PDA

View Full Version : The Nine Ryu-ha of the Bujinkan - are they legitimate?



Pages : 1 [2]

saru1968
14th November 2005, 19:46
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
14th November 2005, 22:08
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
14th November 2005, 23:08
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
14th November 2005, 23:25
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
15th November 2005, 00:12
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
15th November 2005, 01:55
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
15th November 2005, 03:15
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
15th November 2005, 08:17
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
15th November 2005, 10:05
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
15th November 2005, 10:24
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
15th November 2005, 10:42
...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
15th November 2005, 10:54
..............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
15th November 2005, 13:59
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
15th November 2005, 14:03
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
15th November 2005, 15:11
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
15th November 2005, 15:36
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
15th November 2005, 15:41
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
15th November 2005, 16:59
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
15th November 2005, 17:28
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 didnĺt agree with it, I hardly think anyone is going to
move the Meiji Restoration because of me :) )

No; I donĺt have a problem with the way koryu is defined. 1868 is
1868 ľ 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
15th November 2005, 17:30
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, I╣ve 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 │for real▓ 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 │for real▓ 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
15th November 2005, 17:36
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
15th November 2005, 17:53
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
15th November 2005, 18:15
"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
15th November 2005, 18:25
"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
15th November 2005, 18:40
My point was that people are saying Hatsumi made it up, but if Takamatsu taught other people it, then Hatsumi couldn't.

cxt
15th November 2005, 18:51
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
15th November 2005, 18:59
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
15th November 2005, 19:03
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
16th November 2005, 06:15
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
16th November 2005, 11:58
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 Iĺll 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
16th November 2005, 12:31
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
16th November 2005, 15:59
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
16th November 2005, 17:38
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. Itĺs 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
16th November 2005, 20:05
Not all the ryu are in there.

Someone needs new reading glasses :p

From the 1978 edition which is the most recent:

Gikan-ryű (kopp˘) - page 214 - Hatsumi

Gyokko-ryű (kosshijutsu, !!!!˘jutsu, ninp˘) - pages 229 - 230 - Hatsumi

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

Kukishinden Happ˘ Bikenjutsu (ken) - page 240 - Hatsumi

Kumogakure-ryű (nin) - page 247 - Hatsumi

Kot˘-ryű (kopp˘) - page 296 - Hatsumi

Shinden Fud˘-ryű (dakentaijutsu) - pages 414, 415 - Hatsumi

Takagi-ryű (yawara, b˘, yari, naginata, senban nagejutsu) - pages 524, 525, 526 - Hatsumi listed among the other branches including Kakuno-den (Tsutsui and Minaki), Mizuta-den (Takamatsu and Sat˘ Yonejir˘), Takamatsu-den (Hatsumi, Sat˘ Kinbei). This ryűha is like a maze, many branches today, 2 offically part of the Nihon Kobud˘ Ky˘kai, Takagi-ryű (Kusuhara) and Hontai Y˘shin-ryű (Inoue) both including Kukishin-ryű b˘jutsu, Takagi-ryű being the purest of all the branches.

Togakure-ryű (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-ryű"

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-ryű honke line, the Kijin Ch˘sui-ryű daken line, Kit˘-ryű Kuki-ha bunke line, etc.

Only ones that are fully verifiable are the Takagi-ryű and Kukishin-ryű b˘jutsu which is inside Takagi-ryű, everything else isn't. Toda-den (Gyokko, Gyokushin, Kot˘, Kumogakure, Shinden Fud˘ and Togakure) can't be verifiable since we don't know if Toda Shinryűken existed until further proof is found.

I will also say this, ninjutsu itself as an art is not koryű in the sense of the organized structure as the bushi koryű. In Katori Shint˘-ryű, the ninjutsu is considered an auxillary section as in other koryű that had it. There is no shoden, chűden, okuden, etc in ninjutsu that we know of including the Togakure-ryű. I'm not even sure if Takamatsu-sensei got kaiden in it from Toda-sensei. S˘keship 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-ryű 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 K˘ga-gumi being from around the same time. But they might have just been kumi/gumi "groups" and not a specific ryűha perse until later on.

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

Shinobi
16th November 2005, 21:06
That's a pretty lame reason to not mention receiving a menkyo kaiden in a koryu art.

For what its worth, Asayama Ichiden-ryű is one of those "koryű" that isn't a member of the Nihon Kobud˘ Ky˘kai and not listed on their website http://www.nipponbudokan.or.jp/shinkou/html_1/index9.html but is considered to be a legit koryű. 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-ryű jűjutsu, another art Hatsumi-sensei learned from Ueno-sensei and is considered a legit ryű with some of it being lost. Sounds to me like the Nihon Kobud˘ Ky˘kai's standards are very high and not all koryű can get in and another factor to why Togakure isn't and others.

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

cxt
16th November 2005, 21:15
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
16th November 2005, 21:24
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
16th November 2005, 21:37
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 koryű arts.

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

And for what its worth, Ishitani-Jr might be more guilty then Toda Shinryűken, 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-ryű (Kuki b˘jutsu).

cxt
16th November 2005, 21:45
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
16th November 2005, 22:16
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
16th November 2005, 22:36
And the plot thickens...

He explained the reasons for both.

heretic888
16th November 2005, 23:43
We do know ninjutsu goes back to about the 900's and the Iga-gumi and K˘ga-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
17th November 2005, 01:35
He explained the reasons for both.


;)

So I see...

Shinobi
17th November 2005, 05:01
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 K˘ga and Iga are not given much credit. Part of the problem is that the ninja of Iga and K˘ga were not really part of a ryűha. The name K˘ga-ryű was applied later to describe them, but in period accounts they were always known as the K˘ga group (K˘ga-shű, K˘ga-gumi) or Iga group. A ryűha 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
17th November 2005, 11:35
"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 Dait˘-ryű a member and listed when they claim their ryű 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
17th November 2005, 15:15
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
17th November 2005, 15:51
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
17th November 2005, 16:13
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 K˘ga and Iga are not given much credit. Part of the problem is that the ninja of Iga and K˘ga were not really part of a ryűha. The name K˘ga-ryű was applied later to describe them, but in period accounts they were always known as the K˘ga group (K˘ga-shű, K˘ga-gumi) or Iga group. A ryűha 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
17th November 2005, 16:20
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
17th November 2005, 17:01
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
17th November 2005, 17:34
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
17th November 2005, 17:48
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
17th November 2005, 18:20
of course.

ChrisMoon
17th November 2005, 23:40
For what its worth, Asayama Ichiden-ryű is one of those "koryű" that isn't a member of the Nihon Kobud˘ Ky˘kai and not listed on their website http://www.nipponbudokan.or.jp/shinkou/html_1/index9.html but is considered to be a legit koryű. 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-ryű jűjutsu, another art Hatsumi-sensei learned from Ueno-sensei and is considered a legit ryű with some of it being lost. Sounds to me like the Nihon Kobud˘ Ky˘kai's standards are very high and not all koryű can get in and another factor to why Togakure isn't and others.

Maybe someone should make a list of koryű that aren't members of the Nihon Kobud˘ Ky˘kai but are believed to be legit so we can debate about all of them instead of just what Hatsumi-sensei has. And why is Dait˘-ryű a member and listed when they claim their ryű 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
18th November 2005, 02:00
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-ryű and K˘ga-ryű then what you have stated. And just because Don's article mentions the first documented use doesn't mean Iga/K˘ga ninja didn't exist before then. So why can't Iga/K˘ga ninja exist before the invasion of ďmi 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/K˘ga-gumi, you tried to clear it up, but are also in error by speculating they didn't exist prior to the 1480's.

Shinobi
18th November 2005, 02:10
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-ryű and find that interesting they turned it down.

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

Would be a interesting list.

ChrisMoon
18th November 2005, 02:45
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
18th November 2005, 03:35
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/Ninp˘ 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-ryű and K˘ga-ryű 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 K˘ga and Iga are not given much credit. Part of the problem is that the ninja of Iga and K˘ga were not really part of a ryűha."

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/K˘ga ninja exist before the invasion of ďmi 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/K˘ga-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
18th November 2005, 04:11
[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
18th November 2005, 05:19
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/Ninp˘ 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
18th November 2005, 11:47
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
19th November 2005, 13:25
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
19th November 2005, 14:32
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
19th November 2005, 22:01
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
19th November 2005, 23:01
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
20th November 2005, 15:47
Isn't Toda listed in the Bugei Ryuha Daijiten?

George Kohler
20th November 2005, 19:06
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.

Shinobi
21st November 2005, 13:13
Here are all 9 of the lineages that make up Hatsumi-sensei's Bujinkan organization. Hope this helps with everyone's questions, speculations and opinions. I have spent many hours working on these and they can be quite confusing and intricate at times. Whether you believe them or not is up to you. Some of it could be wrong but itĺs accurate as far as I know. Resources are from various sources including BRHDJT, some of Hatsumi-senseiĺs books in Japanese and English, some of his former studentĺs works, Paul Richardsonĺs book, Hiden magazine and other Japanese publications.

Shinobi
21st November 2005, 13:16
*Gikan-ryű kopp˘jutsu

-------- 1-11 not proven ------------
1. Akimoto Kawachi-no-kami Gikan (Gyokko-ryű shitojutsu)
2. Uryű Hangan Gikanb˘ (founder, Eiroku - 1558, daimy˘ of Kawachi-j˘)
3. Uryű Yoshimitsu
4. Uryű Yoshimori (Kanei - 1624)
5. Uryű Yoshichika (Kanbun - 1661)
6. Uryű Yoshitaka (Genroku - 1688)
7. Uryű Yoshihida (H˘reki - 1751)
8. Uryű Yoshishige (Kansei - 1789)
9. Uryű Yoshiaki (Tenp˘ - 1830)
10. Uryű Yoshiyasu (Bunkyű - 1861)
11. Uryű Gikan (Kei˘ - 1865)
--------- 12-15 proven -------------
12. Ishitani Matsutar˘ (left father & learned other styles, key to being koryű or not)
13. Takamatsu Toshitsugu Yoku˘ --> Sat˘ Kinbei
14. Akimoto Fumio
15. Hatsumi Masaaki

* This is my version to match up Hatsumi-sensei as the 15th head. It conflicts with other versions, but since there is no mention of Ishitani-Sr. learning this style in any of the Takagi/Kuki history records and that Ishitani-Jr. left home do to a falling out with his father I believe this is more accurate. Bugei Ryűha Daijiten also doesn’t list Ishitani Sr.!

Shinobi
21st November 2005, 13:19
Gyokko-ryű kosshijutsu

------------- 1-10 not proven ---------------
1. Tozawa Hakuunsai Kaneuji (Heiji - 1159, founder Gyokko-ryű)
2. Tozawa Sh˘suke
3. Suzuki Sabur˘ Shigeyoshi
4. Suzuki Gobei Mitsusada
5. Suzuki Kojir˘ Mitsuhisa
6. Tozawa Seiun (Sh˘˘ - 1288)
7. Tozawa Nyűd˘ Genzai
8. Hachiman Kakuun
9. Kuzuryű Hakuun (ďei - 1394)
10. Sakagami Gor˘ Katsushige
----- 11-26 not proven but believed to be real, 15-18 Momochi real --------
11. Sakagami Taro Kunishige (Tenmon - 1542, Gyokko-ryű shitojutsu founder)
12. Band˘ Kotar˘ Minamoto Masahide (died in battle in 1542)
13. S˘-Gyokkan Ritsushi --> (Sasaki Teruyoshi, Suzuki Chikamasa, Akimoto Gikan)
14. Toda Saky˘ Isshinsai (founder of kosshijutsu & Kot˘-ryű kopp˘jutsu)
15. Momochi Sandayű (Tenmon - 1532, Iga-ryű j˘nin & Iga-ryű karatejutsu)
16. Momochi Sandayű 2nd (Tensh˘ - 1573)
17. Momochi Tanba Yasumitsu (Keich˘ - 1596, lord of Ryűguchi-j˘)
18. Momochi Taro Saemon
19. Toda Seiryű Nobutsuna (Kanei - 1624)
20. Toda Fud˘ Nobuchika (Manji - 1658)
21. Toda Kangor˘ Nobuyasu (Kanbun - 1661)
22. Toda Eisabur˘ Nobumasa
23. Toda Shingor˘ Masayoshi (Genbun - 1736)
24. Toda Daigor˘ Chikahide (Meiwa - 1764)
25. Toda Daisabur˘ Chikashige (Bunka - 1804)
26. Toda Shinryűken Masamitsu (key to it being koryű or not)
------------- 27-28 proven ---------------
27. Takamatsu Toshitsugu --> (Ueno Takashi maybe)
28. Hatsumi Masaaki

Shinobi
21st November 2005, 13:21
Gyokushin-ryű ninjutsu

---------- 1-10 not proven, maybe records in Kishű-han? -----------
1. Sasaki Gor˘uemon Teruyoshi (founder) <-- (S˘-Gyokkan Ritsushi, Gyokko-ryű shitojutsu)
2. Sasaki Gendayű Sadayasu (Kishű-han) --> End˘ Yoshichika (kopp˘ & jűjutsu line)
3. unknown
4. unknown
5. unknown
6. unknown
7. unknown
8. unknown
9. unknown
10. unknown
---------- 11-19 not proven but believed to be real -----------------
11. Toda Seiryű Nobutsuna
12. Toda Fud˘ Nobuchika
13. Toda Kangor˘ Nobuyasu
14. Toda Eisabur˘ Nobumasa
15. Toda Shinbei Masachika
16. Toda Shingor˘ Masayoshi
17. Toda Daigor˘ Chikahide
18. Toda Daisabur˘ Chikashige
19. Toda Shinryűken Masamitsu (key to it being koryű or not)
------------ 20-21 proven ---------------
20. Takamatsu Toshitsugu
21. Hatsumi Masaaki (learned Gyokushin-ryű kopp˘ from Ueno Takashi maybe)

Shinobi
21st November 2005, 13:23
Kot˘-ryű kopp˘jutsu

-------- 1-16, not proven but believed to be real, Momochi 5-8 real --------
1. Sakagami Tar˘ Kunishige (Tenmon - 1542, Gyokko-ryű shitojutsu founder)
2. Band˘ Kotar˘ Minamoto Masahide (died in battle in 1542)
3. S˘-Gyokkan Ritsushi --> (Sasaki Teruyoshi, Suzuki Chikamasa, Akimoto Gikan)
4. Toda Saky˘ Ishinsai (Tenmon - 1532, founder & Gyokko-ryű kosshijutsu)
5. Momochi Sandayű (Tenmon - 1532, Iga-ryű j˘nin & Iga-ryű karatejutsu)
6. Momochi Sandayű 2nd (Tensh˘ - 1573)
7. Momochi Tanba Yasumitsu (Keich˘ - 1596, lord of Ryűguchi-j˘)
8. Momochi Tar˘ Saemon (Genna - 1615)
9. Toda Seiryű Nobutsuna (Kanei - 1624)
10. Toda Fud˘ Nobuchika (Manji - 1658)
11. Toda Kangor˘ Nobuyasu
12. Toda Eisabur˘ Nobumasa
13. Toda Shingor˘ Masayoshi
14. Toda Daigor˘ Chikahide
15. Toda Daisabur˘ Chikashige
16. Toda Shinryűken Masamitsu (key to it being koryű or not)
------- 17-18 proven ----------
17. Takamatsu Toshitsugu --> Ueno Takashi
18. Hatsumi Masaaki

Shinobi
21st November 2005, 13:27
Kukishinden Happ˘ Bikenjutsu

------- 1-14 not proven, some names same as Kukishin shihan-ke line ----------
1. Izumo Kanja Yoshiteru (founder) --> (Minamoto Tamenari, SFR daken)
2. Izumo Koshir˘ Terunobu
3. Izumo Matsushir˘ Teruhide
4. Izumo Bungor˘ Yoshiteru
5. Izumo Kanja Yoshitaka
6. Izumo Kanja Yoshiteru
7. ďkuni Kisanta Kiyosumi <-- (ďkuni Kigenta Kiyosada, Ch˘sui-ryű)
8. Tsutsumi H˘ki-no-kami Ritsuzan
9. Kuriyama Ukongen Nagafusa
10. Arima Kawachinosuke Masayoshi
11. ďkuni Kogenta Yukihisa <-- (Kumano shugenja j˘jutsu)
12. Kimura Itt˘sai Kanesuke
13. Arima Daisuke Tadaaki
14. Kazama Shinkur˘ Hidechika
----------- 15-24 not proven, except ďkuni Kihei -----------
15. ďkuni Kihei Shigenobu <-- (Kuki Sadataka, Takagi Gennoshin, Araki Teppei)
16. ďtone Sakon Yasumasa <-- (Asahina Yoshihei, Shinden Fud˘-ryű taijutsu)
17. ďtone Genpachi Yasuhide
18. ďtone Gengor˘ Yasuhira
19. Awaji Nyűd˘ Chikayasu --> (Toda Chikamasa, Shinden Fud˘-ryű taijutsu)
20. Kurama Kotar˘ Genshin
21. ďkuni Izumo-no-kami Shigehiro
22. Sugino Jűheita Kanemitsu
23. Hisahara Genjűr˘ Yoshitane
24. Hisahara Kotar˘ Nobuyoshi
------------- 25-28 proven -----------------
25. Ishitani Takeo Masatsugu (did he really learn this style of Kukishin?)
26. Ishitani Matsutar˘ Takekage <-- (Iba Toyotar˘, Akiyama Yotar˘, Uryű Gikan, etc)
27. Takamatsu Toshitsugu
28. Hatsumi Masaaki

Shinobi
21st November 2005, 13:29
Kumogakure-ryű ninjutsu

-------- 1-12 not proven but believed to be real --------
1. Iga Heinaizaemon Ienaga (founder) <-- (17 generations of Iga-ryű)
2. Toda Sagenta Nobufusa
3. Toda Gohei Nobunaga
4. Toda Noriyoshi
5. Toda Seiryű Nobutsuna
6. Toda Fud˘ Nobuchika
7. Toda Kangor˘ Nobuyasu
8. Toda Eisabur˘ Nobumasa
9. Toda Shingor˘ Masayoshi
10. Toda Daigor˘ Chikahide
11. Toda Daisabur˘ Chikashige
12. Toda Shinryűken Masamitsu (key to it being koryű or not)
------ 13-14 proven ----------
13. Takamatsu Toshitsugu
14. Hatsumi Masaaki Byakuryű-˘

Shinobi
21st November 2005, 13:32
Shinden Fud˘-ryű dakentaijutsu

------ 1- 12 not proven ----------
1. Izumo Kanja Yoshiteru (Eikyű - 1113) --> (Izumo Terunobu, Kukishinden Happ˘ Bikenjutsu)
2. Minamoto Hachiman Shichir˘ Tamenari (H˘gen - 1156, escaped to Iga)
3. Minamoto Hachir˘ Tameyoshi (H˘gen - 1156, founder)
4. Mizuhara Kur˘ Yoshinari (Kenkyű - 1190, lord of Mizuhara-j˘ in Mutsu)
5. Mugaibo Shinnen (Tenpuku - 1233)
6. ďkuni Zenhachir˘ Yoshinobu (Bunie - 1264)
7. Hata Sabur˘ Sasukeyasu
8. Kotani Yuhachir˘ Nobuchika (Engen - 1336)
9. Kaneko Jinsuke Yoshikiyo (Sh˘hei - 1346)
10. Tajima Genkur˘ Nariyoshi (Genchű - 1384)
11. Shinmon Kokanja Yoshikane (Sh˘ch˘ - 1428)
12. Kimura H˘zan (Kansh˘ - 1460)
-------- 13 - 14 not proven, interesting they re-founded it in 1500’s --------
13. Ibuki Tanomo (Bunmei - 1469, 2nd founder)
14. ďtsuka H˘ki Nyűd˘ Tadamori (Eish˘ - 1504, 3rd founder)
---------- 15-24 not proven, doubts about Katayama H˘ki to some ------------
15. ďtsuka Daikur˘ Tadahide (Tenmon - 1532)
16. Abe Muga (Tensh˘ - 1573)
17. K˘ga Tar˘bei Otsunu (Tensh˘ - 1573)
18. Katayama H˘ki-no-kami Hisayasu (Bunroku - 1592, same as in H˘ki-ryű?)
19. Shind˘ Unsai (Kanei - 1624)
20. Odagiri T˘bei Yoshihiro (Kanei - 1624)
21. Iida Jűbei Tameyoshi (Meiwa - 1764)
22. Mori Genroku Masahide (Bunka - 1804)
23. Toyota Jűbei Mitsuyoshi (Kei˘ - 1865) --> (Toda Gobei)
24. Toda Shinryűken (Meiji - 1868) <-- (Toda Chikamasa, Shinden Fud˘-ryű taijutsu)
-------- proven -----------
25. Takamatsu Toshitsugu
26. Hatsumi Masaaki

Shinobi
21st November 2005, 13:35
Hontai Takagi Y˘shin-ryű jűtaijutsu

------ 1-17 proven -------
S˘ Unryű (Amatsu Tatara Rinp˘ Hiden-no-maki)
It˘ Kii-no-kami Sukesada (It˘-ryű - Kenk˘-ryű)
1. Takagi Oriuemon Shigenobu (founder, had multiple teachers)
2. Takagi Umanosuke Shigesada <-- (Takenouchi Hisayoshi, Takenouchi-ryű jűjutsu)
3. Takagi Gennoshin Hideshige --> (Fujii Shigetsugu & Kagawa Masashige)
4. ďkuni Kihei Shigenobu <-- (Kuki Sadataka, Araki Teppei, Kazama Hidechika)
5. ďkuni Yakur˘ Nobutoshi
6. ďkuni Tar˘dayű Tadanobu
7. ďkuni Kihy˘e Yoshisada
8. ďkuni Yozaemon Yoshisada
9. Nakayama Jinnai Sadahide --> (Yake Ichihei)
10. ďkuni Buzaemon Hidenobu --> (Hikita Otoji)
11. Nakayama Kaemon Sadamasa (Ak˘-hanshi)
12. ďkuni Kamaharu Hidetoshi <-- (Ōkuni Izumo-no-kami Hidesada)
13. Yagi Ikugor˘ Hisayoshi --> (Inoue Kumatar˘, Ishitani Masatsugu)
14. Fujita T˘gor˘ Hisayoshi (no proof of existing according to some)
15. Mizuta Yoshitar˘ Tadafusa <-- (also trained with Ishizaki Yasutar˘ maybe)
16. Takamatsu Toshitsugu <-- (Ishitani Matsutar˘, also Kakuno Hachiheita maybe)
17. Hatsumi Masaaki

Shinobi
21st November 2005, 13:38
Togakure-ryű ninjutsu

------ 1-23 not proven ---------
1. Togakure (Nishina) Daisuke <-- (Kagakure D˘shi, Hakuun-ryű)
2. Shima Kosanta Minamoto-no Kanesada (Togakure Daisuke 2nd)
3. Togakure Gor˘ (founder to some sources)
4. Togakure Kosanta
5. K˘ga Kisanta
6. Kaneko Tomoharu
7. Togakure Ryűh˘
8. Togakure Gakuun
9. Kido K˘seki
10. Iga Tenryű
11. Ueno Rihei
12. Ueno Senri
13. Ueno Manjir˘
14. Iizuka Sabur˘
15. Sawada Gor˘
16. ďzaru Ippei
17. Tomata Hachir˘
18. Kataoka Heizaemon
19. Mori Ugenta
20. Toda Gobei
21. Kanbe Seiun
22. Momochi K˘be (can he be proven in the Momochi-ke keizu?)
23. Tobari Tenzen
---------- 24-32 not proven but believed to be real ----------
24. Toda Seiryű Nobutsuna <-- (Tanba Enshin, Natori-ke line Kishű-han)
25. Toda Fud˘ Nobuchika
26. Toda Kangor˘ Nobuyasu
27. Toda Eisabur˘ Nobumasa
28. Toda Shinbei Masachika
29. Toda Chingor˘ Masayoshi
30. Toda Daigor˘ Chikahide
31. Toda Daisabur˘ Chikashige
32. Toda Shinryűken Masamitsu (key to it being koryű or not)
--------- 33-34 proven ------------
33. Takamatsu Toshitsugu Yoku˘ --> (Fukumoto Yoshio maybe)
34. Hatsumi Masaaki Byakuryű-˘

gmarquay
23rd November 2005, 01:24
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
23rd November 2005, 02:22
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
23rd November 2005, 04:04
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
3rd December 2005, 03:29
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.

Hurtzdontit
6th December 2005, 13:05
Hello everyone,
Not trying to ride a dead horse here but in regards to the X kans being looked at as legitimate koryu (as in those that are recognised by koryu organisations in Japan) I assume that the Bujinkan and therefore the Jinenkan can be ruled out.
What I was wondering, is Shoto Tanemura of Genbukan/Kokusai Jujutsu fame recognised by any of the organisations for Koryu in Japan (Nihon Kobudo renmei etc) and does he own densho that date back longer than two generations. The reason that I ask this is it seems that alot of his Sokeships seem to come from diffrent instructors that Takamatsu sensei (Ueno sensei via Sato Kinbei sensei etc), ryu such as Bokuden ryu, Asayama ichiden ryu etc.
I'm also thinking about starting it up and was wondering if anyone had any input towards this discussion or what the koryu community in Japan think of him as we have all heard the same questions about Hatsumi.
Thanks in advance.
Andrew Timms.

P.S. To all Genbukan/KKJR people please do not take this as a question of your legitimacy as I am mearly asking informative questions and have nothing but respect for Tanemura.

niten ninja
6th December 2005, 16:40
Use the search function, this topic has been done to death just recently, there's even a topic below.

Hurtzdontit
7th December 2005, 08:41
Thanks for the reply,
Actually I thought that this had not been done to death, the subject you mentioned was mostly about Hatsumi. I'm interested to find out what the Koryu community in Japan think of Tanemura in relation to his sokeships that come from other lineages than Takamatsu!
I also wanted to know if the KJJR was a respected koryu renmei in Japan.
I'm asking this because I want to join up but just want to make sure that I'm getting recognised Koryu training.
Thanks
Andrew Timms.

niten ninja
7th December 2005, 09:55
That's actually quite a good question.

Hurtzdontit
7th December 2005, 10:29
Thanks,
Its a question that I can find no information on in cyber space. It seems that the Hatsumi/Bujinkan topic has been done to death but little information about Tanemura exists on the web besides on the dojo websites. I'm also wondering if he has densho that were given to him by people like Sato Kinbei etc (lineage to Ueno sensei etc) that date back to the edo period, I ask this due to the argument that seems to be put forward about Hatsumi is that all of his densho are only as old as when Takamatsu sensei wrote them and in that sense he cannot proove the lineage. For this reason I'm wondering if its the same senario for Tanemuras densho of Bokuden ryu, Asayama Ichiden ryu etc.
Also my reason of asking is that where I live the only thing that is Koryu is Tanemuras Jujutsu renmei. I just want to gather as much info as possible so I can make the right decision about my new martial home.
Thanks
Andrew Timms.

"I have done great things in the past, I have done great things in the future"
George W Bush Jnr

niten ninja
7th December 2005, 11:00
I think alot of the KJJR stuff is from Menkyo Kaiden rather than from him being soke.

niten ninja
7th December 2005, 11:01
I think alot of the KJJR stuff is from Menkyo Kaiden rather than from him being soke.... oops

a_adika
7th December 2005, 22:38
Hi,
If you do a little research, you will find that both Ueno Takashi and Sato Kinbei seem to have learned several of the lineages that they taught from Takamatsu.

Alon A.

fifthchamber
8th December 2005, 03:07
Hmm..Hard question to answer that one..
The Genbukan and the KJJR are not recognised by the two main Koryu organisations here in Japan..However, several of the schools that Tanemura Shoto teaches are certifiable Koryu..The Takagi Yoshin Ryu and the Asayama Ichiden Ryu are both demonstrators at the various enbu here in Japan..However, Tanemura Sensei has not tried to demo with these groups and had made no effort to get a place in the enbu or the two organisations here...
The Genbukan and the KJJR are NOT however taught as Koryu...At all. I did both for several years and they are not the same as what I now learn..Not any less a good thing for that..But if you want koryu they aren't it...They are based on it..And perhaps at the higher levels you could see more similarities..But at the core they aren't taught in that way.
I would suggest going to a class and seeing what it looks like to you..It's all good stuff..And worthwhile..Outside of Japan choice is limited anyways in regards to Koryu..You could do far worse than the Genbukan.
Regards.

Hurtzdontit
8th December 2005, 08:46
Thanks Ben,
It looks a little gendai in the kyu/dan levels as it seems that they teach kihon and a few kata, check the syllabus on the link below.
http://www.genbukan.org/cgi-bin/site.pl?kokusai_syllabus
It seems that they teach the first of the nine levels of Takagi Yoshin ryu up till shodan.
This was the part that interested me.
The KJJR follows a standard kyu/dan system. After 3rd dan, the student may specialize in one of the ryu ha's which Grandmaster Shoto Tanemura is the Soke of, and may receive scrolls up to Menkyo Kaiden level.

The other issue is about legitimacy of the sokeships, not saying that he is dishonest, but does anyone know if he holds denshos older than Takamatsu/Kinbei etc or does he face the same recognition dilema as Hatsumi?
Thanks
Andrew Timms

niten ninja
8th December 2005, 11:13
I though the KJJR was mostly made from styles, that Sato Kinbei had gained menkyo kaiden in.

Hurtzdontit
8th December 2005, 13:14
Nah Check the link below for Tanemuras Soke and Menkyo Kaiden list.
http://www.genbukan.org/cgi-bin/site.pl?ryu_soke

Loooonggg list there. I'm assuming that the list of schools that used to have Menkyo Kaiden listed near them that he got of Hatsumi (Togakure ryu etc) have now changed to Soke Tanemura ha due to the amount of people wanting masterships in Ninpo, I say this because it seems that the Ninpo thing is more popular than the Koryu thing in the Genbukan.
Then again I could be completely wrong.

Andrew Timms

fifthchamber
8th December 2005, 21:55
There is more to the Genbukan syllabus than the Ryuha that Tanemura Sensei studied under Hatsumi...He made an effort to expand the stuff that he knew after the split from the Bujinkan...How far and deep that goes I couldn't say..You might be hard pressed to get more than the basic replies to that one..Not many people would know and less would openly talk about it here..But you can try.
The schools that were added came mostly from people connected to Takamatsu Sensei in some form..Other schools associated with his Ryuha or those done by his students.
If you want more precise answers I would suggest trying www.genbukan.com and looking on the Discussion forums there..
Regards.

bu-kusa
9th December 2005, 12:43
Ben Kitano.

Ĺĺ The Genbukan and the KJJR are NOT however taught as Koryu...At all. I did both for several years and they are not the same as what I now learn..Not any less a good thing for that..But if you want koryu they aren't it...They are based on it..And perhaps at the higher levels you could see more similarities..But at the core they aren't taught in that way. ĺĺ

Just a quick question Ben, how is the training different to the Ryu-Ha you are now studying, do you mean the kyu/dan level training is different, or do you mean the actual Ryu-Ha Kata format is different?

Also the Enbu that you have seen for the Takagi Yoshin Ryu and the Asayama Ichiden Ryu, is there a difference between these lines and the Takagi Yoshin Ryu and the Asayama Ichiden Ryu practise that you have seen in the GBKN system??

(Im just trying to see if itĺs the format of the kyu training that is different, or whether this Ĺdifferenceĺ is more widespread ľ from the point of view of a koryu practitioner)

Many thanks for your time in reading this post,

Hurtzdontit
10th December 2005, 11:54
Hi,
Thanks for all the information so far, Ben as a koryu practitioner do you know how these assosiations (gbk, kjjr) are thought of in the koryu community. I mean we have heard of what they think about Hatsumi but I guess I'm trying to ask at the fear of offending people is Tanemura considered from the koryu circle in Japan as a true soke of the traditions that he inherited or do they see him in the same light as Hatsumi?
Thanks
Andrew Timms

fifthchamber
11th December 2005, 00:29
Hi Andrew,
They aren't. Very few people have heard of the Genbukan. Bujinkan is the only thing most practitioners can associate the word Ninpo with here. If the Koryu community knows about Tanemura at all I would think they respect what he does to some degree. The Kuki family arts have shown that on their webpage..But beyond that there are not many people here who know of the Genbukan organisation.
The Koryu organisations here are to some degree fairly insular...In that we respect the people we meet and see at demos and at the taikai, but beyond that there is not too much need to think about it too much..They do Ninpo..We don't...That's about it..The only guys who protest it are westerners..It may just be that the Japanese are more reserved...But it's not anything more than disinterest I think.
Hatsumi gets spotlight so EVERYONE knows him and his art...That lets people form ideas, but the Genbukan has been more quiet in it's publicity and it is not well known outside of the Ninja groups.
Regards.

Hurtzdontit
11th December 2005, 08:57
Thanks Ben,
One more question if thats cool with you.
Taking away the whole ninpo thing, does he get respect for the samurai based koryu that he is Soke of (Asayama, Bokuden, Takagi etc) or do they not aknowledge him for those.
I guess I'm saying, in Japan is a Menkyo Kaiden in Asayama Ichiden ryu issued from Tanemura looked at from the koryu community as a legit thing or more of a scratch the head in a state of confusion!
Thanks
Andrew Timms.

a_adika
11th December 2005, 13:04
Hi,
I think that Ben hit the nail on the head when he said that the Koryu community (Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai and Kyokai) either don't really know too much about the Genbukan/KJJR or don't think about it too much.

As far as i know, Mr. Tanemura is not a member of the Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai and Kyokai. This does not mean anything about the quality of his organization. I respect Mr. Tanemura for the way he has organized the material and think that you can find very good training in his organization.

As I mentioned to you before, from the Koryu point of view, it may seem very hard to understand how Mr. Tanemura practices more than TWENTY ryuha.
While some members of the Koryu community do practice more than one ryuha, most believe that one ryu is more than enough for a lifetime of study.

Mr. Tanemura does teach some branches of ryuha that are members in the Shinkokai, but he may, or may not have any connection with these people. You would have to speak to Mr. Tanemura or someone close to him to learn more about this.

Again, the Koryu organizations do not probably think about the Genbukan too much. The Genbukan is not a member and that is all.

I hope that you find what you are looking for.

A. Adika

Mr.Franco
16th December 2005, 18:42
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
16th December 2005, 19:26
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
17th December 2005, 00:56
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
17th December 2005, 09:43
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
18th December 2005, 00:04
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
18th December 2005, 05:41
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
18th December 2005, 06:52
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
19th December 2005, 05:01
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
21st December 2005, 07:50
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
21st December 2005, 10:30
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
21st December 2005, 12:54
Yes, could you please extrapolate on this?

niten ninja
21st December 2005, 12:59
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
21st December 2005, 16:47
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
21st December 2005, 18:18
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
21st December 2005, 18:27
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
21st December 2005, 18:51
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
21st December 2005, 20:33
So there are no serious injuries when someone takes a full force blow to the head with a shinai?

a_adika
21st December 2005, 21:15
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
21st December 2005, 22:53
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
21st December 2005, 22:59
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
21st December 2005, 23:15
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
21st December 2005, 23:19
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
21st December 2005, 23:23
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
21st December 2005, 23:23
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
21st December 2005, 23:28
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
22nd December 2005, 16:16
"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
23rd December 2005, 02:18
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
23rd December 2005, 08:43
Not really a arguement just an observation.

El Guapo-san
23rd December 2005, 13:14
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
23rd December 2005, 15:36
I've done randori in Japan with Shihan as well.

Mr.Franco
23rd December 2005, 16:56
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
26th December 2005, 02:22
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 Matsutar˘ who then taught it to Takamatsu-sensei. It’s supposedly based on Kuki/Ch˘sui daken and Shinden Fud˘-ryű 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
27th December 2005, 19:01
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 thatĺs 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 (ôstudy of the sky and earthö; weather-watching and geography), Bojutsu (stick-fighting), Naginatajutsu (halberd-fighting), Chikujo (building fortifications), and Jutaijutsu (unarmed fighting).

This ôTora-no-Makiö 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 ôTora-no-Makiö 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 kanch˘'s website and has been around the internet for some time, even back on the old ninp˘-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 koryű or not and stay on topic. His teaching methods are un-orthodox and not the norm for koryű but his arts are in my opinion.

thanks

El Guapo-san
28th December 2005, 08:38
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
28th December 2005, 09:09
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
28th December 2005, 12:41
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
28th December 2005, 18:15
"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 Matsutar˘ who then taught it to Takamatsu-sensei. Itĺs supposedly based on Kuki/Ch˘sui daken and Shinden Fud˘-ryű as Ichiyanagi traveled around and picked those two as his favorite styles and combined them.

I stand corrected. Thanks for the info!

paradoxbox
23rd February 2006, 05:15
sorry to bump an oldish thread.

I believe what Mr. Lindsey was talking about some information Takamatsu sensei transfered from ryusen no maki into the togakure ryu teachings he received. From my limited understanding of that situation, the Togakure ryu Takamatsu sensei received was not quite the same as we practice it today; it was what you might say incomplete, some of the teachings had been lost. According to Tanemura soke, it's probable that Takamatsu researched teachings he knew to be (or felt to be) part of the ancient and full Togakure ryu, and as soke, re-added them to the ryu.

I cannot verify any of this information personally but it is in the magazine Amatsu Tatara published by Genbukan, but I have no reason to doubt its authenticity.

berserker fury
3rd January 2008, 12:23
I know there is controversy and debate about Takamatsu's 9 schools that developed into the Bujinkan but wasnt he a legit instructor of Kukishin Ryu and Takagi Yoshin Ryu? As far as I can tell arent those two schools at least considered authentic?

berserker fury
3rd January 2008, 13:12
nevermind, I found what I was looking for.

BudoM
23rd November 2011, 11:20
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 ôplaying ninjaö.
One example of playing ninjasů..Not long ago I stumbled on one out of many similar ôBujinkan webpageö.

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