Bujutsu and Budo

[wiz cool c]

Manaka sells Togakure Ryu videos. Isn't that one of the ninjutsu ryu from Takamatsu?

The only thing I know about the Jinkenkan is what I herd and that was that he dident teach the three ninja ryus in his Jinkenkan. He learned from Hatsumi so he knows them. If he sells tapes or teaches them now I have no idear.

[Mr Punch]

Blackmantis, Scott's post on the differences between aikido and aikijutsu seems to be completely correct in my understanding, except the bit where he (mystifyingly) attacks me ad hominem.

As usual you perceive according to your preconceived notions and not according to what was written. Your assessment of the differences and similarities between Aikido and Aikijutsu are in error. As a qualifier it does depend greatly upon the instructor and the style, something I mentioned and you apparently disregarded.

I've no idea where this attack came from. The fact that we have had our differences in the past should not suddenly precipitate this kind of paranoid knee-jerk reaction. In fact, I agree with your post. My assessment of the differences is pretty much the same as yours, so if mine is erroneous... well! I chose to stress the fact that whichever one you use in the street, if you know what you are doing and you are successful will probably lead to someone getting seriously hurt. I know of a couple of aikido encounters where the assailant has been left uninjured, but far more where somebody has incurred serious injury. YMMV. It's no reason for insulting me.

So, as for the 'as usual' and 'preconceived' I'd like to know where you think my 'pre'conceptions come from... The only conceptions I have of aikido and aikijutsu are 15 years of practising them in various forms, through aikikai-style, ki society, and including learning at the dojo of Tada Shihan (the direct student of Ueshiba who happens to be the head of several national aikido organisations) and daitoryu based internals (taught by a private student of Kimura) and sparring in many formats, not to mention lots of personal experience in the street, and the experience of training partners of mine. Plus reading Japanese and English articles in magazines like Hiden.

And furthermore, nowhere was I attacking your post or your character, I merely disagreed with your assessment of judo.

Aikido is basically intended to be used for the purpose of defending oneself resulting in as little harm to the assailant as possible. Because of this the techniques may be preformed in a more or less aggressive manner as necessity dictates.

Which is pretty much the same as what I said about not cranking it on so hard. As is your point about where to throw your assailant... but the stress in my post is just that you usually don't have the luxury of choosing where to throw your assailant. If you want to believe there is a safe and desirable way of resolving any violent conflict without injuring one party, great! More credit to you. I would like to believe it, but IME it's often not the case. So I reiterate, on the street, aiki looks pretty much the same.

Here's a question for you, if you can answer it objectively without resorting to personal insults. Ueshiba was a martial genius and highly experienced in fighting and killing: if he hadn't had that expereince do you think he would have reached the level where he would have recommended defending yourself without hurting your assailant and the peace and love aspects?

Your statements regarding Judo are spurious. Anything may be accidentally or unintentionally fatal. Pushing someone may cause them to fall and hit their head causing death. Your comments are therefore meaningless. Traditional Judo as it was originally practiced includes a large curriculum, including throws, grappling and joint locks. Someone who finds a good traditional instructor would acquire a broader knowledge of techniques increasing their potential effectiveness. These techniques are less lethal than Aikijutsu and of broader scope than Aikido!

Why are they meaningless? Sure, pushing someone over CAN cause death; so deliberately throwing someone on his head on a hard surface has a much higher chance of causing death and this has legal implications, no?

As for the effieciency and lethality of judo, please read Mark Tripp's history of how judo developed out of a desire to test obsolete jujutsu to make it MORE effective!

Since this thread is for the purpose of helping blackmantis determine his next venture into the world of MA I am not interested in getting into another pi$$ing contest with you.

So don't ****ing start one then.

[Mr Punch]

The only 'real' lineage of Aikijujutsu which can be traced back to the turn of the century, is Daito Ryu. ...It is widely thought that Daito Ryu was largely constructed by Takeda Sokaku. To reiterate - "Aikijujutsu" is not an historical, battlefield art, it is a self defense art, created around the turn of the twentieth century.

Widely thought by whom?

Not challenging you in any way, just wondering how it is that you have such conviction on a subject that is still widely debated.

BTW, in answer to the original question Blackmantis, Finny seems to have the best suggestion, but also it depends on what you want to do most in your art. If you want to go sporty with a good chance for self defence on the way, judo is probably for you. I can't really comment much more than that as my judo experience is very very low.

If you want something gentler and supposedly more cultural but that runs a higher risk of you bumping into lots of wafty wannabe Japanese my-art-is-too-deadly you-don't-have-to-hurt-anyone bull****ters, go for aikido. There is a lot of bad aiki out there but if you find some good stuff (of which there is also a lot) you may not develop amazing fighting skills but it should be a valuable experience on many other levels. It's also a nice balance of some good unarmed principles and some good weapons work (if you find a school which uses weapons, which IMO are the most rewarding styles and will add to your depth of understanding of the unarmed work).

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi Finny,

Yes, I am aware of the history of Daito-ryu. Its principles are based upon battlefield fighting techniques to be used when a warrior had lost his weapon. Thus its purpose was to incapacitate or kill the opponent. Takeda hardly softened the style by innovation or modification, while it was the stated intent of Ueshiba to do so.

I disagree that Daito-ryu is the only “real” form or Aiki-jutsu. Aiki is merely a word used to describe a method or set of principles applied. If a style utilizes the same method/principles it could rightly call itself Aiki if for no other reason than to use a familiar term that others recognize as having a specific meaning. It can also be used duplicitously to attract students without adhering to those methods/principles so I am not a being a Pollyanna here.

The history of Daito-ryu is not necessarily certain. Just because a historian asserts a fact does not make it fact. It is merely an assertion of belief or fact according to that researcher’s interpretation of the data they currently possess. (It is generally accepted that George Washington did not chop down a cherry tree yet it was believed to have actually occurred for many years!) The histories of many of these arts are/were secret and we may never know the entire truth of their development or history. I doubt the lineage from which Takeda gained his knowledge was unique in their technical knowledge. I would agree that many Aiki styles are most likely based upon either Aikido or Daito-ryu Aiki-jutsu. That does not make them ineffective or spurious arts.
____________________________________________

Hi blackmantis,

I apologize for the next section I am trying to not hijack your thread with this sort of activity. I will try to be brief and it is my hope this discussion with Mat does not continue here!
_____________________________________________

Hi Mat,

My assertion: “As usual you perceive according to your preconceived notions and not according to what was written” is not an ad hominem attack. It is a description of persistent behavior that misunderstands either intentionally or unintentionally the point the other person is making. It is an error of perception that misdirects the conversation away from the topic. This is a persistent and established pattern for you. I will demonstrate my point for you:

Ad Hominem Argument: “a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the person presenting the claim or argument”. Ad Hominem attacks are attacks that misdirect the argument to person’s personal attributes or character that is true, but more specifically attributes that have no bearing on the topic. However, when an individual has characteristics that do not allow them to perceive clearly it has direct bearing on the discussion and is therefore not an ad hominem attack, but an identification of characteristics that lead to misunderstanding. It is true I did not elaborate. This is due to the fact I am trying to not drag this thread off topic by demonstrating to you your errors of perception, (neither is it my responsibility to do so). I also find it a wearisome and a generally unproductive endeavor.

Since this has become an issue I will be specific “this” time:

My statements were:

I agree judo would be very good, but it always depends upon the school and the instructors as well.

Judo is more easily transferred to the real world, than either Aikido or Aikijutusu. Judo also has joint locking and grappling as well.

Your response was:

I also disagree with your assumption that judo is any 'safer' than aikido or -jutsu...

It should be very clear NO WHERE did I state or infer “judo is any ‘safer’….” you presumed it! You read into my statement what you wanted to see! This is a pattern of behavior you have repeatedly demonstrated in the past. Just because I have never drawn attention to it does not mean it has not occurred or that I am unaware it is occurring. Others have mentioned this to you however in somewhat indirect ways. I attribute this statement of yours to your preconceived notions based upon my past experience where you followed the same pattern of behavior.

My statements were:

Aikijutsu will get you sued if you ever have to use it, (also depends on the instructor) it will primarily teach you to toss someone on their head breaking their neck, or break an arm. This would be considered excessive force in all but life threatening circumstances.

(As an aside it would have been more precise to say “could get you sued” or “is more likely to get you sued!”)

Your response was:

By that logic, aikido would get you sued too.

This is by your logic not mine! You totally ignored the qualifier “also depends on the instructor”! I attribute this error to your preconceived notions as well. These notions cause you to read what you want to read and ignore what does not fit into your preconceive notions. Your pattern has been to add what is not there and ignore items that are there.

I think these minor points are adequate to demonstrate my comments are not ad hominem but address real errors of perception that cause incorrect conclusions to be drawn and comments made that do not address what was “actually” stated.

Now let’s please, let’s try to stay on topic. If you want to have a p!ssing contest start a new thread.

[Mr Punch]

I apologize for the next section I am trying to not hijack your thread with this sort of activity. I will try to be brief and it is my hope this discussion with Mat does not continue here!
...blah blah blah...
Now let’s please, let’s try to stay on topic. If you want to have a p!ssing contest start a new thread.

So ****ing drop it. I haven't replied to your petty argumentative bull above this time, and I'm not going to again... that's called dropping it.

[Mr Punch]

Just checked what I thought Tenjin Shinyo was and it turns out I don't know...

What is it?

[Finny]

Widely thought by whom?

Not challenging you in any way, just wondering how it is that you have such conviction on a subject that is still widely debated.

Hi Mat - you're absolutely right - the subject is still widely debated and I probably shouldn't have typed such a biased response - much of what I wrote is personal opinion. I spelled out my viewpoint quite thoroughly here: http://martial.best.vwh.net/forum/sh...ght=daito+itto

Yes, I am aware of the history of Daito-ryu. Its principles are based upon battlefield fighting techniques to be used when a warrior had lost his weapon. Thus its purpose was to incapacitate or kill the opponent.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree - there are several "battlefield" style grappling systems still extant in japan, Yagyu Shingan Ryu and Takenouchi Ryu being two well known ones. Battlefield systems are designed to work around armour - Daito Ryu is definately NOT a battlefield art. According to it's own lore, it was designed to be used "inside the threshold" (oshikiuchi) in the palace, where swords were not permitted.

Just checked what I thought Tenjin Shinyo was and it turns out I don't know...

What is it?

Hi Mat,

Tenjin Shinyo Ryu was founded sometime in the early 1800s by Iso Mataemon Masatari. He had trained extensively in Akiyama Yoshin Ryu and Shin no Shinto Ryu. It is a unarmoured style of jujutsu, which Kano Jigoro studied and used as the basis for Kodokan Judo (along with Kito Ryu). It is noted for a particularly effective and broad study of throwing, joint locking and strangulation techniques.

http://www.koryu.com/guide/shinyo.html

also, there is a great article on Tenjin Shinyo Ryu in the first of the Koryu.com books, found here: http://koryu.com/store/book1.html

Tenjin Shinyo Ryu is headed by Kubota Toshihiro in Tokyo, who teaches both Tenjin Shinyo Ryu and traditional Kodokan Judo - from what I heard their practise is very hard core, and beautifully efficient. FWIW, I heard a seasoned western koryu expert describe Tenjin Shinyo Ryu as "the real aiki" ... (and he's an aikido practitioner to boot).

[Blacktiger]

No one questioned Takamatsu why question Hatsumi - As with all things schools differ from place to place.

But I dont think many question Hatsumi only those who are uninformed, he has serious skills any one who has trained with him in Japan wont have too many negative things to say.

Its a good reality art all in all

[Wood Dragon]

No one questioned Takamatsu why question Hatsumi - As with all things schools differ from place to place.

But I dont think many question Hatsumi only those who are uninformed, he has serious skills any one who has trained with him in Japan wont have too many negative things to say.

Its a good reality art all in all

I don't think anyone has seriously questioned Hatsumi's skill or ability to teach. It's the lack of quality control in the Bujinkan in the World at large that draws remark. For every Jack Hoban or Sean Askew, you've got twenty guys with mullets, who have a sketchy grasp of the basics and are passing on bad instruction.


As to Takamatsu: No one questions the fact that he had incredible skills, or that he passed the system on to Hatsumi. What people question is where the system came from, prior to Takamatsu.
Did it originate in the way that is the "official history" (Togakure-ryu being 9 centuries old, etc)? Did Takematsu assemble the 9 schools himself, from other sources? Did he somehow develop 9 distinct systems on his own?

[Blacktiger]

Yes agree with all of that. When an organisation gets big you will always get a little loss of quality and a few cowboys out there.

Read below out of interest, just thought I would tack it on.



Soke Masaaki Hatsumi's Traditions:
Togakure Ryu Ninpo Happo Hiken, 34th Grandmaster Gyokko Ryu Kosshijutsu Happo Hiken, 28th Grandmaster Koto Ryu Koppojutsu Happo Hiken, 18th Grandmaster Shinden Fudo Ryu Daken Taijutsu Happo Hiken, 26th Grandmaster Kukishin Ryu Taijutsu Happo Hiken, 28th Grandmaster Takagiyoshin Ryu Jutaijutsu Happo Hiken, 17th Grandmaster Kumogakure Ryu Ninpo Happo Hiken, 14th Grandmaster Gyokushin Ryu Ninpo Happo Hiken, 21st Grandmaster Gikan Ryu Koppojutsu Happo Hiken, 15th Grandmaster

[Mr Punch]

Thanks for the info, Finny. And yeah, I remember reading you about daito ryu before. Interesting.

[Finny]

But I dont think many question Hatsumi only those who are uninformed, he has serious skills any one who has trained with him in Japan wont have too many negative things to say.

I didn't mention either the 'quality' of Mr. Hatsumi's sytstem nor anything to do with the way he runs his organisation.

My only point is that there are a large number of JMA/Japanese Military History experts who have serious issues with some of Mr. Hatsumi's claims. Serious people who have spent the majority of their lives researching and investigating classical Japanese martial arts and history.

Of the 9 styles Mr. Hatsumi claims to have inherited from Takamatsu, there are two which are authentic koryu bugei - martial arts of the bushi (samurai), not ninjutsu. They are Kukishin Ryu and Takagi Yoshin Ryu. There are a few different 'lineages' of these two styles in Japan, for example I believe the Kuki family still practises Kukishin Ryu, and there is a 'mainline' Hontai (Takagi) Yoshin Ryu headed by Inoue Tsuyoshi (see http://www.koryu.com/guide/hontai.html ). Both of these groups would be considered the senior lines of the two styles.

However, the three 'ninjutsu' ryuha that Mr. Hatsumi claims to have received from Takamatsu are another story. No one has seen any evidence to suggest that these three ryuha existed before Takamatsu. When Mr. Hatsumi applied to join the Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai (one of the two main koryu organisations ) years ago, he was asked to provide the documentation that goes with inheriting a koryu bugei ryuha, as all the other members would have. These scrolls would have been analysed by experts to verify their authenticity. Mr. Hatsumi was not allowed to join. From what I've seen and heard, virtually all of the scrolls Mr. Hatsumi has in his posession were written by Takamatsu, who was apparently an outstanding calligrapher.

Above and beyond this, Mr. Hatsumi does not teach any of these styles in a koryu manner. He teaches a bunch of his styles mixed and matched together, and apparently doesn't teach any of the three 'ninjutsu' ryuha to anyone (although he has taught Togakure Ryu in the past, apparently).

But bear in mind, none of these historical issues effects the art as practised by however many millions are members of the Bujinkan, Genbukan and Jinenkan. If they love the art and it gives them what they are looking for - great. I just always like to provide a bit of an alternative viewpoint on this issue than the one commonly seen in mainstream martial arts circles, where Mr. Hatsumi is seen as "the authentic, legit ninjutsu guy", due to his excellent marketing and PR skills.

But the link I posted to in my previous post spells it all out.

[Blacktiger]

Check this info - interesting, I have included the link as well.

I copied the relavant section.......


http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/reference/ninjutsu


It must be noted that Mr Hatsumi's credentials, seriousness and the quality of his teaching have come under attack by various sources – most of the vocal and vicious attacks coming from people that claim to be practitioners of ninjutsu traditions that cannot be found in Japan. Some express doubt of his really having been a student to Takamatsu sensei – despite the certificates he has from Takamatsu, the interview Takamatsu did for Tokyo Sports News naming Hatsumi as his successor and the full DVD of them training together that is available. Others claim it is impossible that Takamatsu would seriously have managed to become sōke to nine different schools, even though most of the schools are closely related and had been transmitted together for generations. More point out the fact that Hatsumi seems overly generous with high ranking titles: he did grant a tenth degree black belt to Stephen K. Hayes (Stephen K. Hayes: more facts about this subject) after the latter had studied under him for barely 18 years. However, traditional martial arts do not use the dan grading system, and there are accounts of people being granted certificates of full mastery in arts within a few months. The debate is largely conducted overseas. Inside Japan the subject of his authenticity is rarely talked about. Masaaki Hatsumi was invited to join the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai and Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai but he declined. However he is a frequent subject of martial arts articles, books, documentaries and has received a prestigious cultural award from the Imperial Household Agency.

Then the flipside: http://www.schmitzrd.com/samples/ninjutsu2.htm

[Finny]

Then the flipside: http://www.schmitzrd.com/samples/ninjutsu2.htm

Yeah, that's the article I posted on the other thread I linked to. But who is the author of the first article? Where does he/she get the information that Mr. Hatsumi was invited to join both the Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai and the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai?

Why is it that anyone questioning Mr. Hatsumi's lineage is characterised as "people that claim to be practitioners of ninjutsu traditions that cannot be found in Japan"?

Dr. Karl Friday is a member of the Kashima Shinryu, has menkyo kaiden (license of full transmission) in the art, and is also a Professor of Japanese History at the University of Georgia - he is one of the West's foremost experts on classical JMA and Japanese Military History. I think I'll take his word over that of an anonymous essay which reads like a advertisement for the Bujinkan.... what did I say about Mr. Hatsumi's marketing skills?

[Blacktiger]

Yeah thats it -dont know who wrote the first article - just found it.

Who knows what the "real" story is