It seems that some people are under the impression that Stephen K Hayes has turned his back on Ninjutsu and created a new art called TO-SHIN DO. Let me try to put things into perspective from my point of view, having not only trained with An shu Hayes spoadically over the last nineteen years but also having been to the Dayton Quest Centre to train.

Much of what is taught in the Bujinkan arts today is very traditional, like one was fighting on battlefield in armour in the sixteenth century. For example the Jodan Tsuki where the fist is delivered from the hip into the target. Now this method was used against men in armour, to knock them down and out.

For a beginner this is a great way to start training. It allows one to learn posture, movement and delivery of a punch. It also allows the training partner to see the punch coming and therefore learn, Jodan Tsuki, Taisabaki etc.

But in todays world, people do'nt wear armour and punch like this. In fact a lot of Japanese didn't punch like this either. Therefore as a student once one has learnt the basics of the punch and how to receive that punch one can go on to learn how to defend against faster, shorter ranged, trickier and more varied in their application.

Do the defences change?
well only in the sense that the distancing, timing etc might be different. Jodan Uke, Chudan Uke, Shikan Ken etc are still used as are more advanced techniques like Yokuto, Danshi etc.

Unfortunately so many practitioners of Ninjutsu stop at the stage where the punch is delivered from the hip and progress no further. Yet strangely when one takes the art of Ninjutsu and applies it effectively against todays styles of attack they are labelled as not practicing Ninjutsu, even though Ninjutsu is an art of self protection, which it cannot be if it is only been practiced as if one is wearing armour from the sixteenth century. This is not martial arts, this is historical reenactment.

Isn't it strange that when Hatsumi Sensei shows a defence against a modern punch its Ninjutsu, but when An Shu Hayes does it, then its a completely seperate martial art.

Ok so in Toshindo we practice with air shields and bags, but then they did in Japan. Sometimes they even struck trees (see the Hatsumi Koto Ryu, and Shinden Fudo Ryu Videos)
And in Toshindo we wear armour. Heh isn't there a photograph of Dr Hatsumi or one of the Shihan in the 60s or 70s wearing Kendo armour to defend against a kick?

Oh yes we call it TO-SHIN DO, but isn't Ninjutsu called Budo Taijutsu now, and didn't Takamatsu call it Happo Biken. Its still the same techniques, its just the names been changed to protect the innocent (Just a joke) but you know what I mean. Or maybe you don't.
Ninjutsu was not always called Ninjutsu, and in this day and age where Ninjutsu has had such a bad rep from Hollywood, Books, Comics and the rest of the media, it might just be a good idea to go into hiding a little bit. Takamatsu did, hence Happo Biken. But wait a minute 'TO and SHIN', are these not the characters that make up the word NIN of Ninjutsu and Ninja.

Maybe its the fact that TO-SHIN DO practitioners do a kind of Kumite whilst fully padded up that seperates this art from real ninjutsu.
Well my answer to that is that by using this approach it enables the practitioner to be put under stress safely and is probably the closest one can get to actual fighting. Of course Takamatsu Sensei used to fight people for real to get his training. But in his day there were no such thing as law suits.

Maybe its because people think that An Shu Hayes has added stuff from other martial arts. Well I can't comment on that, but what I do know is I saw no Karate spinning back kicks, Judo throws, kung fu moves, philopino trapping, or anything that I personally would not class as effective Ninjutsu unless of course it was used against the defender so that the practitioner could learn how to effectively deal with a Judo man, Karate man etc. Even the ground work has Movements that are nothing but Ninjutsu' Itami Jime, Hon Jime, Oni Kudaki, Zenpo Ukemi etc.

And if you think that An Shu Hayes does'nt teach Ninjutsu i.e the schools of Takagi Yoshin Ryu, Gyokko Ryu etc anymore, then I suggest you visit his school and see for yourself.

It seems that some people are under the impression that Stephen K Hayes has turned his back on Ninjutsu and created a new art called TO-SHIN DO.In a way, Hatsumi sensei has, in that ninjutsu will not be fully revealed until our taijutsu is perfected.

Much of what is taught in the Bujinkan arts today is very traditional, like one was fighting on battlefield in armour in the sixteenth century. For example the Jodan Tsuki where the fist is delivered from the hip into the target. Now this method was used against men in armour, to knock them down and out.And the methods within the Bujinkan that did not utilize armour and evolved even more with the advent of suhada bujutsu...? Soke actually showed us a new way of punching while wearing armour yesterday, I found it quite similar to a Wing Chun punch in some ways.

But in todays world, people do'nt wear armour and punch like this. In fact a lot of Japanese didn't punch like this either. Therefore as a student once one has learnt the basics of the punch and how to receive that punch one can go on to learn how to defend against faster, shorter ranged, trickier and more varied in their application.People don't wear yoroi, true. But it sounds as if you believe other types of dakentai training doesn't exist in the Bujinkan? I'm sorry but if that is the case, that is simply because of your own ignorance.

Unfortunately so many practitioners of Ninjutsu stop at the stage where the punch is delivered from the hip and progress no further. Yet strangely when one takes the art of Ninjutsu and applies it effectively against todays styles of attack they are labelled as not practicing Ninjutsu, even though Ninjutsu is an art of self protection, which it cannot be if it is only been practiced as if one is wearing armour from the sixteenth century.Ninjutsu is not about self defense and has nothing to do with taijutsu techniques such as these.

Isn't it strange that when Hatsumi Sensei shows a defence against a modern punch its Ninjutsu, but when An Shu Hayes does it, then its a completely seperate martial art.When Hatsumi sensei does this it is Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu. When Stephen Hayes does...well, I don't know if he wants to call it To Shin Do or taijutsu.

Ok so in Toshindo we practice with air shields and bags, but then they did in Japan. Sometimes they even struck trees (see the Hatsumi Koto Ryu, and Shinden Fudo Ryu Videos)When I read things like this I actually get a wee bit scared. Do you really think that these things do not exist within the Bujinkan???

Oh yes we call it TO-SHIN DO, but isn't Ninjutsu called Budo Taijutsu now,Nope. Budo Taijutsu has wrongly been labeled ninjutsu, but ninjutsu is not taijutsu in this sense.

Ninjutsu was not always called Ninjutsu, and in this day and age where Ninjutsu has had such a bad rep from Hollywood, Books, Comics and the rest of the media, it might just be a good idea to go into hiding a little bit. Takamatsu did, hence Happo Biken....and Hatsumi sensei does as well, hence Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu.

Maybe its the fact that TO-SHIN DO practitioners do a kind of Kumite whilst fully padded up that seperates this art from real ninjutsu.Yes, but then again, combative techniques such as the ones you speak of are not ninjutsu.

Well my answer to that is that by using this approach it enables the practitioner to be put under stress safely and is probably the closest one can get to actual fighting. Of course Takamatsu Sensei used to fight people for real to get his training. But in his day there were no such thing as law suits.Oh but there was, he was put on trial several times. As for stress training, I refer to my analogy about how people tend to confuse their backyard pool with the ocean.

Well I can't comment on that, but what I do know is I saw no Karate spinning back kicks, Judo throws, kung fu moves, philopino trapping,I've seen all these things and more done within the Bujinkan, actually Nagato sensei demonstrated a spinning backkick just a few hours ago. Of course, we don't bend our backs while throwing people like they do in judo, but I think you get my point.

And if you think that An Shu Hayes does'nt teach Ninjutsu i.e the schools of Takagi Yoshin Ryu, Gyokko Ryu etc anymore, then I suggest you visit his school and see for yourself.Takagi Yoshin ryu is about as far removed from ninjutsu as you can get, and I highly doubt Hayes has been taught the ninjutsu aspects of Gyokko ryu.

=============
Mod. Note.
Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

-Jeff
-MT Moderator-

Much of what is taught in the Bujinkan arts today is very traditional, like one was fighting on battlefield in armour in the sixteenth century. For example the Jodan Tsuki where the fist is delivered from the hip into the target. Now this method was used against men in armour, to knock them down and out.

I just can't read anymore.

I train in Japan and your description is waaaaaaay off the mark from my experience.

I really do not think you understand what goes on in Japan or the real reasons why certain things are done the way they are. I understand that you have loyalty to your teacher and think highly of your art. But I fear many Bujinkan members will take great offense at your misreprenting what Hatsumi does in your quest to make Hayes sound better.

In reply to Ninravus and Don Roley.

Firstly Mr Roley. I mean no offence to Bujinkan practitioners but am simply pointing out that the type of punch mentioned is
a/ An old method of punching against people in armour
b/ An excellent way to start training to develop power, alignment, distancing etc
c/ Is today limited in its use based on how people attack today.

I am in no way saying that this punch is the only form of Dakentaijutsu we have in ninjutsu. Certainly not. Ninjutsu has probably more ways of striking than any other martial art. Its just that from my experience of training with Bujinkan members, many seem to stop at this point instead of saying 'OK where do i go from here', 'How can I use this type of punch against a jab, cross etc.

How many times have I seen high level black belts still defending against this punch from the hip. Surely at their level of training they should be defending against punches that are inches from their face.

A few years ago i inherited a Bujinkan group that had a number of black belts training in it. I was amazed that these black belts had no idea how to use this punch in reality or how to defend themselves in todays world.

This is not to say of course that all Bujinkan instructors that train under Dr Hatsumi are like this, of course not, some take the techniques to the next level. Stephen K Hayes being one of them and of course there are others.

Now Nimravus, you have stated that ninjutsu will not be revealed until our taijutsu is perfected. Well you have been training since the 90s, An Shu Hayes has been training since the 70s. He is twenty years or more your senior. Not only that he lived in Japan and developed a very close friendship with Dr Hatsumi which exists to this day. Is it not possible then that Mr Hayes was taught Ninjutsu before you and I even knew it existed. Just because Dr Hatsumi now concentrates on the Budo side of the art, it does not really mean it was not taught in the past. even Hatsumi Sensei has stated that he is a Ninja and has taught Ninjutsu.

One quote you make is that Ninjutsu is not self defence.
If that is so what is it?
Ninjutsu developed as a means of self protection of the body, mind and spirit. Any Japanese instructor will tell you that.

Budo Taijutsu wrongly been labelled Ninjutsu?
I think you need to understand some of the reasons why Hatsumi Sensei is now calling Ninjutsu that.

In reading you posts Ninravus I can't quite work out if you are agreeing with me or not. You seem to be backing up what I say. Either that, or your not reading my posts.

For example when I mention
Originally Posted by Gary Arthur
Ok so in Toshindo we practice with air shields and bags, but then they did in Japan. Sometimes they even struck trees (see the Hatsumi Koto Ryu, and Shinden Fudo Ryu Videos)

When I read things like this I actually get a wee bit scared. Do you really think that these things do not exist within the Bujinkan???

My point exactly. We train with pads just like in the Bujinkan, so why when the TO-SHIN DO student does so people are heard to exclaim, "Oh TO-SHIN DO is not Bujinkan" or "not Ninjutsu".

you also put

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur
Well I can't comment on that, but what I do know is I saw no Karate spinning back kicks, Judo throws, kung fu moves, philopino trapping,

I've seen all these things and more done within the Bujinkan, actually Nagato sensei demonstrated a spinning backkick just a few hours ago. Of course, we don't bend our backs while throwing people like they do in judo, but I think you get my point.

Nagato demonstrated a spinning back kick. Was this a Karate kick? or a Ninjutsu style kick. I have done a kick where we turns as the attacker is coming and putting the hand to the fron kick backwards. Ushiro Muki Geri I think is the name. I know Nagato was a kick boxer, maybe he was demonstarting this.

I also mentioned that in Takamatsu Day there were not law suits. And there were not. There is a big difference here. Takamatsu was put on trial as a Japanese in a Chinese country for killing a number of Chinamen. This is a huge difference from being in a law suit because you got in a fight with some one a split their lip, or gave them a black eye.

And finally if you doubt that An Shu Hayes has not been taught the Ninjutsu aspects of Gyokko Ryu why dont you visit him and find out for yourself. You might find yourself surprised.

c/ Is today limited in its use based on how people attack today.Then of course you have drunk people, tee hee...

I am in no way saying that this punch is the only form of Dakentaijutsu we have in ninjutsu. Certainly not. Ninjutsu has probably more ways of striking than any other martial art.Less, I would say. None at all, actually.

Its just that from my experience of training with Bujinkan members, many seem to stop at this point instead of saying 'OK where do i go from here', 'How can I use this type of punch against a jab, cross etc.Right, but wouldn't it be better to correct the problem itself, rather than to admit defeat?

How many times have I seen high level black belts still defending against this punch from the hip. Surely at their level of training they should be defending against punches that are inches from their face.There are times for shinken gata and there are times for regular training.

A few years ago i inherited a Bujinkan group that had a number of black belts training in it. I was amazed that these black belts had no idea how to use this punch in reality or how to defend themselves in todays world.But in To Shin Do you have a guarantee of some sort that such practitioners will not appear at all, right? If so, I'm honestly interested in how you do this.

Now Nimravus, you have stated that ninjutsu will not be revealed until our taijutsu is perfected. Well you have been training since the 90s, An Shu Hayes has been training since the 70s. He is twenty years or more your senior. Not only that he lived in Japan and developed a very close friendship with Dr Hatsumi which exists to this day. Is it not possible then that Mr Hayes was taught Ninjutsu before you and I even knew it existed.If that was the case, he wouldn't erroneously keep referring to ninjutsu as synonymous with taijutsu. The Japanese do indeed know the difference, that is why they can allow themselves to be careless with the use of the term in question.

Just because Dr Hatsumi now concentrates on the Budo side of the art, it does not really mean it was not taught in the past. even Hatsumi Sensei has stated that he is a Ninja and has taught Ninjutsu.He has also stated the complete opposite.
One year Hatsumi sensei also stated something like "one should never drink alcohol, and it's unjustifiable and vulgar to use excessive force against an attacker". The next year he was all "oh, Guinness and Scotch all have very good effects on one's health, and to be kind to your enemy is to be cruel to yourself". All this without having mentioned the American guy Soke "allowed" to become the next Soke.
No one should have to be told that this is a very Japanese way of saying "think by yourself, goddamn idiot!!" Not referring to you here Gary, just an expression.

One quote you make is that Ninjutsu is not self defence.
If that is so what is it?
Ninjutsu developed as a means of self protection of the body, mind and spirit. Any Japanese instructor will tell you that.See above. As for ninjutsu, it is a small specialized science dealing with the usage and gathering of information, infiltration, espionage, biology, meteorology etc. and has nothing to do with taijutsu in itself. No, I'll never tire of saying this.

Budo Taijutsu wrongly been labelled Ninjutsu?
I think you need to understand some of the reasons why Hatsumi Sensei is now calling Ninjutsu that.He is not, he is simply pointing out the fact that he hasn't taught very much at all of ninjutsu!

Either that, or your not reading my posts.Ditto. I'm feeling nicely today so I'm not going to quote a few things from a book I just read about confirmatory biases.

My point exactly. We train with pads just like in the Bujinkan, so why when the TO-SHIN DO student does so people are heard to exclaim, "Oh TO-SHIN DO is not Bujinkan" or "not Ninjutsu".For one thing, while wearing a Bujinkan uniform you don't have to worry about Nagato sensei getting "upset" when you come and train in Japan.

Nagato demonstrated a spinning back kick. Was this a Karate kick? or a Ninjutsu style kick.There are no kicks in ninjutsu.

I have done a kick where we turns as the attacker is coming and putting the hand to the fron kick backwards. Ushiro Muki Geri I think is the name. I know Nagato was a kick boxer, maybe he was demonstarting this.Nothing of the sort, all taijutsu.

I also mentioned that in Takamatsu Day there were not law suits. And there were not. There is a big difference here. Takamatsu was put on trial as a Japanese in a Chinese country for killing a number of Chinamen. This is a huge difference from being in a law suit because you got in a fight with some one a split their lip, or gave them a black eye.Couldn't have been to big other than the slightly higher stakes, in that he as a Japanese was freed in a Chinese court.

And finally if you doubt that An Shu Hayes has not been taught the Ninjutsu aspects of Gyokko Ryu why dont you visit him and find out for yourself. You might find yourself surprised.If it's what you wrongly refer to as ninjutsu I have no doubt he has learnt it.

How many times have I seen high level black belts still defending against this punch from the hip.

Among everything else you have written that I have trouble with, this is probably the most easy to talk about.

The idea of throwing and reacting to punches from the hip is just outside of my experience. You sound like you are describing a totally different art other than what I have been training in all this time.

Does any of the Bujinkan members on this board have their ukes throw punches from the hip during class? Outside of the san shin- a SOLO form, I can't think of times when the punch does not come from about where a boxer would launch it from.

And throwing punches while in close, modified hooks, dealing with the same, etc- yeah I work on them under my Japanese teacher. I wonder how many Bujinkan members don't do this when the guys in Japan are.

ok, I have to ask here. Are we talking about Hayes, or differences in the teachings/teaching styles? A thread split may be in order to help keep thigns straight.

ok, I have to ask here. Are we talking about Hayes, or differences in the teachings/teaching styles? A thread split may be in order to help keep thigns straight.

It appears to be both at this point, with Mr. Arthur asserting that Hayes needed to "modernize" Hatsumi's art for Western consumption because its allegedly archaic methods did not address the realities of modern Western situations/attacks/etc.

I have nothing to say about Toshindo, but Mr. Arthur appears not to have a clue about how Hatsumi sensei and the shihan teach.

It appears to be both at this point, with Mr. Arthur asserting that Hayes needed to "modernize" Hatsumi's art for Western consumption because its allegedly archaic methods did not address the realities of modern Western situations/attacks/etc.

I have nothing to say about Toshindo, but Mr. Arthur appears not to have a clue about how Hatsumi sensei and the shihan teach.
I'm not personally familiar with either, so can only go on what I hear here.

Now, I have to act stupid here (yes, it's acting...stop laughing...:P ) and ask, Since you (Dale) are not familiar with TSD, and you (Gary) are not familiar (it seems) with Dr. Hatsumi's teachings, how can you reliably contrast the 2? (I mean no offense to either party)

It seems that while both arts have similarities, and contain some of the same parts, both have in fact evolved from the core-root in similar, yet different directions.

I see ninjutsu is not taijutsu is not bujutsu is not toshindo. Is it 4 arts, 1 with 4 schools? etc.

Maybe this muddies it more, or maybe it doesn't I'm just coming in from the "I'm really lost and need a road map here" angle. :)

Thank you.

Both ninjutsu and taijutsu are bujutsu arts.:asian:

But both are different?

From each other, yes.

From each other, yes.
I think what Nimravus is trying to get at is that ninjutsu, per se, has nothing to do with fighting.

Jeff

so, simplistically put, ninjutsu is not a combat art, and taijutsu is?

Where does ToShinDo fit in these definitions? A blending of the 2?

so, simplistically put, ninjutsu is not a combat art, and taijutsu is?

Where does ToShinDo fit in these definitions? A blending of the 2?
Ninjutsu is more concerned with techniques for spying and infiltration, concealment, escape techniques, etc. Some of the training has become archaic (ex. Why create metsubushi when you can buy pepper spray?) and some is not widely taught for obvious reasons (recipes for poisons, for example). Budo taijutsu is a more accurate description of the Bujinkan training, as only a few of the schools are actually ninjutsu schools, and the bulk of training today is concerned with budo.
Toshindo is Hayes' interpretation of the Bujinkan training. For myself, and many other Bujinkan members, it smacks of condescension, hinting that the training needs to be dumbed down for us ignant Americans...

Jeff

Its obvious that what Hatsumi is teaching is effective. That being said, why then would Hayes make the changes that he did, with his Toshindo? Are the basic ideas/principles the same as what Hatsumi is doing, or did he make drastic changes?

Mike

so, simplistically put, ninjutsu is not a combat art, and taijutsu is?
Ninjutsu is not a PHYSICAL combat art, no.

I would like to interject here and say if you think that all the Bujinkan does is practice defnse against "old school" martial arts attacks,

Come visit the school I train at. Bet it would change your mind.

:idunno:

Its obvious that what Hatsumi is teaching is effective. That being said, why then would Hayes make the changes that he did, with his Toshindo? Are the basic ideas/principles the same as what Hatsumi is doing, or did he make drastic changes?

Mike
I'm sure Gary Arthur can comment on the specifics, but for several years Hayes has been moving towards a much more structured curriculum than exists in the Bujinkan. In the Bujinkan, there is a guidebook for instructors known as the Tenchijin Ryaku no Maki, but it does not break down techniques per belt level. It's rather suggested that a student should be familiar with all of the techniques and concepts therein before reaching shodan. Hatsumi sensei gives his shidoshi (instructors) freedom to teach their students in their own style. An interesting side note is that as a result of this approach, the Bujinkan community has developed as a real world peer-to-peer network, rather than having a strict hierarchy. Ben Cole, a Bujinkan student and former longtime Japan resident, did a thesis on this phenomenon.

Jeff

Now, I have to act stupid here (yes, it's acting...stop laughing...:P ) and ask, Since you (Dale) are not familiar with TSD, and you (Gary) are not familiar (it seems) with Dr. Hatsumi's teachings, how can you reliably contrast the 2? (I mean no offense to either party)

Actually I *am* pretty familiar with it, from having the occasional TSD practitioner in my dojo for a while in the past, and from having a number of the TSD videos loaned to me by one of them. I just said I have nothing to say about it.

so, simplistically put, ninjutsu is not a combat art, and taijutsu is?

Kreth's description of ninjutsu is a good one. Ninja did use taijutsu for combat, but it's not "what they were about". For example, there is not a lot of formal-transmission taijutsu in Togakure ryu; and what is there seems largely oriented toward methods applicable to resisting/escaping arrest or battlefield capture situations; fighting in darkness or low-light conditions; etc. -- the sorts of things an intelligence operative might need if he was caught in some unauthorized place or circumstance and had to escape. Lots of distraction, misdirection, creation of surprise and confusion.

Ahh. I'm starting to understand. (I think). :)

Thank you for the clarifications guys. I do remember 1 bit in 1 of Hayes books where he describes a training trip where he was taught to crouch to see his opponents against the horizon, as part of the fighting in darkness idea. (This is a huge summary here).

Oh, sidebar - If it is ever possible, I will gladly train with anyone, anywhere, provided I can actually 'get there'. If I hit the lotto, it'll be a fun year of immersion. :)

Oh, sidebar - If it is ever possible, I will gladly train with anyone, anywhere, provided I can actually 'get there'. If I hit the lotto, it'll be a fun year of immersion. :)
Bob,
I'm about 4 hours from you. You can buy the beers, I'll provide the whippin'... I can show you Bujinkan training as interpreted by a large uncoordinated guy... ;)

Jeff

Jeff, Once I get wheels again, it's a go. :) I might hit Ft. Erie and get the good Canadian stuff. :D

Kaith,

Just make sure Jeff leaves his monpa at home..

What's a "Monpa"?



(Note - kaith is I, I is kaith. I am using a personal non-staff account for some work I'll be doing, and to try to avoid the "Kaith said it, its official" problems that have happened at times.)

What's a "Monpa"?
A rather large hammer, similar to the one you use at a fair to ring the bell. One of it's uses in Japan was beating down gates. Oh, that and squishing enemies... ;)

Jeff

I'm sure Gary Arthur can comment on the specifics, but for several years Hayes has been moving towards a much more structured curriculum than exists in the Bujinkan. In the Bujinkan, there is a guidebook for instructors known as the Tenchijin Ryaku no Maki, but it does not break down techniques per belt level. It's rather suggested that a student should be familiar with all of the techniques and concepts therein before reaching shodan. Hatsumi sensei gives his shidoshi (instructors) freedom to teach their students in their own style. An interesting side note is that as a result of this approach, the Bujinkan community has developed as a real world peer-to-peer network, rather than having a strict hierarchy. Ben Cole, a Bujinkan student and former longtime Japan resident, did a thesis on this phenomenon.

Jeff

Thank you for answering the question! :asian:

Mike

Oh, sidebar - If it is ever possible, I will gladly train with anyone, anywhere, provided I can actually 'get there'. :)
Don Roley lets people stay at his house for free. I like translating. Bring Dunkin Donuts French Vanilla coffee (whole bean) and Krispy Kreme Donuts and everything will be okay....

Do they have those in Japan, or do I have to smuggle em in? :)

Do the defences change?
well only in the sense that the distancing, timing etc might be different. Jodan Uke, Chudan Uke, Shikan Ken etc are still used as are more advanced techniques like Yokuto, Danshi etc...
Maybe we can compare and contrast this point.

In the Bujinkan, the technique "Yokuto" comes from the Shoden level of Koto ryu; a basic level scroll, ie this is a basic technique. The technique "Danshi" comes from the "Jo/Tenryaku no Maki" of Gyokko ryu; another basic level scroll, therefore, another basic level technique.

If we look at the "Ten Chi Jin Ryaku no Maki" as a guide for what needs to be known by Shodan (black belt), both Yokuto and Danshi are included in there. "Shodan" literally means "Begining Step", ie everything under that is basic.

So maybe we could say "What's advanced in Toshindo is basic in the Bujinkan". For what purpose? Do Toshindo practitioners feel that more time needs to be spent on learning the basics before going onto "advanced" techniques? Do Bujinkan practitioners feel that they can polish their "basics before the basics" while working on "basic" techniques? Are the techniques done differently, or is the approach done differently?

In my experience, after I got the movements down of the basic "Yokuto", I was shown some "variations", then my teacher pushed me to use the same principle against long distance punches, close punches, grabs followed by punches, kicks, and punching attacks from kumi uchi. I thought that was pretty comprehensive instruction.


And if you think that An Shu Hayes does'nt teach Ninjutsu i.e the schools of Takagi Yoshin Ryu, Gyokko Ryu etc anymore, then I suggest you visit his school and see for yourself.From my perspective, Takagi Yoshin ryu does have a connection to ninjutsu, but I don't think that connection is as clearly defined as the above statement.

The typical time spent in TSD before learning the Yokuto, Koyoku, and the rest of the Shoden kata is around two years. that doent seem like MORE time spent on the Bujinkan curriculum, but less. Doesnt the average person who trains several times a week usually reach Shodan in about 4 years? sorry to make a time frame....

What's a "Monpa"?
Be afraid. Be VERY afraid.

http://www.nebujinkan.com/video/monpa3.mpg

Maybe we can compare and contrast this point.

In the Bujinkan, the technique "Yokuto" comes from the Shoden level of Koto ryu; a basic level scroll, ie this is a basic technique. The technique "Danshi" comes from the "Jo/Tenryaku no Maki" of Gyokko ryu; another basic level scroll, therefore, another basic level technique.

If we look at the "Ten Chi Jin Ryaku no Maki" as a guide for what needs to be known by Shodan (black belt), both Yokuto and Danshi are included in there. "Shodan" literally means "Begining Step", ie everything under that is basic.

So maybe we could say "What's advanced in Toshindo is basic in the Bujinkan". For what purpose? Do Toshindo practitioners feel that more time needs to be spent on learning the basics before going onto "advanced" techniques? Do Bujinkan practitioners feel that they can polish their "basics before the basics" while working on "basic" techniques? Are the techniques done differently, or is the approach done differently?

In my experience, after I got the movements down of the basic "Yokuto", I was shown some "variations", then my teacher pushed me to use the same principle against long distance punches, close punches, grabs followed by punches, kicks, and punching attacks from kumi uchi. I thought that was pretty comprehensive instruction.


Heh,

Actually here is the funny thing in this statement...Yokuto is actually taught to white belts in To-Shin Do...however it is taught more as principal than the actual waza...and the students are not even really necessarily told it is yokuto until later. The same is true of koyoku, ketsumyaku and a few others. The principals of these techniques (along with rolling, striking, tai/taeodoki, etc) are all taught in TSD in the first 9 months of training. It is mentioned that these are 'basic' techniques...however my understanding of the differences between the 'basic' scrolls and the more 'advanced' scrolls is that the basic scrolls cover the most likely situations. It is not that they are truly more 'basic' than the later material...just more likely to occur...therefore more important to get earlier on. These 'basic' waza have a LOT in them as you hinted at above.

There is a major problem with this discussion as well as this forum...there are not really too many truly experienced To-Shin Do practitioners here that can readily answer questions...or compare contrast.

No disrespect to Dale but I hardly think a few videos and a solitary To-Shin Do student give one a very large insight. If someone were to come to him and say they had a good familiarity and understanding of the Bujinkan in the same manner I am sure he would say the same. I know I have heard it said often enough that if you want to learn the Bujinkan approach one must study with Soke (or one that is has gone far enough that continues to study with Soke).

Unless one has recently studied with Mr. Hayes or any of the other senior practitioners (John Poliquin, Mark Russo, James Norris, Brett Varnum, etc) I would tend to take what that person says about To-Shin Do with a very large grain of salt.

...however my understanding of the differences between the 'basic' scrolls and the more 'advanced' scrolls is that the basic scrolls cover the most likely situations. It is not that they are truly more 'basic' than the later material...just more likely to occur...therefore more important to get earlier on. These 'basic' waza have a LOT in them as you hinted at above..
Interesting perspective. So then why, for example, are there responses to choke attacks in both the Shoden and Okuden levels of Koto ryu? I was under the impression that the first three scrolls form the foundation for the Okuden scroll. In Gyokko ryu, (excluding the Kihon and Taihenjutsu sections), the first section is "empty" hands vs empty hands, next "empty" hands vs short blade, last "empty" hands vs long blade. In a society where warriors carried weapons everywhere they went, (both inside the castle and out) does an empty handed attack seem more likely than an armed attack? I don't know. I wasn't taught to think one group of attacks would be more likely than another, just that "hey, in this part, all the attacks are first done unarmed, this next part they're first done against a short balde", and so on and so forth.

Unless one has recently studied with Mr. Hayes or any of the other senior practitioners (John Poliquin, Mark Russo, James Norris, Brett Varnum, etc) I would tend to take what that person says about To-Shin Do with a very large grain of salt.
I would wholeheartedly agree with you there.

In Gyokko ryu, (excluding the Kihon and Taihenjutsu sections), the first section is "empty" hands vs empty hands, next "empty" hands vs short blade, last "empty" hands vs long blade. In a society where warriors carried weapons everywhere they went, (both inside the castle and out) does an empty handed attack seem more likely than an armed attack? I don't know. I wasn't taught to think one group of attacks would be more likely than another, just that "hey, in this part, all the attacks are first done unarmed, this next part they're first done against a short balde", and so on and so forth.
Hmm...that is a good question...kind of makes you wonder why there are so many unarmed waza period if you look at it from that perspective. Of course all of the waza regardless of the 'basic form' can be done with weapons or without...standing...up against a wall...taken to the ground...etc. The way I have always been taught is that the first stuff you learn is the most likely methods...armed, unarmed, etc. The responses and principals contained within them are the most likely etc. Of course I do preface that with 'my understanding' based on what I have been taught to this point. I wouldn't be at all surprised if at some later point my understanding is expanded, reversed, rearranged, etc...certainly wouldn't be the first time ;)

As I read this, to me, it seems as if both schools have many of the same concepts, techniques, etc.

They just teach them in different orders, spend differing amounts of time on them, and have gone in different directions since they started.

By this I mean that Dr. Hatsumi's students who are with him now are seeing material that wasn't shown to Mr. Hayes in the 80's (due to it not being time for the material, or any other reason), and Mr. Hayes has continued to refine and improve his own system.

Maybe, as has been started, looking at what is in common, then comparing how each is taught or trained would be good? At some time, someone will have to do up a glossery, as I can't tell a waza from a wristwatch. :)

Hmm...that is a good question...kind of makes you wonder why there are so many unarmed waza period if you look at it from that perspective.
What I've been told is that all martial arts in Japan developed during the Sengoku Jidai had at least three skills- Sojutsu, Kenjutsu and Tai/Jujutsu. Each school chose one of these as it's base to start from. For example, "Yagyu Shinkage ryu" is a "Kenjutsu" based school, Koto ryu a "Taijutsu" based school. The theory in the taijutsu based schools was that when you put a tool in someone's hand, it becomes a distraction, so it's easier to transmit the proper body motion first through unarmed techniques. Once the student has a grasp of the distance, timing and rhythm used in the ryu, the techniques are then learned where tools are employed applying those same principles.


Of course all of the waza regardless of the 'basic form' can be done with weapons or without...standing...up against a wall...taken to the ground...etc. Right. But first you learn the "basic form", then the variations using the same principle, then the what if? applications with tools, upside down, underwater in the dark (the Shu - Ha - Ri progression). The first three basic techniques in Koto ryu are a defense against kumi uchi (the "clinch"), defense against a hip throw, and a defense against a punch. In the United States, I'm sure that a hip throw is not a very likely form of attack, and I think because of that, it's taught later in Toshindo. Here in Japan, with Judo being taught in every High School, it's still a likely situation.

As I read this, to me, it seems as if both schools have many of the same concepts, techniques, etc.

They just teach them in different orders, spend differing amounts of time on them, and have gone in different directions since they started.

By this I mean that Dr. Hatsumi's students who are with him now are seeing material that wasn't shown to Mr. Hayes in the 80's (due to it not being time for the material, or any other reason), and Mr. Hayes has continued to refine and improve his own system.

Maybe, as has been started, looking at what is in common, then comparing how each is taught or trained would be good? At some time, someone will have to do up a glossery, as I can't tell a waza from a wristwatch. :)It would seem so...


There is a common phenomenon when people switch organizations to vilify the old organization and herald the new one as the greatest thing since sliced bread -- the panacea for all that is wrong in Martial arts.

In reality - there is probably very little difference between them... and people tend to get hung up on "looking" for information to prove their point with. Gary is new to TSD - and is more than happy to tell you why he moved... And those that stayed are more than happy to tell him that he is an idiot for leaving...

Anyway - I wouldn't get too wrapped up trying to decipher differences (unless we count in the TSD HSC - which is likely as pathetic as the RVD Buj. HSC)...

Anywho... Just my take.

Carry on...

-Daniel

As I read this, to me, it seems as if both schools have many of the same concepts, techniques, etc.

They just teach them in different orders, spend differing amounts of time on them, and have gone in different directions since they started.


Heh,

Actually you could say this from Bujinkan group to Bujinkan group :)

Heh,

Actually you could say this from Bujinkan group to Bujinkan group :)
True, true.

We seem to be talking a lot about "This is Shoden and is therefore a basic technique and this is Chuden and therefore more advanced technique" but really I dont think we should think about it like that.
The schools of the Bujinkan, Genbukan, Jinenkan and TO-SHIN DO developed during a period of warfare that is termed the Sengoku Jidai (period of the warring states) that persisted for approx 250 years. These school or more correctly 'family traditions' were evolving even before that, but I guess the Sengoku Jidai was the real tester.
Now in those days there probably was no Shoden, Chuden, Okuden etc but simply a collection of techniques that were passed down from father to son or teacher to student.
What techniques were taught varied greatly on the political situation at the time. If a period of war then sword and spear became the principal weapons taught, if peace then weapons like the staff or maybe unarmed combat. I understand from Paul Richardsons 'Inroductory history to the schools of the Bujinkan' for example that the Kukishinden has gone through several changes to its sylabus during the many hundreds of years of its existence.
I believe that many schools only really had their techniques laid down on paper when it was a period of peace. There was no time during warfare to do this as either fighting or training.
So at the end of the Sengoku Jidai, although there were the occasional uprising and skirmish, when Japan became relatively peaceful we have the beginning of written techniques in scroll or makimono form, hence why we see a lot of schools emerging in the 17th century. They were in existence before but there was no documentary record of them. Some probably never even had a name as such.
In Reinhard Kammers' The Way of the Sword he states that in about 1604-1651 "The old schools of the art split up, new schools arose and their numbers became legion"
Now in this he is talking about Sword schools but as many sword schools also had unarmed combat, Spear etc, and some even practiced the entire Bugei Juhappan of which there were several variations, one could say martial arts schools in general.
So If you as a martial arts master living in a period of peace you had to lay down your schools techniques on paper, (or in other words write a sylabus)what techniques would you include first?
Well its a period of peace, the sword and especially the spear are now no where near as important any more, it might just make sense to have the Unarmed combat as the starting point.
So the once secret teachings of Taijutsu, Jujutsu, Yawara etc become the beginning techniques and the sword is now taught much latter on.
In the Bujinkan the Hanbo for example is taught to beginning students, but this was a once secret weapon. On the battle field the hanbo only came of use if your naginata, yari etc was cut in half and you could use the broken section for defence until you could grab another weapon. Hence it made sense in those time to teach yari etc first and hanbo latter. Today it is all reversed as we are not on the battlefield but we do carry umbrellas, golf clubs etc.
Now if we talk about Shoden, Shodan etc, I was under the impression that the word Sho meant 'First' as opposed to 'beginner'. And although yes in most cases we begin with the Shoden level there is nothing stopping us starting with the Okuden level, as the techniques here are not really more advanced but simply less likely to be of use today in our relatively peaceful society.
In my dojo a few years ago, I never really looked at handgun defences but today with terrorism growing I tend to spend a lot more time looking a firearms defences and how to take guns off people. Like in the past the martial arts change depending on the political climate.
Now if we are talking about TO-SHIN DO as a system of martial arts then anyone looking at it can see that the beginning techniques i.e the Kyu Grades are designed (if thats the right word) for the 21st century warrior.
Unlike a lot of schools not only are techniques taught that work, but also there is a warrior code that students must learn to gain black belt and aspects of what is legally and morally right.
After all this is 21st Century Western World, Not 13th century Japan.
In some organisations they may choose to start somewhere else. In the Bujinkan the Kihon Happo and Sanshin is emphasised at the beginning levels, In Genbukan it is the Taisabaki and striking techniques that are emphasised, Mushadori etc is much latter in the sylabus possibly 1st Kyu level.
In Jinenkan (and I apologise if I have got this wrong as unlike the other two I have no direct experience) it seems that there is very little at kyu grade level but the kata from the schools are taught almost as basics. In TO-SHIN DO we teach from the aspect of Chi, Sui, Ka, Fu and Ku. The beginning techniques (Earth Level) are really a to get the student to defend them selves against a variety of attacks i.e hook punch, straight punch, wrestler leg lift, lifting arm capture, choke etc. In itself it is a basic self defence course. Earth is also taught first, as from experience I have found that if I get a student to start by learning say Jodan tsuki followed by and Ura Shuto, many get frustrated because there is too much going on, Arm movements, striking, distancing, moving the legs etc. If I teach Sanshin on the other hand, those people that walk into the dojo and want to learn self defence see no relevance in the movement. Therefore in the earth we concentrate more on more arm movement, and less on taisabaki. and get the students to defend against a variety of attacks. This means that the student gains confidence, and have even after one lesson learnt something that could work for them. And once they have learnt the hand and arm movements we can concentrate on the leg movements and introduce the Sui No Kata (water level).
Also at every level we add pressure to the student to get them to successfully handle a real attack. We do not just do techniques but work with pads for knock down power, armour up for rougher training and more importantly work at situational self defence where the uke is saying things to you as in a real situation.
I have found that language on the street can be the weapon that unless you are trained to ignore, is what can overwhelf the competent martial artist.
At the end of the day, as i have said many times, it really is horses for courses. Some people enjoy a more classical approach to training whilst others enjoy a different approach.
And if your wondering about the Kihon Happo, Sanshin and the Kata, well yes they are in the TO-SHIN DO sylabus too, just not at the places found in other organisations.
In essence all organisations and teachers within those organisations have different sylabuses or if not certainly emphasise different aspects, it does not mean that one is right and one is wrong. Lets stop this silly idea that just because SHIHAN (Master Instructor) Stephen K Hayes, the man who introduced the art to the western world, The man that was given by Dr Hatsumi the title KINRYU (A name title that few have) and a man that still has close ties with Dr Hatsumi and is still a student of him, and a man that has spent so much time training with the master instructors in Japan and was there in the early days, before most of us had ever even heard about the art, has a sylabus that might differ from yours, and is therefore not teaching the Takamatsuden arts. This is ludicrous. Most people who state things like this have never visited a TO-SHIN DO Quest Centre let alone done any training in one.
In the 70s or early 80s Hatsumi Sensei urged his students to go out into the world and make, what was being refered to a the time Ninjutsu, relevant to their society. Well An Shu Hayes has done exactly this, and now, become the Quest Centres and TO-SHIN DO have become successful he is critisised.

Gary,
I am all for complete, if long, explinations. But what you just wrote is difficult to respond to. To be blunt, a lot of what you believe and speculated about in terms of Japanese history and the ways and reasons for training is just plain wrong. When you build on these mistakes, going on for paragraphs, it makes it difficult to deal with what you write on a point by point basis. I would like to correct what you wrote, but there is just so much to deal with that it would take a heck of a lot of time.

Do you maybe want to break down what you wrote into smaller chunks for discussion? I would be a lot more willing to point out where there are errors in what you believe if I had a lot less to deal with and later errors where not built on earlier ones.

First of all, I do not think you should be talking about history or traditional ways of training based on your experience. To be blunt, you really do not show a lot of familiarity with the subject matter from what I can see. What you write seems again to be a way of making other forms of training sound less in order to make your own system sound better by comparison. This may lead to trouble with some folks. I think it better if you do not talk about such things AS FACT in order to try to build your case unless you get a bit more knowlegeable about the subject matter.

I agree with Don Roley. Maybe we should just go line by line over the next few days and state where our perspectives differ.

We seem to be talking a lot about "This is Shoden and is therefore a basic technique and this is Chuden and therefore more advanced technique" but really I dont think we should think about it like that.."Sho" means "start" or beginning". "Chu" means "middle". Usually the "start" comes before the "middle".

termed the Sengoku Jidai (period of the warring states) that persisted for approx 250 years. These school or more correctly 'family traditions' were evolving even before that,Seeing that these traditions were passed on in villages, castles, temples and shrines, not just "within the family", I think the term "school" or "tradition" fits better.

Now in those days there probably was no Shoden, Chuden, Okuden etc but simply a collection of techniques.... I believe that many schools only really had their techniques laid down on paper when it was a period of peace. Traditions like Takenouchi ryu, Katori Shinto ryu, Shinkage ryu, Nen ryu, Kage ryu and Kashimashin ryu all had written scrolls back then, some with sections entitled "shoden, chuden, okuden".

If a period of war then sword and spear became the principal weapons taught, if peace then weapons like the staff or maybe unarmed combat. (Skipping a few lines)Now in this he is talking about Sword schools but as many sword schools also had unarmed combat, Spear etc, and some even practiced the entire Bugei Juhappan of which there were several variations, one could say martial arts schools in general.
So If you as a martial arts master living in a period of peace you had to lay down your schools techniques on paper, (or in other words write a sylabus)what techniques would you include first?
Well its a period of peace, the sword and especially the spear are now no where near as important any more, it might just make sense to have the Unarmed combat as the starting point.
So the once secret teachings of Taijutsu, Jujutsu, Yawara etc become the beginning techniques and the sword is now taught much latter on.I don't want to sound rude, but you completely missed what I had said in my previous post. Some schools are taijutsu based. Some schools are sword based. The base doesn't change, it's the underlying teaching philosophy of the school. All schools from that time at the very least taught spear, sword and taijutsu. Take some non-Bujinkan schools for example. New students to Takenouchi ryu began with taijutsu 300 years ago, and they begin with taijutsu today, then move on to bo and sword. Shinkage ryu began teaching kenjutsu (sword techniques) 300 years ago, and new students to that ryu ha still learn sword from day one before going on to stickfighting and empty hands. The schools in the Bujinkan are all taijutsu based schools.

Lets stop this silly idea that just because SHIHAN (Master Instructor) Stephen K Hayes, ...has a sylabus that might differ from yours, and is therefore not teaching the Takamatsuden arts. I don't think I ever said SKH "is not teaching Takamatsuden arts". He's teaching his version of it that he learned from Hatsumi sensei, flavored with his own personal experience, as are all the other shihan. I thought we were comparing those versions here.

In response to Don Roley.

I am in no way saying that one form of training is any better than any other. As I have stated, its horses for courses. TO-SHIN DO trains one way, Other organisations train another way. What I am saying is that as Ninjutsu practitioners we should try to get on together, have respect for each other, and learn from each other. This is all I have ever done. Please see my other posts.

Secondly you state that I should not be talking about history based on my experience. Firstly I ask, do you know what experience I have in this art, and what training I have had in historical studies, and even so what makes you think that your view of history is any better than mine or anyone elses. As Napoleon said "History is a pack of lies agreed upon"

Kizaru
Reading your post I actually think we are mostly agreeing with each other, and in reference to what you have stated about the different Ryu Ha, you are of course correct, but it is not as simple as that. However as this subject will go off track if we continue on about schools, lets end this here, or contact me via e mail. I think it is true to say that some schools remain teaching what for them has become the back bone of their art either sword or spear or Taijutsu and we can do so as we are at peace. And this is true of course in the Bujinkan. TO-SHIN DO however realises that today the primary weapons are the knife, gun and club as well as unarmed combat, which is why at the Kyu grade level there are no techniques with the sword, spear etc. This is not to say they are not taught to more advanced students or at special training sessions. In fact at these sessions An Shu Hayes teaches the techniques as laid down in the Densho and as taught to him by Dr Hatsumi.

Imagine if you will, if tomorrow for some bizarre reason we were plunged again into a war and the naginata became the primary weapon on the battlefield and in the street, would these arts, Bujinkan or otherwise start to bring naginata training to the forefront of their training or would they continue on the path they are taking at present?

Just a hypothetical situation, but worth a thought.

you state that I should not be talking about history based on my experience. Firstly I ask, do you know what experience I have in this art, and what training I have had in historical studies, and even so what makes you think that your view of history is any better than mine or anyone elses.

Oh dear. Is this going to be one of those types of debates?

I never said I knew anything about your experience. I said what I did after seeing what you wrote. And what kind of impression do you think you make when you write the above just after Kizaru showed how your language was off and you missed the boat about historical methods of training?

I really think that you should stop trying to portray Toshindo as being closer to what the samurai during wartime trained in unless you know what you are talking about. You do not seem to be.

If you want to try to push your version of history, then please do so with exact quotes with page numbers, etc. Saying, "I think XXX said," generalizing and wild ass guesses are not what I am talking about.

But all to often I have seen people not list their sources like that and instead try to impress everyone just how they do not need to because they are soooo much of an expert in the subject matter. :rolleyes: But anyone who tries that here will be have no mercy shown them as people like Kizaru and I list our years of Japan experience, our experiences in Japanese universities, our language abilities, our extensive collections of history texts, our years of training in the Bujinkan under Japanese shihan, etc. Trust me, you do not want that to happen to you.

So, again- list your sources for history or preferebaly just stop trying to push your theory that somehow Toshindo trains like the samurai from the age of war more than Hatsumi.

And I find the following a little strange.

TO-SHIN DO however realises that today the primary weapons are the knife, gun and club as well as unarmed combat, which is why at the Kyu grade level there are no techniques with the sword, spear etc.

Are you saying that kyu level ranks in the Bujinkan learn naginata and such to any great extent? I beg to differ. The lower ranks I see mainly train in sticks and maybe knives. Some schools teach gun and some teach basic attacks with swords so that people can serve as ukes for taisabaki drills. Heck, in the dojo I train in now we deal mainly with those areas and I pick up a spear maybe three times a year on my own to keep up some skills.

But I think you miss the point of some of the principles and methods involved in the way things are taught the way they are in the Bujinkan. The way I have learned ancient weapons have been very helpfull to me in understanding certain principles and concepts. Last weekend I was off in the mountains and got to pick up an axe. Since no one was around, and I am a budo geek, I took some time to practice with it as a weapon. I have never taken axe fighting lessons, but I think I did a bit better than your typical axe murderer would. Most people use the thing with the strong hand above the weak hand and either strike straight down or from the strong side to the weak. But I switched hands like you do with a naginata and reversed directions as well as from below.

It is not just axes. I have a shovel that I work out with in my yard that relies a lot on the sword and spear stuff I have learned. I use an ASP baton mainly based on wakazashi moves. There are many examples I could list, but I think you get the point that by concentrating on the principles of the ancient weapons, I have found wasy of using common tools and weapons we find today.

But of course, I believe that taijutsu skills must precede trying to use a weapon, so begginers must spend a lot of time just getting their unarmed skills down just like you seem to say Toshindo does.

We seem to be talking a lot about "This is Shoden and is therefore a basic technique and this is Chuden and therefore more advanced technique" but really I dont think we should think about it like that.

Really? You sure about this? Perhaps you should provide some evidence to support this idea...

You have one idea and 10 paragraphs of speculation. Unless you have some unknown facts to support your GUESSING - the rest of what you said is irrelevant (interesting - but irrelevant).

There is nothing to stop me from claiming that the scrolls are meant to be read under the moonlight in order to see magic runes ... except common sense and "BURDEN OF PROOF"...

Waiting....

-Daniel

Schools like Koto ryu were developed for hit-and-run types of self defense and guerilla warfare, where you had to knock down your opponent(s) quickly and get the hell away. There were many such systems even during the Sengoku Jidai that emphasized unarmed hitting more than grappling and weapons.

First, Toshindo is a modern adaptation of the traditional martial arts of war-time Japan. Then, somehow it's closer in spirit to what the samurai trained in than the Bujinkan. Explanation, please.

Are you not replying to this anymore Gary?

Just curious...

:-)

-Daniel

Daniel

No I have not replied to this thread for a little while as I kind of find it sad that when I honestly express my personal opinion of Bujinkan from what I have seen from attending Hatsumi Seminars, watching Videos and having Bujinkan members, including black belts visit my dojo, it is ridiculed as though I really don't know what I am talking about.

I started this post with my explaination of what I perceive TO-SHIN DO to be, and its difference to Bujinkan.

Now whilst I appreciate that all Bujinkan teachers teach slightly differently, some dwelling on some of what i would term classical stuff, whilst others practice more modern style self defence forms of the art. There is what I would call a Bujinkan approach to training. Which from my point of view differs somewhat to the TO-SHIN DO approach.

This does not mean that TO-SHIN DO is a completely new martial art. Some people it seems have this bizarre idea that Stephen K Hayes has sold out and created a new martial arts system, totally devoid of any of the teaching he has learnt from Dr Hatsumi.

On the contrary, I think that actually Stephen Hayes got the original teachings of Ninjutsu and what is taught today in Bujinkan is mostly a shadow of the true ninja warrior arts. Therefore what is taught in TO-SHIN DO is what mr Hayes learnt all those years ago in Japan when there were only a few people actually training.

On one of mr Hayes DVDs he says that the way he is teaching now is exactly how he learnt it in Japan so many years ago (Go listen to the DVD, its on mountains of strength).

My personal opinion on Bujinkan and the way it is taught today.
OK imagine this. You are the 34 generation grandmaster of a secret sword school that began in the 11th century. This school that you are the grandmaster of came into existence during the crusades. Your great, great, great, etc grandfather was the founder of this western martial art.
You have a few students sworn to secrecy never to teach or reveal this art of the Knights Templar.
Then one day a foreign person turns up and trains. After a few years they write a book on the secret techniques of the Knights Templar.
Suddenly your once secret school is not secret anymore. You are launched into the limelight and in the country where your foreign student comes from you are famous. Everyone wants to study with you, because up until the writing of this book they had never heard of the Knight Templar.
But in your own country, well you are seen as some kind of fraud, or crazy person. Of course the Knight Templar don't exist they died out in the 13th century the critics state.

See any similarities with the art of Ninjutsu. Theres Dr Hatsumi teaching his students Ninjutsu in a back room of his clinic when Stephen K Hayes (and others) publish a book on this once secret art. Suddenly he is made a superstar in the USA, UK and other countries but in Japan, the ninja are a myth made famous by comic books, where they are involved in assasination, theft and sorcery. In effect they are the enemies of the samurai, the enemies of the ruling class.
Can you imagine if your doctor suddenly came out and said 'Im skilled in the arts of assasination'
Not good for business and not good for your character which is Oh so important in Japan.

And if you think this is a bit far fetched, then ask yourself why Takamatsu Sensei and Hatsumi Sensei never mentioned they studied Ninjutsu, and trained in white gis. Why did Takamatsu sensei never mention he taught ninjutsu until his neighbours found out from his obituary. Why did he say he was teaching Happo Biken instead?

Ok many will say, well this is not Ninjutsu this is Bujinkan Taijutsu, or Budo Taijutsu, and only one of our schools Togakure Ryu is actually Ninjutsu.
Really, Think again. It might have been prudent for Dr Hatsumi to call his arts Bujinkan and Budo Taijutsu to take some of the heat off of what he was doing in the early days.
Please guys also remember this. These Japanese Martial arts are a Japanese treasure, do you really think the Japanese are going to give you everything that relates to this art. Thats like the English selling a castle to the USA. The locals would be in uproar.

I have heard that in the early days when Hatsumi Sensei started to become famous the students had to take a pledge not to reveal certain aspects of the art to the masses.

Now I've probably said too much in this post, and I await what i know is going to be a barrage of abuse and defensive writing.

But ill leave you with this. Back at the 1995 Hatsumi Seminar Hatsumi Sensei began by addressing the crowd with the subject of lies, deception and falsehood. Following this we moved onto Naginata. First he demonstrated a technique with one naginata, followed by a technique with two naginata. He then picked up a third and started to demonstrate with these.
I looked around and could see people nodding in agreement and some were even taking notes. As he had already stated that the Ninja must see the truth from falsehood I thought to myself, Hatsumi Sensei must be doing this to see who will actually get what he has just said. I wonder how many did. But then maybe there is a technique where one will use 3 naginatas in unison against an attacker. What do i know, What do any of us know. This is Ninjutsu after all.

On the contrary, I think that actually Stephen Hayes got the original teachings of Ninjutsu and what is taught today in Bujinkan is mostly a shadow of the true ninja warrior arts.

And taking that attitude, without being able to back it up with anything even close to a reliable source, is why you are angering so many people.

You experience with the Bujinkan is extremely limited. You were not there when Hayes got his training. You have been corrected on language and history use by other members of the board. In short, you really do not know all that much.

The quote above shows that it is you who have launched an attack. And it is up to you to back it up with facts and not wild conjecture.

On the contrary, I think that actually Stephen Hayes got the original teachings of Ninjutsu and what is taught today in Bujinkan is mostly a shadow of the true ninja warrior arts. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. What I understand from what is written above is, "Real ninjutsu is taught only in America and NOT in Japan".

So, at some point after Stephen Hayes left Japan, Hatsumi sensei decides to start teaching "poorly" and he's been doing that for the past 20 years or so? That doesn't make sense to me. There are young Japanese people training with Hatsumi sensei and the shihan, are you implying that they are willingly going to class, knowingly spending their time and money to learn garbage in order to "fool the foreigners"? I've been in plenty of classes where I was the only non Japanese, the class size was about 6 people, and class was conducted more or less as it always was, except that I wasn't translating. In the "Knights Templar" example below, is it implied that the Japanese students aren't being taught "the real thing" either? Why do the Japanese shihan who have been training for 30 years plus still show up to training?

My opinion is you'll get out of it what you put into it. If you train with the right motivation, demonstrate that you're trustworthy and ask intelligent questions at the right time, you'll have plenty put on your plate.



Suddenly he is made a superstar in the USA, UK and other countries but in Japan, the ninja are a myth made famous by comic books, where they are involved in assasination, theft and sorcery. In effect they are the enemies of the samurai, the enemies of the ruling class.I though they were "a myth made famous by comic books" in the US and the UK too. As far as being the "enemies of the Samurai", I've read comic books and fairy tales in Japanese where the samurai was someone who had studied ninjutsu...



Please guys also remember this. These Japanese Martial arts are a Japanese treasure, do you really think the Japanese are going to give you everything that relates to this art. Thats like the English selling a castle to the USA. The locals would be in uproar. Reading the above "Knights Templar" example you say that the "secret sword style teacher" is looked upon kind of like a fraud...so the locals are going to be in an uproar over a crazy fraud giving away fool's gold? Forgeting that for a moment, are you saying that even though it's a Japanese treasure, they bent the rules for SKH (and all the other non Japanese that trained there before him) and then decided that was it? If they didn't want to teach non Japanese, why didn't they just say, "sorry folks, no non Japanese allowed anymore"? There are PLENTY of places I've tried to get into here and I've been told "sorry pal, not Japanese enough for access", so it's not like that isn't culturally acceptable...

What do i know, What do any of us know. This is Ninjutsu after all. Or is it?

I am not saying it is being taught poorly, just differently. My feeling is that what is taught today i.e Budo Taijutsu has a different slant than what was taught in the 1970s and 80s in the back of Hatsumis clinic.

However as most of us have come on board later, we think that what is being taught now is the same as it has always been. This is clearly not so. We all know that the way that Hatsumi Sensei teaches is very soft in comparison with what was taught years ago.

It could be therefore that Mr Hayes is teaching the way that he was originally taught in the 70s and 80s, but because so many of us have come on board much later, and have no experience of training in the 70s and 80s, what we perceive is that Hatsumi sensei is teaching the way it has always been taught and Mr Hayes has sold out.

I remember back in about 1994 training in a black belt class with Tanemura Sensei, he explained that what he would teach that night how Takamatsu taught. It was so different from the Bujinkan way of doing things. there were no punches held at the hip and in fact I believe I remember him mention that if Takamatsu sensei came back from the grave that he would be appalled at this kind of punching style. Another Genbukan Dojo Leader stated that if Takamatsu Sensei saw this he would be spinning in his grave.

Is this punching style wrong. No of course not, it was an old way of fighting in armour and of course is part of the Sanshin, but maybe even Takamatsu realised that this type of punch was good for beginners but if one wanted to really protect themselves then this was simply no good even in his day.

And Mr Roley, Unfortunately you were not there in the early days either, and if we are talking about angering people, Well I only anger those who are so closed minded and not open enough to ponder what I have put. And I seem to remember a post where you angered so many people with your reply to a post from a person so new to the art, so none of us are perfect.

I am not saying it is being taught poorly, just differently. My feeling is that what is taught today i.e Budo Taijutsu has a different slant than what was taught in the 1970s and 80s in the back of Hatsumis clinic.

And you think that Hayes teaches closer to that than Hatsumi or the Japanese shihan. But how on earth can you tell that without having been there yourself?

Here is the thing, the training in those days was with a small group of people that knew each others limitations very well. As such, they were able to do things that were a bit closer to the edge than you can with a larger group of people that have been in town only a short while. So if Hatusmi is teaching in a different manner, then it is to prevent the pair of white belts from killing each other. And the same dynamic has to apply to Hayes as well.

And there are other teachers in the Bujinkan from those days like Nagato, Noguchi, Oguri, etc. Are they part of this conspiracy too? Or have you considered that when there is only a few students who can be trusted to not kill each other the level goes up again? This type of training is not something that Hayes can do in North America under his circumstances at all without being sued silly.

And if you are talking about the godai element theory or something, then you had better provide some proof that there was ever an "earth feeling" while training.

It was so different from the Bujinkan way of doing things. there were no punches held at the hip

I dealt with this already. Aside from the sanshin (an extreme solo form), I do not see these punches from the hip you keep saying the Bujinkan does. No other Bujinkan member has stepped forward and said they have seen it either. If this is the way you kept punching while in the Bujinkan, then you learned wrong and no one really bothered to point out your mistakes. Take a look at any Hatsumi tape from a Daikomyosai or such and see if you can find people practicing that type of punch.

Well I only anger those who are so closed minded and not open enough to ponder what I have put.

Calling people close minded if they don't agree with you is not going to make you friends. And as Kizaru pointed out so well, your arguments make no logical sense, you have no evidence to back up what you say and your experience with the subject matter is extremely limited. So, who do you think appears to me to be unwilling to open up his mind to other ideas?

It could be therefore that Mr Hayes is teaching the way that he was originally taught in the 70s and 80s, but because so many of us have come on board much later, and have no experience of training in the 70s and 80s, what we perceive is that Hatsumi sensei is teaching the way it has always been taught and Mr Hayes has sold out.
I am REALLY confused.

I thought the Idea behind Toshindo was to make it "Modern" and applicable to the westerners studying it (ninjutsu) today...

So either he (hayes) is teaching it the way he learned it, or he modernized it.

Which is it?

Don Roley: "I dealt with this already. Aside from the sanshin (an extreme solo form), I do not see these punches from the hip you keep saying the Bujinkan does. No other Bujinkan member has stepped forward and said they have seen it either."

Me neither, the usual kamae that I see punches thrown from is either ichimonji or doko. The only time I see punches come up and out from a low position are with "low-intention" / hidden punches that travel directly and naturally from shizen to 'get in under the radar' / come from below the peripheral sight line.

As for any other comparisons with Toshindo - I'm not qualified to say. However, I have heard Hatsumi talk about doing techniques with feeling such as "like the wind" etc. I don't know if that's a godai reference, or if he's just saying "move like the wind." :idunno:

Technopunk
Sorry to confuse you. You know its really hard sometimes talking about something on these forums without being taken out of context, and sometimes it really is a battle of semantics.

Of course everything we do is based on our own personal experience and I think I have enough experience over the last 19 years to know somewhat of what I am talking about, although Mr Roley might disagree with that as he seems to know so much about me.

During the last 19 years I have trained on numerous occasions with Dr Hatsumi, his students and of course in the Genbukan with Shoto Tanemura and his students. I have also trained on a number of occasions with Mr Hayes the first time being in 1986.

I guess the difference is that I am not one of these people that have run off to Japan turned up at Dr Hatsumis door and got a fifth dan.

And that I think has put me in quite a unique position, in that politically I am not only seeing things from one side of the fence. I have had the freedom to train with who i want, whether its Hatsumi, Tanemura, Tanaka, Navon, Hayes or whoever.

Ok people will say, but you are now politically involved with Stephen K Hayes and are in fact biased to his way of training, just as others are biased towards Hatsumi Sensei or Tanemura Sensei. But unlike the Genbukan and Bujinkan where people are banned from training with the other side, I am still free to train with who I want, in fact An Shu Hayes actually encourages it.

Anyway lets get back to the point about the fact that TO-SHIN DO being modern yet taught as An Shu Hayes learnt it years ago.

I think the best way of explaining this is that in the early days the techniques were based very much on 'Making them work' in todays world, which of course was the 70s and 80s. The philosophy of Ninjutsu has always been that one should move with the times, and indeed Takamatsu sensei did a lot to make the art of Ninjutsu relevant to his world. We know for example that he mastered many forms of Chinese martial art, and also a Korean one. Now some of those techniques that he learnt are probably in the system that we study today.

Now today of course the world has changed, people do not attack in the same way that they did in the 70s and 80s. OK people still throw punches and kicks but wrestling was'nt so big in the 70s. I can't walk down the street today without seeing some advert for RAW wrestling classes in my town, and of course there was also an absence of Gracie style jujutsu. So following the philosophy of Ninjutsu TO-SHIN DO now includes a section on ground fighting and defences from the grappler.

In the 70s and 80s as An Shu Hayes explains on his DVDs that they would learn something from the Grandmaster and then meet in the local park to try to get it to work. Today in that respect it is no different. An Shu Hayes is still trying to get it to work (and doing an excellent job I might add), except of course the world is constantly changing. If suddenly wrestling moved into the back ground and say a new form of fighting evolved and became popular, then TO-SHIN DO would probably move away from the ground defences and concentrate somewhat on defences from this new form of attacking.

Now am I saying that it is only TO-SHIN DO that teaches modern methods of Ninjutsu? No I am not. There are of course many people out there that have taken what they have learnt from Dr Hatsumi and others and created a method of using the Bujinkan arts in the western world of the 21st century.

What I do find strange though, as ive said all along, is that when these Bujinkan guys create a way of using the Bujinkan arts in a modern form then its fine, but when An Shu Hayes does the same thing then he is accused of selling out and not teaching the arts he was taught by his teacher Dr Hatsumi.

Finally Mr Roley says this

Here is the thing, the training in those days was with a small group of people that knew each others limitations very well. As such, they were able to do things that were a bit closer to the edge than you can with a larger group of people that have been in town only a short while. So if Hatusmi is teaching in a different manner, then it is to prevent the pair of white belts from killing each other. And the same dynamic has to apply to Hayes as well.

Which is exactly why TO-SHIN DO is so structured. White and yellow belts for white and yellow belt classes, and blue belts for blue belts classes. As Takamatsu Sensei said "Black belt techniques to black belt, 5th dan to 5th dan"
In the Bujinkan at the moment there does not seem to be any structure except from the Ten Chi Jin but even then the instructors can choose whether to use it or not. A black belt in Chicago US Dojo could be completely different in skill to a black belt in Manchester England Dojo. Whereas in TO-SHIN DO my yellow belts should be learning the same techniques and be the same level of experience and skill as a yellow belt in Dayton Ohio. Although of course they might get a little more being in the presence of An Shu Hayes of course, but hopefully you know what I mean.

But unlike the Genbukan and Bujinkan where people are banned from training with the other side, I am still free to train with who I want, in fact An Shu Hayes actually encourages it.
Training with the Bujinkan is as far as I know not disallowed in the Genbukan.

I think the best way of explaining this is that in the early days the techniques were based very much on 'Making them work' in todays world, which of course was the 70s and 80s.
So now that was the time people were being given the real enchilada, while nowadays there's just a whole lot of fluff being taught? Before you wrote yourself about Hayes's own disappointment with what he was taught during that time, that it was all based on what one may have had to face during the sengoku jidai with armour-clad people with swords and all. Now you say that time was the most str337 oriented time of the Bujinkan. Would you please make up your damn mind?

The philosophy of Ninjutsu has always been that one should move with the times, and indeed Takamatsu sensei did a lot to make the art of Ninjutsu relevant to his world.
Herbal medicine and castle infiltration methods from 16th century Japan isn't all that applicable these days. That's probably another reason Hatsumi sensei focuses on teaching taijutsu and bukiwaza rather than ninjutsu,

We know for example that he mastered many forms of Chinese martial art, and also a Korean one. Now some of those techniques that he learnt are probably in the system that we study today.
Read his autobiography and you might be inclined to change your opinion.

So following the philosophy of Ninjutsu TO-SHIN DO now includes a section on ground fighting and defences from the grappler.
Which of course is totally unlike the Bujinkan, which has no methods for ground combat at all.:rolleyes:

Now am I saying that it is only TO-SHIN DO that teaches modern methods of Ninjutsu? No I am not. There are of course many people out there that have taken what they have learnt from Dr Hatsumi and others and created a method of using the Bujinkan arts in the western world of the 21st century.
Created a method of...? No need to, the knowledge is already there. That's why we focus of principles instead of techniques.

What I do find strange though, as ive said all along, is that when these Bujinkan guys create a way of using the Bujinkan arts in a modern form then its fine, but when An Shu Hayes does the same thing then he is accused of selling out and not teaching the arts he was taught by his teacher Dr Hatsumi.
One thing that may have to do with it is that what you are describing as the shortcomings of the Bujinkan is, IMO, a constructed problem.

In the Bujinkan at the moment there does not seem to be any structure except from the Ten Chi Jin but even then the instructors can choose whether to use it or not.

I trust you've done your research on this by meeting high-ranking instructors from all over the world and discussing the matter.

Now today of course the world has changed, people do not attack in the same way that they did in the 70s and 80s.

:rofl:
Um, first you were going on about punches from the hips since it was "historical". Now that you cannot seem to point to any examples of this, you are saying that muggers do not throw punches as they did a couple decades ago?

Do you realize you are not being very consisitent? Not only with that, but in your contention that Hayes teaches closer to what the ancient ninja did than Hatsumi. You have not provided proof for that contention either when challenged.

And you really, really missed the point when I talked about the way training used to be compared to how it is done today. I was talking about the roughness and danger in the way training was done. You are trying to say that there is a difference in the techniques that were trained back then and now. Your talking about punching from the hip again comes to mind, but again you cannot point to any examples of this. I have heard a lot of stories like the time Hatsumi grabbed someone by the tounge and threw them into an open- flamed stove to not believe that the training when there were only a few guys was different than now when there is a lot of newbies in the room trainig with each other. You seem to labor under the impression that the actual ways of punching (i.e. from the hip) have changed. I can understand why Hatsumi would not have us do things with full intent and power, but not your theory that he has changed the techniques to make them not applicable in combat anymore.

Ninravus: Takamatsu has an autobiography ? wow when did he write that.
Also i am not saying that Hatsumi sensei is teaching fluff. What Hatsumi is teaching I believe is very high level. So high level in fact that many cannot get what he is doing. And because of that a beginner can actually get lost in the early stages, because of what Hatsumi Sensei is teaching. TO-SHIN DO seems to teach basic techniques for beginners and advanced techniques to black belt.
Does this mean that other students of Hatsumi Sensei can't teach the basics. No of course not. But as an example this punch from the hip is great for beginners, but unfortunately so many people seem not to move beyond this.
You also mention about herbal medicine and castle infiltration not being important today. Well exactly, just like studying how people fought in the 16th century is unimportant today, except from an historical point of view. But we can study Ninjutsu that works today, just like we can study modern medicines and drugs, and alternative therapies (Amatsu Tatara etc), and of course myself as a Security consultant I have to know all about microwave fences, PIR detectors, and EAS barriers etc. As well as terrorist threats (one of my sites being a military base). Is'nt this Fortress penetration, but in reverse (remember everything has an ura and omote)
Finally you mention about groundfighting not being part of the Bujinkan. Well do you think defences from automatic pistols were in the sylabus until Hatsumi put them there. You can also see the art of the golf club and umbrella in Ninjutsu, but these things ar'nt exactly old style techniques.
Ninjutsu moves with the time, or at least it should do. If we don't allow it to move forward then unfortunately it may just become an anachronism to a bygone age.

Don Roley: Try looking at the Daikomyosai videos for this punch from the hip. The Kukishinden and Shinden Fudo ryu Daikomyosai have a number in there.
Also I did not saying muggers don't throw punches the way they did two decades ago. Don't put words in my mouth. What i said was that today wrestlers and Gracie jujutsu is a threat to the Ninja, where they were unheard of several years ago but people still throw punches.

Ninravus: Takamatsu has an autobiography ? wow when did he write that.
:anic:
Can't find it right now, it used to be on www.mizunagare.com but that site seems to have been hacked.

What Hatsumi is teaching I believe is very high level. So high level in fact that many cannot get what he is doing. And because of that a beginner can actually get lost in the early stages, because of what Hatsumi Sensei is teaching. TO-SHIN DO seems to teach basic techniques for beginners and advanced techniques to black belt.
If one needs to be told constantly that the solution to this problem is kihon, kihon, kihon and some more kihon one probably doesn't have much business with Hatsumi sensei's teachings to begin with.

Does this mean that other students of Hatsumi Sensei can't teach the basics. No of course not. But as an example this punch from the hip is great for beginners, but unfortunately so many people seem not to move beyond this.
Are you suggesting that it is impossible to fix this within the Bujinkan?

But we can study Ninjutsu that works today, just like we can study modern medicines and drugs, and alternative therapies (Amatsu Tatara etc), and of course myself as a Security consultant I have to know all about microwave fences, PIR detectors, and EAS barriers etc. As well as terrorist threats (one of my sites being a military base). Is'nt this Fortress penetration, but in reverse (remember everything has an ura and omote)
That is indeed more ninjutsu than what Hatsumi sensei is teaching. You seem to have your ninjutsu needs covered by outside sources, so all that's left for you to discover within the Takamatsuden would be taijutsu principles, right?

Finally you mention about groundfighting not being part of the Bujinkan. Well do you think defences from automatic pistols were in the sylabus until Hatsumi put them there. You can also see the art of the golf club and umbrella in Ninjutsu, but these things ar'nt exactly old style techniques.
It's all about Hatsumi sensei being familiar enough with the principles he's imparting. Techniques are unimportant.

Ninjutsu moves with the time, or at least it should do. If we don't allow it to move forward then unfortunately it may just become an anachronism to a bygone age.
And whom, praytell, is the one trying to prevent the Takamatsuden arts from evolving?

What i said was that today wrestlers and Gracie jujutsu is a threat to the Ninja, where they were unheard of several years ago but people still throw punches.
And by "ninja" you mean...?

Don Roley: Try looking at the Daikomyosai videos for this punch from the hip. The Kukishinden and Shinden Fudo ryu Daikomyosai have a number in there.

Uh, in Shinden Fudo ryu for example- you always begin in a natural stnace and thus the hands are down by the hip- special case. And the punch is more often a sneaky little things sliping up under the other guy's radar as has been pointed out and not as you represent it. You are misrepresenting what people do. You just said "this punch from the hip is great for beginners, but unfortunately so many people seem not to move beyond this." But begginers do not learn this way of punching in any Bujinkan dojo I have ever been in.

I have to conclude that your knowledge of Bujinkan is rather shallow if you walked away with this impression. You may have been to a Tai Kai, etc, but there is that great line about gorillas reading philosophy from A Fish Called Wanda. Perhaps if your teacher (whoever he was) had bothered to point out the correct way to punch from the beggining you may not have this impression and stop trying to convince people that people are taught to punch in the Bujinkan from the hip as a matter of course.

Also I did not saying muggers don't throw punches the way they did two decades ago. Don't put words in my mouth. What i said was that today wrestlers and Gracie jujutsu is a threat to the Ninja, where they were unheard of several years ago but people still throw punches.

You're training to beat gracie guys instead of the guys you will see on the street? I think your understanding of what goes on in the street and your training focus is a bit off.

And just because you may not be aware of dealing with attacks on the ground does not mean they are not there. If you had a bit more experince you may understand this. Look at the suwariwaza from the Takagi and the stuff starting from fudoza in the Shinden fudo ryu to see the starting points of what we learn. We don't take the time to learn how to do many things the Gracies do and instead concentrate on dealing with attacks as best we can and get to our feet as soon as possible.

Ninravus: Takamatsu has an autobiography ? wow when did he write that..I've always heard that Takamatsu sensei wrote an autobiography/book of memoirs and called the "Handbook on Happiness". To the best of my knowledge, this has never been translated from Japanese, nor published.

Does this mean that other students of Hatsumi Sensei can't teach the basics. No of course not. .I agree. Learn basics from the senior students and shihan, learn advanced concepts from senior shihan and Hatsumi sensei...no disagreement there.
Do some people choose not to do that? Sure. Who does it hurt the most? Me? You? Hatsumi sensei?

But as an example this punch from the hip is great for beginners, but unfortunately so many people seem not to move beyond this. .Maybe I'm blind or just plain stupid; I don't see where this "punch from the hip" is a sticking point for people. In the training I've experienced, we train against punches and kicks from all different angles as well as throws, chokes, attacks from behind and fighting from the ground.


You can also see the art of the golf club and umbrella in Ninjutsu, but these things ar'nt exactly old style techniques.
Ninjutsu moves with the time, or at least it should do. If we don't allow it to move forward then unfortunately it may just become an anachronism to a bygone age..That's a good question. The spirit of "ninjutsu" has always been to take everyday items you have at hand and apply them to the taijutsu skills you've got. Golf clubs didn't exist in Japan 300 years ago, but this idea of applying what you've got at hand did. Today the concept is still applied with the golf club, umbrella, laytex jutte, iron or ice cream cone. So what's more important, the tools themselves, or the concepts and applied skills that make them work?

I've always heard that Takamatsu sensei wrote an autobiography/book of memoirs and called the "Handbook on Happiness". To the best of my knowledge, this has never been translated from Japanese, nor published.

No, these are separate texts as far as I know. And there is an English translation of his (reportedly unfinished) autobiography, I've read it myself.

No, these are separate texts as far as I know. And there is an English translation of his (reportedly unfinished) autobiography, I've read it myself.

Please read the top of this webpage, hosted by Ben Jones, beginning with, "New book on Takamatsu Sensei ".

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/bj1/bugei/news.htm


Caveat Emptor.
:asian:

We're not talking about the same thing here. I'm talking about the autobiography Takamatsu sensei himself wrote, it's only about three pages long in English.

We're not talking about the same thing here. ..
Okay, my bad. Pass me the cake spatula.

Ninravus
Your quote to me.

Originally Posted by Gary Arthur
We know for example that he mastered many forms of Chinese martial art, and also a Korean one. Now some of those techniques that he learnt are probably in the system that we study today.

Read his autobiography and you might be inclined to change your opinion.

If this autobiography is only three pages long in English, then I wouldn't exactly call it an autobiography. And if it is only three pages long it shouldn't take you long to find the point you want me to read in this extremely rare text and enlighten us all or at least give us a quote to back up what your saying.

I already told you that it was incomplete. I seem to recall having read something along the lines of:

"During my travels throughout the mainland I fought a man who was very skilled and knowledgeable about many techniques. After I beat him, we sat down and talked. Indeed, he knew many techniques and many ways of stopping techniques. The names of these techniques I have long since forgotten. He truly did have a lot of technical knowledge, but like most others his technique was not useful, because of the way he used it.
If you know the name of a bird, it doesn't tell you anything about the bird itself."

"In China I made a living by teaching martial arts. I had more than a hundred students to which I taught much about war, but also about peace. I fought many matches against high ranking martial artists, some of them ended in draws but I never once lost."

"Some Chinese martial artists speak of breathing, but I tell you that if you want to control your breathing it will never be a natural breath. I have met several martial artists who claim that their breath is the source of their power and if that is the case then I am very happy for them! If they ever have to fight for their lives for more than three hours it would be nice to see them control their breath throughout the bout. Too much air makes the mind and the vision unfocused so be careful."


Note that these are not direct quotes but only parts that I still have in my head.

So what if there are similar techniques in Chinese and Japanese systems - how would you be able to tell if they weren't already there before Takamatsu sensei's encounters in China and Korea?

Anyone train in Bujinkan in Kitchener Ontario? I'd like to start but would love to meet with someone.

Uh, in Shinden Fudo ryu for example- you always begin in a natural stnace and thus the hands are down by the hip- special case. And the punch is more often a sneaky little things sliping up under the other guy's radar as has been pointed out and not as you represent it. You are misrepresenting what people do. You just said "this punch from the hip is great for beginners, but unfortunately so many people seem not to move beyond this." But begginers do not learn this way of punching in any Bujinkan dojo I have ever been in.

I have to conclude that your knowledge of Bujinkan is rather shallow if you walked away with this impression. You may have been to a Tai Kai, etc, but there is that great line about gorillas reading philosophy from A Fish Called Wanda. Perhaps if your teacher (whoever he was) had bothered to point out the correct way to punch from the beggining you may not have this impression and stop trying to convince people that people are taught to punch in the Bujinkan from the hip as a matter of course.

I wonder if the disconnect is based on one of the old training drills from way back when. I remember as a rank beginner (as opposed to now as a mildly rank beginner. . .) using the punch from the hip as a tool to train me to use the hips to throw the punch as opposed to drilling it in with the shoulders. It also worked as a tool to emphasize body positioning. I've also been shown how to use it as a hidden punch as well and of course some variants on the Sanshin. However, the basic punches that I've been trained on come from a more neutral position in the stance with the striking arm sliding under the withdrawing or defending one. Why would you telegraph a punch form jumonji by dropping it from you chin level all the way back to the hip? I'm curious, outside of Boshiken from the hip in Fu no kata how many people actually punch from the hip with any regularity?

Matt

Hello all,

Insted of calling it a lunge punch, punching from the hip, Noda City floater maybe restudy Ken Tai Ichi Jo ~ Body and Weapon move as one or the steps that make up Inashi Gata... Know the theory, application , and then go out and apply.

Please go back and retrain and relearn the basics of the Bujinkan.

Respectfully,

Ken Savage
www.winmartialarts.com (http://www.winmartialarts.com)