of Iga and Koga comes from a supplement to the Nochi Kagami, an Ashikaga annal written in the early 16th century: "Concerning shinobi no mono, they are said to be from Iga and Koga and went freely into enemy castles secretly. They saw hidden things and were considered allies. Strategists call them kagimono hiki."

So why can't Iga/Kôga ninja exist before the invasion of Ômi province in the 1480's?

Hypothetically, there's no reason they can't.

This isn't a matter of possibility, however, its a matter of proof. There is just no documented evidence of the Iga/Koga "ninja" being active before Yoshihisa's invasion of Omi Province.

Unless, of course, you count bands of so-called akuto being organized by the Oe and Hattori families and causing trouble for the Todaiji administrators during the latter half of the Kamakura Jidai. But, personally, I think its a stretch to call these individuals "ninja".

I listed page numbers for reference in the BRHDJT; I wish others would do the same when debating something like this.

The Bugei Ryuha Daijiten is a dictionary, not a historical source.

I made a error is trying to verify a source on Iga-gumi/Kôga-gumi, you tried to clear it up, but are also in error by speculating they didn't exist prior to the 1480's.

It's not speculation. There is simply no historical evidence the Iga/Koga "ninja" were active prior to the mid-15th century.

Laterz.

[heretic888]

[You may also wish to review an [url=http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showpost.php?p=372846&postcount=13]earlier post[/i] I wrote in which I describe my position in more exact detail.

Sorry about that. The proper link can be found here:

http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showpost.php?p=372846&postcount=13

Laterz.

[Shinobi]

Some of the sources for my information include:

Eiko Ikegami, The Taming of the Samurai: Honorific Individualism and the Making of Modern Japan.

Pierre Francois Souyri, The World Turned Upside Down: Medieval Japanese Society.

Stephen Turnbull, The Lone Samurai and the Martial Arts.

Stephen Turnbull, Ninja: AD 1460-1650.

Masaaki Hatsumi, "Ninjutsu Discussion - Everything Concerning the Ninja, Part I." (http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mza/UM_articles.html) Ninja/Ninpô Gaho, 1964.

Don Roley, "History of the Koga Ryu." (http://www.jigokudojo.com/koga)

Morten Oxenboell, "Images of Akuto." (http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/monumenta_nipponica/v060/60.2oxenboell.pdf) Monumenta Nipponica, Volume 60, Number 2, Summer 2005.

Alexei Gorbyliov, "Unknown ninjutsu." (http://cclib.nsu.ru/projects/satbi/satbi-e/statyi/ninjutsu.html) Kempo, N4/1996.

Iga Ninja - 49 True Stories (http://www.igabito.jp/ninja_map/en/index.html)

Iga Ueno - The Birthplace of the Ninja (http://www.geocities.jp/general_sasaki/igaueno_eng.html)

Iga Ninja (http://sekichiku.freehosting.net/j_iganinja01.htm)


Very good reply, I will look into all of those sources. I agree that everything before 14-1500's is mostly legend and folklore, I was just listing what is "believed" to be accurate, but as you said it can't be proved therefore not solid fact but more legend and folklore.

And I wouldn't list that Alexei Gorbyliov article as a credible source, he can't even spell or get his facts straight, Takagi being ninjutsu, etc. Lots of rubbish in that one.

[George Kohler]

And I wouldn't list that Alexei Gorbyliov article as a credible source, he can't even spell or get his facts straight, Takagi being ninjutsu, etc. Lots of rubbish in that one.

Eric,

I believe this article is different than the one that you're talking about.

[heretic888]

And I wouldn't list that Alexei Gorbyliov article as a credible source, he can't even spell or get his facts straight, Takagi being ninjutsu, etc. Lots of rubbish in that one.

Eric,

I'm fairly certain that Takagi Yoshin Ryu (nor any of its sister branches) is mentioned by the author of the aforementioned article. In fact, I don't believe any ryuha (with the possible exception of Yoshitsune Ryu) is ever mentioned by name. I think you may be confusing this article with something else.

As for the spelling and grammar, I think its fairly evident that English is not the author's native language. While it would have been preferable for him to have hired a professional translator, I certainly see no reason to hold this against him.

I would be interested as to what "facts" you felt the author misconstrued. I thought the later half of the article, dealing with the Hattori family's history in Iga Province, was very interesting.

Laterz.

[George Kohler]

Eric,

I'm fairly certain that Takagi Yoshin Ryu (nor any of its sister branches) is mentioned by the author of the aforementioned article. In fact, I don't believe any ryuha (with the possible exception of Yoshitsune Ryu) is ever mentioned by name. I think you may be confusing this article with something else.

Yes, he was confusing with another article. See this thread http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31744

[Kendoguy9]

While the official story on Daito-ryu is that it is from the 1100's, I don't think there are many people who train in the art who believe that. Many koryu people don't really consider it koryu either. There is nothing about Daito-ryu before Sokaku. The lineage chart that is presented is not a lineage of Daito-ryu as much as it is a family lineage of the Takeda family in Aizu. Clearly Sokaku learned something from somewhere because Daito-ryu is a very complex school of jujutsu. Exactly what it was is either lost to the ages or the big guys in charge aren't saying (or maybe it was Daito-ryu?).

I don't know what happens behind closed doors (no pun intended :) ) but this is my guess why Daito-ryu is "accepted koryu" and Togakure-ryu is not. The DR got around the lack of proof and called Sokaku the "reviver" of the art. The 1868 time frame was just on the edge and it was let in. Mr. Hatsumi most likely stuck to his guns that TR's whole lineage is fact, in spite of the lack of proof beyond Takamatsu/Toda and was rejected. If Toda is the first true headmaster of the ryu, I don't think that is anything to be ashamed of, because of his high reputation. I think it is a matter of how much of the lineage you are willing to accept as legend and how much as fact. Maybe had Dr. Hatsumi said Toda was the "reviver" of the art, and the rest of the lineage was a family tree he would have been let in? Who knows?

At any rate I have been exposed to some X-kan training and I think it is very strong (just not the right art for me). If it makes you happy who cares? I honestly don't care that most koryu people don't think of Daito-ryu as much of a koryu. Get over it or find a new art. I hear there are some upstarts doing a new art called "judo" that are very tough...

[ChrisMoon]

If Toda is the first true headmaster of the ryu, I don't think that is anything to be ashamed of, because of his high reputation.

What reputation is that? I thought the Bujinkan/Genbukan people could not prove he even existed.

[niten ninja]

Isn't Toda listed in the Bugei Ryuha Daijiten?

[George Kohler]

Isn't Toda listed in the Bugei Ryuha Daijiten?

Yes, Toda Shinryuken is listed in the BRDJ, but no is able to find any records on him.

[gmarquay]

Is there any mention, anywhere, of other students from Toda Shiryuken's Shinden Fudo Ryu dojo? I was under the impression that Takamatsu Sensei was far from being the only student of that dojo. Wasn't he thrown around the dojo for a year before he was able to learn his first techniques? I know I've read that in a few of Mr. Hatsumi's books.

If Hatsumi Sensei can not or will not provided people with proof of Toda Shiryuken's existance, could not other students of Toda Sensei corroborate these claims? Has Hatsumi Sensei ever mentioned the other students of Toda Sensei, and what they went on to do?

How about Takamatsu Sensei's Menkyo Kaiden in these schools? Can those be verified, either through Mr. Hatsumi or perhaps other living relatives of Takamatsu Sensei (if there are any)?

How about Takamatsu Sensei's parents? Was not Toda Shinryuken his grandfather? If there are surviving relatives of his parents (perhaps cousins of Takamatsu Sensei) could they not corroborate that Toda Shinryuken did indeed exist? Toda Shinryuken would have been thier grandfather as well, yes?

There has to be some way of proving or disproving at least some of the claims about this man and the ryugi that he transmitted.

Respectfully,
Glenn Marquay

[Kendoguy9]

What reputation is that? I thought the Bujinkan/Genbukan people could not prove he even existed.

I was under the impression Toda sensei taught at the Kobusho, although I could be wrong. I have to be honest, I have never really had too much interest in the X-kans so I've always assumed he was a real person. I thought the issue was when he lived, and if Takamatsu sensei could have learned from him.

Since it has little, to nothing, to do with the arts I practice I can't put to much time into it.

[George Kohler]

Is there any mention, anywhere, of other students from Toda Shiryuken's Shinden Fudo Ryu dojo?

There was some rumors a couple of years ago that they might have found some makimono that had his name as part of the lineage or his signature(can't remember which). I haven't heard anything since, so I'm assuming that it is still a rumor. Maybe John Lindsey can answer this question, since he was the one that told me this.

How about Takamatsu Sensei's Menkyo Kaiden in these schools?

As far as I know, Takamatsu Sensei made new scrolls for each of his students, so I don't think the students have his menkyo kaiden. Apparently, Takamatsu Sensei's wife threw away some of his "papers" because the rats/mice got to them.

Was not Toda Shinryuken his grandfather?

Toda Sensei was not his blood relative. Takamatsu Sensei's father had several wives after Takamatsu Sensei was born. One of those wives was related to Toda Sensei.

[KenKenobi]

not once did we don black masks,ninja tabi ,camo or do outdoor psuedo survival training.so many of the clowns out there ruin it for real practitioners.

That's a truism if there ever was one.

My dojo teaches an American (awaiting the flames) system (which does not claim any association with Koryu) called Seisuikan Ninjutsu, rooted in ninjutsu philosophy and technique, but we are not part of the black mask crowd at all.

We have a very nice relationship with Stephen Hayes, but our system is our own. The principles we adhere to are more the universals of harmony, flow, natural movement and the natural order and unconventionality. The idea of learning certain ninja tools is fascinating and we learn do sword techniques, jo staff, etc. And even survival techniques are good to learn (i.e. Scouting, Outward BOund etc.) but as Everest said, the people are so critical to the ryus/systems percieved value.

My experience is that have seen classical, traditional martial artists who are wonderful enlightened people and others that are slavish and fanatical about their ryu. The same goes for modern MA system practicioners, like Seisuikan(although our roots are ancient). The people practicing an art often define its reputation and its value.

As to my interaction with Bujinkan members, I have had only positive enriching experiences that have helped me grow as a martial artist, including An-Shu Hayes. Under the old addage that like tends to attract like, I can only speculate that Hatsumi is a decent person with a proud heritage of martial arts who treats people with respect. I have personally been given no reason to think otherwise.

My .02. Peace to all.

[Mr.Franco]

I had spoken to Brandon Alvarez http://www.shinobiwinds.com/ regarding his latest visit to the Momochi residence which took place a couple of months ago. On his last visit to Mr. Momochis residence, Mr. Momochi mentioned that there are no "written" records of the family teachings, only old weapons, armor and the such. He added that most of what was taught was passed down from word of mouth in order to protect the families from retribution if any evidence was found.

As far as Hatsumi Senseis "public" demonstrations are concerned:

Yes they are very much a "Show" for the masses and are very "hollywood". But to my understanding, so are many other Koryu. From what I understand Ryu-Ha like the Shinkage Ryu change/use incorrect distance, rythem, timing in public demonstrations in order to protect the teachings of their lineage. I think this is very understandable and respectable thing to do as well as a good practice of "Heiho".

[cxt]

Mr. Franco

With all respect , I think there is a considerable bit of difference between altering the specific's of a given kata for public demonstration.

And the topics being addressed here.

In addition, logically, if the Momochis (as an example only) set things up in such a way to prevent anyone from being able to "back track" things--in order to protect the family.

Then it seems that did exactly what they set out to do.

Thus they would also have shot themselves in the foot concerning various "proofs."

I am quite sure that no-one at the time was thinking of teaching 200-300 years down the road.

But none-the-less the buck seems to stop with them.

Anyone whom takes deliberate and thorugh steps to destroy documents, hide "links" etc, may be doing it for the best of all possible reasons.

But they have little room to wiggle when asked to produce requested "proofs."

In a very real way its THEIR fault that such proofs might not exsist--thus they have little room to complain.

Heck, if they had not done so--its possible that none of them would have survived.
Lack of "proofs" would seem a small price to pay for the very survival of the family.


Chris Thomas

[Mr.Franco]

With all respect , I think there is a considerable bit of difference between altering the specific's of a given kata for public demonstration.

I've seen Hatsumi Sensei do a 180 when a camera is on him. It goes from decent training to "a ninja show". And for those of you who aren't sure how the Bujinkan training is held in Japan-It's not a "Ninja Training Camp". There are techniques which are derived from "Densho" and expounded upon. Much of the subject matter would be considered very much "Ko-Budo". It ranges from classical Japanese weaponry to unarmed techniques.

In addition, logically, if the Momochis (as an example only) set things up in such a way to prevent anyone from being able to "back track" things--in order to protect the family.Then it seems that did exactly what they set out to do. Thus they would also have shot themselves in the foot concerning various "proofs."

I am quite sure that no-one at the time was thinking of teaching 200-300 years down the road. But none-the-less the buck seems to stop with them. Anyone whom takes deliberate and thorugh steps to destroy documents, hide "links" etc, may be doing it for the best of all possible reasons. But they have little room to wiggle when asked to produce requested "proofs."


No argument here. I myself have wondered the same thing at times, but just for a more historical curiosity. In the end it's do I like what I'm studying?

I hate to sound "Zen" but in a certain way the past doesn't matter, nor does the future. My guess is even those well documented Ko-Ryu hava had to have made changes throughout warring times and times of peace. Is every Ko-Ryu intact from when it was first founded? I'm not sure thats the case. I think that the Soke have made changes in order to improve the lineage or art. So if thats the case than it's now as old as it's last change-ne?.

[niten ninja]

There was a thread in the ninjutsu section, on a demonsatration by the Booj, where a straight sword was used, which confused alot of people. The conclusion was that hatsumi had dressed it up alot to make it look good for the public, (wasn't he a choreographer for a while?) I think his intentions were almost certainly entertainment over hiding kata.

[fifthchamber]

Are you suggesting that the Bujinkan, for some reason or other chooses to display itself as a choreographed Ninja film display in order to "hide" the techniques from the watching public? I would have to say that that is rather far fetched....I agree, Koryu do alter certain parts of their kata in order to cover the "points" of those waza..But none of those Koryu choose to display the kinds of enbu that I have seen the Bujinkan performing here in Japan. There was no kata done at these enbu..No order to the movements as far as I could see beyond the choreography used to create it. The enbu were great, fun to watch..But did not use kata as a basis...Unless you are suggesting that the enbusha had somehow attained the wisdom to be able to use the principles of those kata and somehow rise above them and become able to flow...Somewhat far fetched considering that several of those demoing were not yet Dan ranked..This alone is NOT a koryu method/behaviour..It doesn't work like that..Certainly not at enbu..
Regards.

[Mr.Franco]

Are you suggesting that the Bujinkan, for some reason or other chooses to display itself as a choreographed Ninja film display in order to "hide" the techniques from the watching public?

Yes

I would have to say that that is rather far fetched....I agree, Koryu do alter certain parts of their kata in order to cover the "points" of those waza..But none of those Koryu choose to display the kinds of enbu that I have seen the Bujinkan performing here in Japan. There was no kata done at these enbu..No order to the movements as far as I could see beyond the choreography used to create it. The enbu were great, fun to watch..But did not use kata as a basis...

So what! What does that have to do with anything.

Unless you are suggesting that the enbusha had somehow attained the wisdom to be able to use the principles of those kata and somehow rise above them and become able to flow...Somewhat far fetched considering that several of those demoing were not yet Dan ranked..

I'm not suggesting anything. I have never been a part of a "Public Demonstration" under Hatsumi Sensei so I don't know if they ad-lib or if it's rehersed or if they base it on specific kata. But I do know that the style of training seen at the Hombu via Hatsumi Sensei allows for ad-libing.

The fact of the matter is that Hatsumi Sensei does change the way he expresses the art in public in comparrison to what you would see in the dojo. I even see the difference in his method of teaching when he is in the Budokan (Ayase) to when he is in the Hombu.

This alone is NOT a koryu method/behaviour..It doesn't work like that..Certainly not at enbu.. Regards.

Each Soke can do what he pleases when it comes to the art in which he represents. Or maybe there is a "Ko Ryu Rules For Public Demonstration" and a "Ko Ryu Rules For Being Soke".

Hatsumi Sensei is known for being eccentric. I believe that this is why people follow him/his teachings. He is known for going "outside the box" and expresses his art in this manner.

Does it follow "Ko Ryu" tradition; as far as I know-no. But it works for these times and for those that have become better people because of it.

[fifthchamber]

Hello Mr. Franco,
Thank you for the reply. The question asked in this thread was "Opinions on Masaaki Hatsumi as Koryu"...I'm simply pointing out that what I have seen of the Bujinkan here is that it isn't taught as a Koryu...I'm glad that you could see what I mean.
Regards.

[Mr.Franco]

Hello Mr. Franco,
Thank you for the reply. The question asked in this thread was "Opinions on Masaaki Hatsumi as Koryu"...I'm simply pointing out that what I have seen of the Bujinkan here is that it isn't taught as a Koryu...I'm glad that you could see what I mean.
Regards.

Although I agree with you that the lineages aren't disiminated in a Ko-Ryu fashion, it seems that many are eluding to the "categorization" of the Bujinakn Ryu-Ha has as "Ko-Ryu"/"Ko-Ryu'nt".

[El Guapo-san]

I've heard the demonstration bit explained as giving the audience something that they can see. A good number of techniques that I've learned in Japan and elsewhere all tend to have a high degree of "hidden" (in this case not immediately apparent) elements to them. Hence the need to dress things up a bit.

Also heard the koryu debate.... but one of the things that should disqualify Bookj is that it is not taught in a koryu way. Things are more "live", and that makes for a certain amount of change and impreciseness, which is not something that many koryu are noted for.

J. Vlach

[ChrisMoon]

Also heard the koryu debate.... but one of the things that should disqualify Bookj is that it is not taught in a koryu way. Things are more "live", and that makes for a certain amount of change and impreciseness, which is not something that many koryu are noted for.

J. Vlach

What exactly do you mean by things are more "live". Are other styles and arts not as live?

[Steve Delaney]

Yes, could you please extrapolate on this?

[niten ninja]

Isn't there an article on koryu.com about sparring with shinai but only helmets and gloves. Don't get much more alive than that.

[Mr.Franco]

Isn't there an article on koryu.com about sparring with shinai but only helmets and gloves. Don't get much more alive than that.

Actually in the Bujinkan there is sparring done but normally there are no protective gear worn-at least in my experience.

You can get "knuckle busters", "fat lips", "black eyes" and sometimes even broken/chipped bones. In my experience, the training has allways been about enduring training in order to not be affected/surprised by things like pain-"1,000 changes and no surprises".

I have been talking to a handfull of reliable people/sources recently and from what I have been told the arts which are taught by Hatsumi Sensei are "Ko Ryu" and the movements/style are of the "Meiji Era". Now I can't have an intelligent discussion about this because I am not well versed on this subject. I am open to any and all "Intelligent" opinions-I am very interested in the historical aspects of classical Japanese warriorship.


Things are more "live", and that makes for a certain amount of change and impreciseness, which is not something that many koryu are noted for.

I can't speak for other Koryu nor do I want to demean any other schools or arts because I:

A) Don't have enough exposure to them

B) I respect them for there traditions and philosophies

I can only assume (and you know what that means) that what is meant here is that In the Bujinkan many people train on "Shinken Gata". My comment is that this has been a "HUGE" debate within the organization as to when is a person ready for this type of training, so take for what it's worth. Hatsumi Sensei and other Shihan do train in this method within their dojos, but I believe it is intended for those who have allready acheived a certain level of skill (my opinion).

As I have said before-I have personally witnessed Hatsumi Sensei "change hats" when it comes to public venues. It's a public "show". That being said, I think we've exhausted this specific issue (another one of "my opinions").

[Mr.Franco]

movements/style are of the "Meiji Era".

Sorry, I have to correct myself

From what I had been told is that the style/kanji in which the "Densho" were written denotes a "Pre-Meiji" era. To add to this, the way the Kata are constucted/performed is also indicitive of "Ko Ryu".

Again this is what I was told by reliable sources. I am not a historian at all but I'm working on it!

[ChrisMoon]

Actually in the Bujinkan there is sparring done but normally there are no protective gear worn-at least in my experience.



The sparring he is referring to is in article by Ellis Amdur in which they were using shinai. I have serious doubts that people in the Bujinkan are sparring with shinai without protection.

[Mr.Franco]

I have serious doubts that people in the Bujinkan are sparring with shinai without protection.

Sorry to diispoint you- it's painfull but true! (pun intended)

Many of the people who have a little more time training in the Bujinkan can probably remember the time when everyone used "wood" training weapons. Now that people like "Tim Bathurst" and "Bujin Design" have come out with "Fukuro Shinai" it's less painfull, but some of us still prefer not to wear protective gear in order to "condition" our body.

I have had injuries do to this, but I was younger then, and my abilities to heal quickly was also a plus. I still prefer to train/spar with no protection (unless it's with a girl) but I have hopefully learned enough tricks in order to avoid serious injury.

[ChrisMoon]

So there are no serious injuries when someone takes a full force blow to the head with a shinai?

[a_adika]

From what I had been told is that the style/kanji in which the "Densho" were written denotes a "Pre-Meiji" era. To add to this, the way the Kata are constucted/performed is also indicitive of "Ko Ryu".
Again this is what I was told by reliable sources. I am not a historian at all but I'm working on it!


Telling us that you were told something by reliable sources does not really amount to much.
Who are these reliable sources and what is the proof???

Actually in the Bujinkan there is sparring done but normally there are no protective gear worn-at least in my experience.

It is true that each Bujinkan Dojo is different and that many dojo do indeed have free sparring as part of the training. However, speaking about training in Japan these days, I would have to say that free sparring is more the exception than the norm in my experience. I cannot speak about every single Shihan or about every single class. I can also not speak about training a long time ago. However, in almost two years of living and training in Japan regularly at Hatsumi Sensei's classes and at several of the well known Shihan a few years ago, and on several shorter training trips, I have NEVER seen any kind of free sparring done. Again, this is my experience and does not mean that sparring is never done in Japan.

Also heard the koryu debate.... but one of the things that should disqualify Bookj is that it is not taught in a koryu way. Things are more "live", and that makes for a certain amount of change and impreciseness, which is not something that many koryu are noted for.

It seems like you are implying that Koryu are "dead".
What gives you this impression?
What is your experience with Koryu that you say this so decisively?

Have a nice day,

A Adika

[Mr.Franco]

Telling us that you were told something by reliable sources does not really amount to much.
Who are these reliable sources and what is the proof???

Out of respect for those peoples privacy, I cannot give you a name, but they have seen some of the "Densho" and I trust thier word.

in almost two years of living and training in Japan regularly at Hatsumi Sensei's classes and at several of the well known Shihan a few years ago, and on several shorter training trips, I have NEVER seen any kind of free sparring done.

I have never done any sparring while training with Hatsumi Sensei or any of the Shihan. I apologize if it sounded this way. Most of my sparring has taken place with instructors of the Bujinkan here in the U.S.

So there are no serious injuries when someone takes a full force blow to the head with a shinai?

I'm sure there would be. Now that there are "Fukuro Shinai" more readily available it is less dangerous therefore the strike are more commited and there is less possibility for injury.

[ChrisMoon]

I'm sure there would be. Now that there are "Fukuro Shinai" more readily available it is less dangerous therefore the strike are more commited and there is less possibility for injury.

I see, just that in your previous post you made a big deal about not using any protective gear or padding but you are using a padded weapon. So really not any difference then in what you are doing and what they are doing. You probably would not want Ellis Amdur coming at you with an unpadded shinai and no gear.

[Mr.Franco]

I think that that would be a dangerous position to be in but if it happened I would have to deal with it the best I could and try not to be too affected by the screaming.

But if it's worth any "brownie points" I have had many run-ins with a bokuto, rokushaku bo, sanshaku bo, etc. It's stings like a mutha...shut yo' mouth! It's all good until you see blood gushing out of a wound which is allready pulsating. All you can do then is suck it up or call "time-out"...I've done both!

After this than I sit back and contemplate "where'd I go wrong"?

It's all good though. I enjoy the pain process (sometimes) theres a certain "hormone release" which gives you a good buzz!

[Mr.Franco]

I think we ran off the road and nobody signaled!

Anybody got a map?

Let's see-we were there, now were here-How can I get back on the road back to there?

[ChrisMoon]

Sure thing lets get back on track. Though I am still interested in seeing you take a bokuto strike to the head and have a conversation immediately after about how it stung like a mutha.

[Mr.Franco]

You probably would not want Ellis Amdur coming at you with an unpadded shinai and no gear.

Oh yeah, well you probably wouldn't want Miyamoto Musashi coming at you with two swords and you only had a kusari-gama!

Sorry Chris-I had to!

[Mr.Franco]

Though I am still interested in seeing you take a bokuto strike to the head and have a conversation immediately after about how it stung like a mutha.

Luckily the couple of times it has hit me on the head It wasn't at full speed or the only conversation I'd be having is guessing how many fingers the guy above me is holding up!

[niten ninja]

"but some of us still prefer not to wear protective gear in order to "condition" our body."

Not sure you can condition yourself for sword strikes.

[Mr.Franco]

Not sure you can condition yourself for sword strikes.

Not sure when I'll be in my next sword duel!!!

Damn these arguments are stupid!!!!

[niten ninja]

Not really a arguement just an observation.

[El Guapo-san]

Out of respect for those peoples privacy, I cannot give you a name, but they have seen some of the "Densho" and I trust thier word.

I have never done any sparring while training with Hatsumi Sensei or any of the Shihan.


At least one of the Shihan in Japan does randori as a part of class. I know because he kicked my behind. There are densho and there's also kuden which goes along with some of the schools. Couple of shihan that I've trained with independently here in Europe have had the same kuden (which means that they're either talking to each other.... likely.... or getting it from Japan.... also likely).

J. Vlach

[tweety]

I've done randori in Japan with Shihan as well.

[Mr.Franco]

There are densho and there's also kuden which goes along with some of the schools.

Actual there is a scroll which (from what I understand) was created by Takamatsu Sensei called the "Tora No Maki" which is "shinken gata"

[Shinobi]

Actual there is a scroll which (from what I understand) was created by Takamatsu Sensei called the "Tora No Maki" which is "shinken gata"

You seem to be incoherent in your replies, please stay on topic and try not to quote from memory as your making lots of mistakes and making the BJK look bad.

"Tora-no-maki" is not created by Takamatsu-sensei. The Tora-no-maki Shinken-gata is from Ichiyanagi Oribe Kazuma who taught it too Ishitani Matsutarô who then taught it to Takamatsu-sensei. It’s supposedly based on Kuki/Chôsui daken and Shinden Fudô-ryû as Ichiyanagi traveled around and picked those two as his favorite styles and combined them.

Also please try to reply with only facts and not speculations as this thread is asking "opinions on maasaki hatsumi as koryu?" and is important to some of us. Replying with stuff like "Takamatsu created it" only detracts from the topic and spreads false information. Please read "Message from Soke (1)" #2 here http://www001.upp.so-net.ne.jp/bujinkan/ for guidelines/protocol when posting/replying on the internet about the Bujinkan arts.

Thanks

[Shinobi]

For one, if you read my post regarding the Tora No Maki I stated that this is from what I understood. Anything that I have said has been to the best of my knowledege and it has been in regards to what I have been told.

Forget what I said before about making the BJK look bad, I didn't know you were a JNK member and since that’s the case, you might want to buy this http://www.jinenkan.com/shopping/shopdisplayproducts.asp?id=21&cat=Shinken+Gata+Videos
The site used to say this:


"The exact time is unclear, but at some point a Budoka (martial artist) named Ichiyanagi Kazuma systematized the Bugei Juhappan (18 subjects of martial study) into these 9 categories: Gunryaku (military strategy), Jinei (Encampment), Kenpo (swordsmanship), Sojutsu (spear-fighting), Tenmon/Chimon (“study of the sky and earth”; weather-watching and geography), Bojutsu (stick-fighting), Naginatajutsu (halberd-fighting), Chikujo (building fortifications), and Jutaijutsu (unarmed fighting).

This “Tora-no-Maki” is a collection of the Shinken-Gata of Jutaijutsu. This was then taught by Takamatsu-Sensei to Hatsumi-Sensei, then to us. I practiced the severe techniques of this “Tora-no-Maki” for several years.

The contents, as you will see by watching these tapes, consist of Dakentaijutsu and Jutaijutsu. The skills recorded here include Kihon-Gata (fundamentals), Kihon Suwari-Gata (fundamental seated techniques), 12 Shodan (or Shoden), 12 Nidan (or Chuden), 8 Sandan (or Okuden), 12 Yondan (or Sabaki-Gata), and 12 Godan (or Kaiden-Gata); 44 techniques in all.

The techniques themselves are mostly similar to Kukishin-ryu Dakentaijutsu, but the details are somewhat different.

--Unsui"


The information was up on your kanchô's website and has been around the internet for some time, even back on the old ninpô-L days. Ichiyanagi started it and is a mix of Kuki daken and SFR, or so the history says.

Note from George Kohler:removed by request of original poster.

I chimed in a long time ago in this long dragged out thread. I tried to be polite to you and if you see it as "chastised" that wasn't my intention. But since you have asked me to kiss your bum I wont reply or converse with you anymore since I don't think Manaka-sensei would be too happy with your insults/behavior.

I hope you or someone else can contribute in a polite way on whether they think Hatsumi-sensei's arts are koryû or not and stay on topic. His teaching methods are un-orthodox and not the norm for koryû but his arts are in my opinion.

thanks

[El Guapo-san]

What exactly do you mean by things are more "live". Are other styles and arts not as live?

I should have said "live" as in "changing." Many koryu will have precise movements and kata which are handed down unchanged. That's good, it represents tradition.

On the other hand, Bujinkan more readily adapts and adopts things. Such as movement X from Y ryu that is normally done without weapons is henka'd a bit to include kunai, a mobile phone or a gun. The same things could be done with koryu material, but it's not something which I see on widespread basis by other schools.

That's not to say that koryu are not effective anymore or that they are museum pieces. They're not. What I am saying is that the method of trasmission and classes are different, and that sets things apart. To me, that means that, to an extent, Bujinkan is simply not koryu.

Not that it makes much difference anyway. I'd think I'd probably get bored in koryu pretty quickly but that's just because it ain't my scene (sneaking around in the swampest places and flipping out is).

J. Vlach

[ChrisMoon]

I should have said "live" as in "changing." Many koryu will have precise movements and kata which are handed down unchanged. That's good, it represents tradition.



J. Vlach

Says who and are they stating that as fact?

An excerpt from Old School by Ellis Amdur in regards to his own teacher:

In keeping with Araki-ryu's tradition, he led his students in a ruthless gleaning and honing of the forms handed down from all of these traditions, keeping only those which proved strongest in a variety of experiments, taryu shiai (controlled, agreed-upon matches with men from other martial traditions) and the study of original records to strive to discern the intentions of the creators of the original forms.

...

The syncretic Araki-ryu could be termed koryu bujutsu (a living traditon flowing from the past)."

In Koryu Bujutsu: Classical Warrior Traditions of Japan, Mr. Amdur writes:

"The line of Araki-ryu that I practiced was true to its own definition of koryu. Even the oldest kata (forms) were ruthlessly examined with an attempt to make them more effective while still retaining the essential character of the school. In addition, new forms and freestyle practice were developed for modern day self-defense, street fighting or combat with improvised weapons. This included practice in methods of unarmed kakuriki (grappling) and kempo (striking with hands and feet). Such innovation was not something particular to this generation. Araki-ryu has always adjusted and adpated to local conditions in each generation and location that it alighted, in keeping with its defining phrase, "Ichi koku, ichi den: In each country/location, one tradition." My instructor used to say, "If you return to America and simply teach what I taught you, I will consider you a failure. America is different - you will have to teach Amdur-ryu. Call it Araki-ryu if you like, but it will have to be developed so it suits you, and suits your country."

Careful about making broad statements about other schools or traditions. Especially if you have no experience with them.

[El Guapo-san]

In general, in general. We're talking about one organization (Booj) and Koryu (many many organizations). Of course there will be exceptions to the stereotype.

J. Vlach

[Mr.Franco]

"Tora-no-maki" is not created by Takamatsu-sensei. The Tora-no-maki Shinken-gata is from Ichiyanagi Oribe Kazuma who taught it too Ishitani Matsutarô who then taught it to Takamatsu-sensei. It’s supposedly based on Kuki/Chôsui daken and Shinden Fudô-ryû as Ichiyanagi traveled around and picked those two as his favorite styles and combined them.

I stand corrected. Thanks for the info!

[BudoM]

Regarding
Japanese:
"Hatsumi-wa ninja-gokko o yatteiru."

English:
"Hatsumi is the guy who plays ninja."
I believe that "Hatsumi is the guy who plays ninja." is both truth and not in a same way. A lot of members of Bujinkan (but not all), are guys how are playing Ninjas. That is what is giving a Bujinkan a bad name and off course as a head of Bujinkan is to be placed ahead of “playing ninja”.
One example of playing ninjas…..Not long ago I stumbled on one out of many similar “Bujinkan webpage”.

http://www.bujinkan-montenegro.co.cc/fotogalerija/main.php?cmd=album&var1=slike01/


http://www.bujinkan-montenegro.co.cc/fotogalerija/main.php?cmd=imageview&var1=slike03%2F12.jpghttp://www.bujinkan-montenegro.co.cc/fotogalerija/main.php?cmd=imageview&var1=slike05%2F12.jpg
http://www.bujinkan-montenegro.co.cc/fotogalerija/main.php?cmd=imageview&var1=slike05%2F27.jpghttp://www.bujinkan-montenegro.co.cc/fotogalerija/main.php?cmd=imageview&var1=slike01%2F22.jpg