I loved reading Mr Hayes' books in the 80's. I have rediscovered them and are reading them all over again. There are interesting. However, I have recently heard that a lot in them are not reflective of the Bujinkan and are mostly just the philosophies of Mr Hayes. I understand that (other than Sanchin) Mr Hayes made up the GoDai perspectives on fighting and that is not done in the Bujinkan. I have also heard that a lot of the spiritual aspects of the books are his interpetations and not the Bujinkans. Can anyone enlighten me on the matter?

It's simple enough: Go to Japan, or spend some time training with someone who does, and the differences will quickly become apparent -- in ways and to a depth that dialogue about it could never do.

I loved those books too -- they're what got me, along with so many others, into this in the first place. :)

The only hayes book I have that I can read repeatedly... and maybe its because its mostly a work of fiction... is "Wisdom from The Ninja Village of the Cold Moon"

I loved those books too -- they're what got me, along with so many others, into this in the first place. :) I am one of the many others... ;) I still have 2 or 3 of his books on my bookshelf, but I have MORE of Soke Hatsumi's and I no longer read Hayes' books, but that is my personal preference. Probably for a similar reason as to why I don't play video games anymore. ;)

I still read through "The Ninja And Their Secret Fighting Art" occasionally. It still cracks me up at times.

"What use could there be in leg attacks?"

:lool:

Probably for a similar reason as to why I don't play video games anymore. ;)

Heretic.

:P

Heretic.

:P
HAHAHAHA:) I have been called worse. ;) My son isn't very happy with me when it comes to playing video games. I try to play games with him from time to time and it just doesn't hold my attention for very long. Also, being a software developer has taken all the fun out of computer/video games.

Heretic.

:P

You rang? ;)

Go to Japan, or spend some time training with someone who does, and the differences will quickly become apparent -- I just have to say a quick little thing. OBVIOUSLY, there is not a better training method than training WITH Hatsumi sensei. BUT, not everyone can make the trip. its just not feasable for some. furthermore, you HAVE to go to hatsumi to get your 5th dan. now, you dont have to go to Brazil to get your black belt in Gracie Jiu Jitsu, so will this ever change?
just wondering.

thanks

I have the one where it is a bunch of shidoshi interviewing Hatsumi. its pretty good.


actually, I have like ALL of SKH's books. kinda sad.

personally, I like books about "ninjitsu" that are from outside sources. some chick qrote a book about "all the martial arts", and the part on Ninja fighting was good. Ninja fighting - an oxymoron in itself.

I have the one where it is a bunch of shidoshi interviewing Hatsumi. its pretty good.
I still can't figure out why people don't feel vaguely insulted by some of the things in there.

..., you HAVE to go to hatsumi to get your 5th dan. now, you dont have to go to Brazil to get your black belt in Gracie Jiu Jitsu, so will this ever change?
I hope not!

The SKH books were a good, fun, read! Were they representative
of the Bujinkan Arts? Somewhat, but clearly he missed details
or put in his own details! This is truly one of the problems I have
with all Budo Taijutsu books. I believe almost every book that
Hatsumi has ever done has been ghost written by someone or
translated by someone and clearly many of them have made
serious mistakes! Now don't get me wrong, almost all of them
are good books and clearly are worth reading! However, if one
is looking for facts in these books it has been shown time and
time again that you cannot take the written word on Budo Taijutsu
as the final word! This particularly peculiarity to Budo Taijutsu
has led many people around in circles looking for answers! Who
is responsible for this? I know of at least one occasion where an
author wrote a book and took it after the fact to Hatsumi for
preview! Mind you this book was already written, printed, etc!
Sensei had almost know impact on this book and yet it was sold
using his name and his arts name! Frustrating! That is how many
people feel trying to clarify things in Budo Taijutsu. We as students,
teachers, and most importantly authors and translators owe Soke
much better than this! All in all though, Stephen Hayes books were
a good read!

Brian R. VanCise

Kizaru,

I agree with you, I hope not as well!

Brian R. VanCise

Lets put things into context here. the argument is whether Stephen K hayes books are representative of the Bujinkan?

I just picked up a copy of "Ninjutsu, the art of the invisible warrior" and this was first published in 1984. And of course some were published even earlier than this.

So this is a bit like saying "Is a 1984 copy of the New York Times representative of 2005?"

The Bujinkan has changed much over the past twenty five to thirty years since An Shu Hayes first visited Japan. It was originally Togakure Ryu, Then it became Ninpo Taijutsu, then Budo Taijutsu and now I hear its going back to Ninjutsu. Even Hatsumi Sensei has stated "Does not the weather change every day?"

So when Stephen K Hayes wrote those books, being of course before the majority of us had heard about ninjutsu, travelled to Japan to train, or in some of our cases been born. When An Shu first went to Japan I was two years of age. I'm thirty two now with a career and two children of my own.

It of course cannot be denied the impact that An Shu's books had on the world of Ninjutsu. Many of us started off picking up those books from a martial arts store, and intrigued wanted to find out more.

There are of course other factors that made those books what they are. Firstly editors and publishers have a big say about what goes into a book and what does not. I have a friend who has written four books and he says its the publishers that control very much what he writes.

Secondly in the early days Hatsumi Sensei had forbidden any one to name the techniques that were being taught. So in Stephen K Hayes books you may see a kata like Koku, but it will not be called Koku, as Hatsumi Sensei had forbidden things like this to be named.

Thirdly these books were not written for Bujinkan people, as there were none , apart from a few Japanese, and a few Israelis at the time. Possibly twenty or so people. Can you imaging trying to get funding to write a book for twenty people. These books were written for a general audience of people interested in martial arts. That is those people who wander into a martial arts book store with a view of buying something to read. As such the Stephen K Hayes books started a boom in ninjutsu and made Hatsumi Sensei famous, and of course very rich.

In the past they used to kill the messenger. Well Stephen K Hayes was the messenger, and his books were the message. It inspired a lot of people. In fact at one point Stephen K Hayes books were outselling Bruce Lee books.

Metaphoricaaly then many people try to assasinate Stephen K Hayes, coming up with all kinds of silly rumours. But please Guys. The Hayes books may not be you cup of tea today, but credit where its due. After all without these books many of us would still be practicing another martial art, and Hatsumi Sensei would still be teaching a few Japanese in the back room of his bone setting clinic.

Gina Jordan
www.toshindo.co.uk (http://www.toshindo.co.uk/)

Lets put things into context here. the argument is whether Stephen K hayes books are representative of the Bujinkan?

I just picked up a copy of "Ninjutsu, the art of the invisible warrior" and this was first published in 1984. And of course some were published even earlier than this.

So this is a bit like saying "Is a 1984 copy of the New York Times representative of 2005?"

I am going to stop you right there because everything you wrote is based on this false premise.

You present the idea that Hayes' stuff was different in 1984 than what you see now because of changes in the art. But the fact remains that at no point in the entire history of the Bujinkan did Hatsumi talk about things like the need for a 'fire stance' and the like.

And the stuff he writes now is no more a representative of the art IMO.

I can accept the fact that the books he came out with in the early years reflected the fact that he had such a meager experience. I have looked back on some things from my early years and slapped myself on the head for being so ignorant. Thank Cuthulu I did not put them down in print for others to read like Hayes. But his stuff differs from what you see in Japan because it is different and always has been.

So if you want stuff that reflects what is going on in Japan, you need to look at sources other than Hayes and closer to the subject matter.

I am going to stop you right there because everything you wrote is based on this false premise.
How do you know Don. You were not there. When Stephen K Hayes arrived in Japan, this was just two years after Takamatsu sensei had died and Hatsumi Sensei was trying to come to terms with being a grandmaster and lots of things were being tried out. Today the Bujinkan in Japan is a lot more organised, but in the early days, much it seems was about testing out this art.


But the fact remains that at no point in the entire history of the Bujinkan did Hatsumi talk about things like the need for a 'fire stance' and the like.
Yes, interestingly Hatsumi mentions and talks at length about the Godai in Sanmyaku volume 1, number 3, yet people tend to think that An Shu Hayes made the name "Godai" up.

So maybe the Godai is not how it is taught in Japan today. That's fine. But can you imagine writing a book and featuring the Sanshin as a ninja method of combat. Well, somehow I don't think the books would have sold as well.

The idea of the Godai was so that eastern concepts of Ninjutsu could be taught to a western audience. This is the mark of a good teacher. To make understandable a concept to the student. I mean even today people don't fully understand the sanshin.

And over the years I have trained with more than one Bujinkan group that has used the Stephen K Hayes approach to the Godai to teach their students. And there are probably a few that still do.

And the stuff he writes now is no more a representative of the art IMO.So what has An Shu Hayes written recently?



But his stuff differs from what you see in Japan because it is different and always has been.

So if you want stuff that reflects what is going on in Japan, you need to look at sources other than Hayes and closer to the subject matter.
But we are not talking about how An Shu Hayes books represent what is happening in Japan now, and thank god they don't. As I stated these books were written 20 plus years ago when YOU or I were not there.

Finally. The question I believe was how the SKH books were representative of the Bujinkan. Yet somehow you have turned this round to what is happening in Japan. But surely the Bujinkan is a world wide organisation, and I bet there's not two dojos that teach the same thing.

In fact I would argue that it would be very difficult to say what exactly the Bujinkan training method is. So in that case how can anything be representative of the Bujinkan?

Gina Jordan
www.toshindo.co.uk (http://www.toshindo.co.uk/)

How do you know Don. You were not there.

Of course, neither were you.

So how can you try to say that the way things were done in Japan back then were different from what they are now? I have the advantage of talking with people who were there every week. :ultracool Their version of the way things ALWAYS WERE is very different from what Hayes presented and what you are trying to convince us.

As for the godai, the godai as presented and taught by Hayes is not the way it has ever been in Japan. Just because there is sui no kata does not mean that there is a 'Water style technique.'

Gina, I am going to stop you right there.

First, please do not tell Don what he knows or does not know because he was not there, then proceed to act as the authority on it when you were not. If you think about it, that makes you look silly and destroys your credibility.

Second. What is your Bujinkan experience, other than your aformentioned training with a few training groups, that you can speak with so much athority on it? Because many of us HAVE experience in in the Bujinkan AND with Mr. Hayes both in his early days teaching Toshindo, and back when he was still "under" Hatsumi.

I know that the "Hayes" crowd feels some bizzare need to legitimize him in the eyes of the Bujinkan people, which is plain silly. Your instructor Gary came on here with an identical party line... why??? We acknowlage Hayes ties to his training in Japan, we dont claim he is a fraud or somehow "lying" about his background... What we do claim is that his teachings are not "Better" than what the Bujinkan teaches... thats arrogance on the part of the Toshindo people on a grand scale. The humble student, in a handfull of years has outreached the lifetime of training by the master... Can it happen? Sure. did it in this case? Doubtful.

There are at least 2 members on this board that were student of Haeys in 2 seperate states who were witness to "AnShu" Hayes going to TKD schools and "Selling" them Toshindo blackbelts to help launch his "chain store" dojo's, and subsequently left. My instructor, also a former student of Hayes for a large number of years tells the same story. PEOPLE WHO WERE THERE. Thats your Genuis AnShu the Marketing Master for ya. I agree with your statement that His books opened the door for many of us... no one denies him that... although in my case his broad statements in those books almost PREVENTED me from seeking a Bujinkan teacher when I was rather disilluioned by the way training was going in his dojo because they were still holding onto the claim back then that Hayes was the ONLY legitimate western teacher, and his books (which the dojo REQUIRED you to buy and read as part of your rank) seemed to back that claim up. Sillyness.

My opinion? Hayes is a Talented Martial Artist, who saw the path paved with Greenbacks and followed it instead of continuing in the path of Budo.

All of this post was fluff. If so, then what's my point? Stop wasting your breath trying to change the opinion of people who have seen what he was and what he became... (ya know, people who were there when it happened, not people who "Bought" quest centers. Incedently there is one for sale here by me now...) stop trying to convince those of us who had MASTERS in our art with their ear to Hatsumi's lips tell us that Hatsumi never said "don't train with Hayes" Your opinion carries much less weight to us than theirs did, as I am sure ours does to you.

So...

So how can you try to say that the way things were done in Japan back then were different from what they are now? I have the advantage of talking with people who were there every week. :ultracool Their version of the way things ALWAYS WERE is very different from what Hayes presented and what you are trying to convince us.

Also a quote of yours from this site


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.

Oh so it has changed. In the early days training was more intense because there were fewer people. The Bujinkan has changed because there are more people in it. In the days when An Shu Hayes was training there were only a few other students and as you say Don the training was much more intense.

In fact I would go so far as to say that in the early days the training was about trying to get things to work, i.e try out the techniques, whereas today it is more about learning the kata.

Gina Jordan

I hope not! Yeah, I hope not either.

but I hope that people will stop believing in that "one cannot learn Taijutsu unless they go to Japan" mentality. if someone asks a question, the people who have the privelage of going to or being in japan say...."go to japan"


In fact I would go so far as to say that in the early days the training was about trying to get things to work, i.e try out the techniques, whereas today it is more about learning the kata.
I think you went tooo far......So. you are saying Hatsumi is teaching "worse" than he did 20 years ago? and your saying Hatsumi wants you to "learn the kata" rather have the technique work? is this the direction SKH has gone? Not according to his home study program.....~clears throat~ HAVE YOU TRAINED IN THE BUJINKAN!?!

HAVE YOU TRAINED IN THE BUJINKAN!?!Have you?

I'm sorry to post this but anyone that studies "JujItsu" and "Bujinkan stuff", should really watch how he makes regal statements.

None of us were there, which makes none of us qualified to speculate what happened. Everything we have heard has been hearsay and maybe some propaganda by others.

I recently heard from some that came back from Japan... re: Hayes Shihan. They asked Soke what was the issue with Hayes. All Soke said was... "if you want to learn from Hayes' taijutsu, learn from Hayes. If you want to learn from my taijutsu, learn from me."

I think in the early days SKH books were a representation of the Bujinkan because he was soley a Bujinkan practitioner.

Now... maybe not so much in the eyes of many.

FN

Oh so it has changed. In the early days training was more intense because there were fewer people. The Bujinkan has changed because there are more people in it.

In terms of size, yes. Of course, Hayes can't duplicate that type of training because of size either. And the training I got last Thursday was with just two of us long term students and my teacher. In that situation, the training does indeed tend to be a bit more hands on and intense. I have done things here that I would hesitate to do in the UK and America due to the different mindset and legal situation. Here, if you get injured in training, the chances of it going to court is low. Unless the teacher held you down and beat you, there is little chance of you winning a case like that in Japan.

Again, the stuff that you are talking about, 'wind techniques', Mikkyo religious exercises, etc never existed in the training in Japan. They were added by Hayes to the stuff he does. I know this because I listen to my teachers here in Japan and can't find any reference to them doing "fire stances" and the like in any Japanese source.

So, how the heck can you try to present it like Hayes was doing things just like they were being done in Japan at the time?

but I hope that people will stop believing in that "one cannot learn Taijutsu unless they go to Japan" mentality. if someone asks a question, the people who have the privelage of going to or being in japan say...."go to japan"

I think we need to have links to Japan and to always seek out better instruction. If you are a green belt, it is silly to think you have to go to Japan to get instruction from someone better than you in the art. Even low level black belts can show up to train with people at the nose bleed level for training.

But for those that reach a high level, the only person that they may think knows more than they are the people in Japan. Hatsumi in Japan will always know more than any of his students. Also, we have a lot of bad information floating around the Bujinkan due to the meager level of understanding the early American teachers had and we need to correct them by going to the source. So, going to him is the course for the higher ranks. And the green belt I talked about should be going to a teacher that shows his willingness to train under a teacher who knows more than him. And so on. At some point, someone in the chain should be going to Japan to learn from someone better than they.

And not just for one day and a photo op.

This thread is straying off topic, lets bring it back to Hayes books and thier representaion of the Bujinkan, before a mod comes along an smacks us in the head. (looks around for a mod... sees a mirror, and ducks)

Seriously.

There is much of value in that last post. However, one thing that I keep hearing over and over again are comments like:
"So this is a bit like saying "Is a 1984 copy of the New York Times representative of 2005?"
I think that is being a bit disengenous. One is a newspaper and news changes. How much does a martial art change? Hey lots of these arts have been around thousands of years. Let me pick up a judo book, or karate book, or aikido book. Have those arts really changed that much in twenty years. Nope. So what is all this---- it has changed so much in twenty years. Why?

And what about all that mental and spiritual stuff that Hayes wrote about? Is that ninjutsu or is that just Hayes?

So..if you can look past the godai (sp?) and spiritual stuff in Hayses books, are the physical techniques valid?

So..if you can look past the godai (sp?) and spiritual stuff in Hayses books, are the physical techniques valid?
My opinion? (and bear in mind I am a low ranking peon...)

Yes and No.

thanks?

;)

thanks?

;)
I think like many books and Videos... some things are presented wrong... or not completely enough to give a good feel for them.

The example from hayes books I would use is some of his Postures... they are... I wont say wrong... I would say... different... from how we learn them, and so are they effective? Maybe... dunno... So... from my Point of Veiw, yes and no. Ive seen things and gone, "No Way" and Ive seen things and gone "Hmmm"

So..if you can look past the godai (sp?) and spiritual stuff in Hayses books, are the physical techniques valid?

I know the Godai is Hayes' representation. But are those techniques he uses within the Godai Bujinkan? Does the spiritual stuff belong to the Bujinkan at all? Hayes represents this to be ninjutsu.

This post started out with the question are "SKH Books a representation of Bujinkan"

Now it did not say are "SKH Books a representation of Bujinkan in Japan"

The bujinkan is a world wide organisation and there is a broad spectrum of how the bujinkan arts are taught. Some instructors teach a very formal method of instruction and use forms like the sanshin, whereas others concentrate more on using pads and sparring to train their students.

Even if one takes some time to look at the various Bujinkan sites on the internet one will see a massive variation of teaching styles. There is even no standard grading sylabus, as although there is the Ten Chi Jin manual, there is still a lot of variation in the teaching.

For example the Van Donk site teaches Musha Dori at 6th Kyu, whereas the Pittsburg teaches it at 3rd Kyu, Yet the Lincoln (UK) dojo teaches it at 1st Kyu. In fact I can find very few Dojo that follow the Ten Chi Jin to the letter especially when it comes to the Jin level. In the copies of the Ten Chi Jin I have Jin is 3rd, 2nd, and 1st kyu level, yet very few are teaching the techniques of Setsu Yaku etc to kyu grades.

Now don't get me wrong, i'm not saying that there is anything wrong with this. Personally I think that its OK if its down to the individual instructor in how he wants to interpret the techniques of Hatsumi Sensei. In fact I believe thats what Hatsumi Sensei wants.

But with such a different style of teaching from Dojo to Dojo, how can any book be representative of the Bujinkan.

What I also find kind of strange is that if one looks at some of these Bujinkan Groups, you could apply the same logic that has been applied to the Stephen K Hayes martial arts.

In that one could say " This group is practicing the Bujinkan techniques different to and in a different format to how I was taught it therefore it must be another style that this instructor has invented"

Now Don keeps talking about the Godai, and its already been agreed that possibly this Godai concept of teaching physical techniques was something that An Shu Hayes used as a method to teach his students and is not part of the Bujinkan.

However I also came across the following sites, Bujinkan Athens at
www.bda-ninpo.com/html/index_eng.htm (http://www.bda-ninpo.com/html/index_eng.htm)
teaching the Go Dai. In fact are not those pictures of Stephen K Hayes taking up those kamae. The same is too of course of Glen Morris' Ninpo Bujinkan site. In fact he mentions some strange things I can't find on any other site.

I will state again that the Bujinkan has changed. No Don i'm not just talking about Japan, as that was not the question, although it is my belief that this has changed too very much since 1975 and I appreciate that you have spoken to the Japanese who apparantly have told you different, but I guess I like yourself will choose who to believe.

Originally Posted by Shogun
but I hope that people will stop believing in that "one cannot learn Taijutsu unless they go to Japan" mentality. if someone asks a question, the people who have the privelage of going to or being in japan say...."go to japan"

I actually agree with what Shogun has written here. This quote is used as a cop out by those people who have gone to Japan, and probably learnt very little. There are some excellent instructors in the west, and I would suggest that in some instances more can be learnt from these instructors than flying off to Japan.

Gina Jordan

This post started out with the question are "SKH Books a representation of Bujinkan"

Now it did not say are "SKH Books a representation of Bujinkan in Japan"

It seems silly to me to say that when talking about the Bujinkan we should ignore the head of the art in Japan.

And in that respect, the books by Hayes are very different from what is going on and has always been going on in Japan.

And some dojos do have quite a bit of leeway in the way they teach things. And yes, some of them are still following the flawed lessons of the early Hayes stuff.

So that is why we should be looking to Hatsumi to correct these many mistakes and bring us back to what he wants.

After all, if we just do whatever we want, there is not really a need to put "Bujinkan" on our dojo. The Bujinkan is Hatsumi and we all just try to follow his lessons if we are good students.

All Hayes books have one thing in common.
There's very little talk of breaking people's balance in them.

Have you?um, yeah. the amount? not much. seriously for about two years, and seminars for the last year.

and anyone who has:
"Ninjutsu, somewhere between Kyu & Shihan "

in theirs is clearly lost.

I have been told personally by certain Bujinkan Shihan, that some of the stuff SKH is teaching is invalid and has NO TIE to a source.

as for the thread: SKH Books a representation of Bujinkan?

my answer. No.

I'm sorry to post this but anyone that studies "JujItsu" and "Bujinkan stuff", should really watch how he makes regal statements Plus, I used to study skh's stuff. BTW, its Gracie Jiu Jitsu

I am slowly coming to realize that SKH does not teach Bujinkan ninjutsu. Since this is his own concoction maybe it is good that he changed the name to something else. And it seems that the answer to my books is..... for the most part, what is in Mr Hayes' book is not Bujinkan ninjutsu.

Too bad, I actually liked some of the stuff he wrote.

So..at the time he wrote them (the books), the physical techniques were not what he was taught when he was in Japan?

So..at the time he wrote them (the books), the physical techniques were not what he was taught when he was in Japan?

Correct.

So..at the time he wrote them (the books), the physical techniques were not what he was taught when he was in Japan?

Let me try to give a more detailed explination.

You can see that the Kamae that he does looks like what you see Hatsumi and others do for the most part. The difference is that begginers in Japan are told to drop their hips more to build up strength and develop better habits. If you train with lowered hips, then when the fecal matter hits the fan, you will be able to move better even though you won't get into as deep a kamae as you were in training.

So, if you look at the pictures and think of them as what you would do if you were attacked, they are not bad. But if you are thinking of them as what a begginer should be doing while training in the dojo, they are wrong.

When you get good movement skills and hit old age, you no longer have to get that deep. But the teachers here will tell you to start out a lot deeper than you see Hatsumi moving now. I use this example because I recently translated a comment from a Japanese shihan to a class to the effect that if you want to move like Hatsumi does now, you had better start getting your hips lower while you are still young and inexperienced. There are other differences like this as well, but I think you get my point.

It is this subtle type of thing that marks the difference in the way Hayes presented the information and the way things are done in Japan. And as Gina has pointed out, because of the influence by Hayes, there are a lot of people in the Bujinkan moving with their hips higher up than the Japanese shihan here would advise at their level of training.

OK. I was just wondering about the photos of Hayes performing techniques in the books against opponents. Beyond depth of stance and the fire, water etc. approach. Are those techniques way out from what the Booj guys do? I too was a big Hayes fan in the 80's and have the books. Now im curious...

Let me try to give a more detailed explination.

You can see that the Kamae that he does looks like what you see Hatsumi and others do for the most part. The difference is that begginers in Japan are told to drop their hips more to build up strength and develop better habits. If you train with lowered hips, then when the fecal matter hits the fan, you will be able to move better even though you won't get into as deep a kamae as you were in training.
I think a good example, if you want to see some of the differences in this... Look back at Hatsumi's book from 1971, "Stick Fighting" and then look at the Hayes books from early in his career in the 80's and you will see dramatic differences in the stances. If memory serves correctly this also would hold true of the Togakure-Ryu video from the early-mid eighties, compared to the SKH books.

I think a good example, if you want to see some of the differences in this... Look back at Hatsumi's book from 1971, "Stick Fighting" and then look at the Hayes books from early in his career in the 80's and you will see dramatic differences in the stances. If memory serves correctly this also would hold true of the Togakure-Ryu video from the early-mid eighties, compared to the SKH books.

Hey, I have just been recently reading the Stickfighting book. I am really enjoying it. I was on a website the other day and they mentioned that "Ninjutsu, History and Tradition" is no longer in print and that "Stickfighting" is soon to follow. So don't get rid of them!!!
:whip:

The stickfighting book is a good one! I recently picked up the newer Advanced STick Fighting book but haven't had a chance to really explore it yet.

I think a good example, if you want to see some of the differences in this... Look back at Hatsumi's book from 1971, "Stick Fighting" and then look at the Hayes books from early in his career in the 80's and you will see dramatic differences in the stances. If memory serves correctly this also would hold true of the Togakure-Ryu video from the early-mid eighties, compared to the SKH books.

This makes me wonder-- where did SKH get his stuff for all of this books? I could've sworn that Soke made SKH a shihan in Bujinkan ninjutsu. You would think that the stuff in the book would be Bujinkan ninjutsu.

This makes me wonder-- where did SKH get his stuff for all of this books? I could've sworn that Soke made SKH a shihan in Bujinkan ninjutsu. You would think that the stuff in the book would be Bujinkan ninjutsu. I dont doubt that it is Hayes interpretation of what he was taught... I think Don gave a reasonable explaination why the stances were done the way hayes did them...

The difference is that begginers in Japan are told to drop their hips more to build up strength and develop better habits. If you train with lowered hips,

Yes, this may not come across to well in the books. I know when I discussed this with An Shu Hayes, he said that there are all kinds of problems with photographing martial arts moves, and simply that some of the leg movements that appeared in some of the photographs looked really strange.

Now the early books may not be a representation of the Bujinkan. But what we have to remember is that An Shu Hayes was training before the Bujinkan came about. Remember I said that An Shu Hayes was training in Japan only two years after Takamatsu Sensei had died. Things were very different then. An Shu Hayes has told me this, as has Tanemura, and I believe Doron Navon mentioned it once. Now of course the techniques were the same, but training was Oh so much more intense. Today I think that form is concentrated on much more, but in the early days it was about "How can we make this stuff really work" or "Does it work".

An Shu Hayes once told me that training was never fun. It was brutal and only later did he realise that the reason he had been allowed to train was that the Japanese wanted a big guy to try the techniques out on.

Now if we take "Ninjutsu the art of the Invisible Warrior" which was published in 1984 and was probably written at least a year before that, I believe we have a good example of a brilliant Ninjutsu book written for beginners.

It starts of with an introduction and introduces Hatsumi Sensei, the nine schools, and the Bujinkan. The book then goes on to look at cultural and training values and on page 9 there is a picture of training in Hatsumis Dojo. Can you imagine trying to do deep leg movements in that small space. A bit different to today.

The book then moves onto bowing and then to Taiso (Body Conditioning). Then there is a an intro to Taijutsu. Wow look at some of those wide deep postures. Then of course some basic striking drills are shown, followed by Kaiten. The book then goes into techniques and although not named we have Musha Dori, Omote and Ura Gyaku, Ganseki Nage, and of course some of the striking. In fact almost all of the Kihon Happo.

The book then follows with some weapons drills and finally some firearms methods and roots of the spiritual traditions.

In my view nothing but a great book outlining what Hatsumi Sensei was probably teaching at the time.

In my view the Mystic Arts which was published in 1985 is equally a good book. Again Kihon Happo is shown together with some basic sword cuts and even some technique from the Gyokko Ryu. And in both books not a mention of the Godai.

Even in the Ohara series the Godai is only really mentioned in the first two volumes. Volume three, four and five contain other material, that relates very much to Ninjutsu.

Yes I appreciate that the books may not be everyones cup of tea as they are written in a completely different style to Hatsumi Sensei. No two people are the same.

Since 1985 things have moved on enormously in the Bujinkan. There are now thousands of people training and probably thousands holding black belt. It may be time for much more to be published on Ninjutsu like the individual techniques and for Hatsumi Sensei to speak on a much deeper level. But one has to take into consideration that An Shu Hayes books were written for a general audience who were becoming interested in and/or just starting out on the path of warriorship.

One of my other hobbies (hopefully soon to be a business) is magic. Now when I first started I picked up a Marvins Magic Trick set and a book called "Mark Wilsons complete course in magic". These two items kept me entertained and learning for about a year. Now six years latter I am reading material by Ed Marlo about advanced card sleights, and I almost never pick up Mark Wilson course anymore, and certainy the Marvin Magic set was given away years ago. But that does not mean that they are bad things. They did what they intended to do and that was to set me out on the road to magic and teach me the basics.

No book can fully be representative of the Bujinkan. Even Hatsumi Sensei has said that a picture cannot capture the essence of Ninjutsu. Does this mean that books or DVDs etc should not be published. Of course not. These things are tools to learning, and like all tools each does a task. Granted the Stephen K Hayes books may not include in the pages all the secret techniques of Ninjutsu, but they do the job.

Let face it guys. In the world of Ashida Kim, Sid Campbell, James Loriega and all those other frauds, the Stephen K hayes books were a light in the darkness. And before anyone says "Well if it wasn't for the Stephen K Hayes books we wouldn't have all those bogus people practicing ninjutsu". Well the answer is probably neither would you.

And just to return to the beginning quote by Don Roley. This year in the UK An Shu was sure making a lot of reference to those low movements when he taught Kukishinden Ryu taijutsu and sword.

Gary Arthur
www.toshindo.co.uk (http://www.toshindo.co.uk)

One of my other hobbies (hopefully soon to be a business) is magic. Now when I first started I picked up a Marvins Magic Trick set and a book called "Mark Wilsons complete course in magic". These two items kept me entertained and learning for about a year. Now six years latter I am reading material by Ed Marlo about advanced card sleights, and I almost never pick up Mark Wilson course anymore, and certainy the Marvin Magic set was given away years ago. But that does not mean that they are bad things. They did what they intended to do and that was to set me out on the road to magic and teach me the basics.

Gary Arthur
www.toshindo.co.uk (http://www.toshindo.co.uk)

I'm a neutral in this affair; however, I had to respond to tell you that, to an outside observer, you have made a darn fine post.

Certainly, Steven Hayes was a trailblazer. Without him, it is unlikely that Dr. Hatsumi's arts would now be practiced in the West - at least to the extent that they now are.

I think the Magic analogy is great. My father is a semi-pro magician and he's told me that many fine magicians got their start with Mark Wilson's course. I got my start as a landscape painter by watching Bob Ross on public television (the "Happy Painter"). Sure, I've outgrown him now, but I respect his contribution.

On the topic at hand, I think Haye's work is most representative of HIS art, with some (to what degree, I lack the expertise to tell) overlap into Bujinkan territory.

Welcome to MT! I hope you stay because I think you have a lot to contribute here.

Gary Arthur
www.toshindo.co.uk (http://www.toshindo.co.uk)

Gary, why are you using more than one account on martialtalk and saying that you are someone else?

Up to now, we thought we were dealing with one of your students. But you just sighned your name while posting as Gina Jordan.

As for your points, a lot of flaws in them. Bujinkan was around before Hayes, not vice versa.

The "kihon happo" you say is taught in the books are not quite the same as they should be IMO. And there is no san shin, nor talk of things like unbalancing your opponent. They look fairly close to what you might see in Japan, but they miss the mark in terms of accuracy.

I better leave this be and let you explain why you signed up as Gina Jordan instead of using your real name.

ooops!

Gary, why are you using more than one account on martialtalk and saying that you are someone else?

Fair Point. Gina is my partner and lives with me. We often view these posts together, because thats the exciting life we lead. I tried getting on this site after I changed my address, but for some reason the name Gary Arthur stopped me being able to register.

As for your points, a lot of flaws in them. Bujinkan was around before Hayes, not vice versa

Then maybe Don you can give us a date that the Bujinkan first began i.e the date Hatsumi sensei walked into the Dojo and pronounced what he was going to do was call his organisation the Bujinkan.

The "kihon happo" you say is taught in the books are not quite the same as they should be IMO.
Don you and I know that there is no set way of practicing text book Kihon Happo.


And there is no san shin, nor talk of things like unbalancing your opponent. They look fairly close to what you might see in Japan, but they miss the mark in terms of accuracy.

No, No San Shin. Maybe An Shu Hayes thought that it was misleading for a book of this kind or maybe the publishers took it out. Who knows.

Hatsumi's new book on the Ninja also doesnt include Sanshin, In fact as far as I can remeber the San Shin is'nt shown in any of his books. but you would'nt say his books were not representative of the Bujinkan. Even the first video Hatsumi brought out in the early 80s didn't include the the Sanshin, but again he would not be accused of not representing the Bujinkan. Theres only so much stuff you can get in a book.

We have to bear in mind that none of Stephen K Hayes books are called
"Bujinkan Martial Arts, a complete guide"

I have already stated before that no book can be representative of the Bujinkan, but what i think you are trying to do Don is to totally discredit Stephen K Hayes' book.

Credit where its due Don.

Oh and one final thing, as I intend to end this post here. If you can tell me what is or what is not in Stephen K Hayes books, obviously means that
1/ You have read them.
2/ That you still own them.

Now i'm not saying you liked them, but unless you bought them as a job lot, something must have inspired you to buy the next one, and the next one.

Anyway would be really interested when, that is the exact date the Bujinkan martial arts began. Maybe i'll start a new post.

Gary Arthur/Gina Jordan
www.toshindo.co.uk

Today I think that form is concentrated on much more, but in the early days it was about "How can we make this stuff really work" or "Does it work".

LIIIIIE. I have met only one person within the Bujinkan openly claiming not wanting or needing to practice taijutsu as a functional combat system.

It starts of with an introduction and introduces Hatsumi Sensei, the nine schools, and the Bujinkan.

That introduction BTW, for those who haven't read it, is a textbook example of the completely false theory that the ninja were exclusively oppressed farmers.

The book then goes on to look at cultural and training values

To me it looks like an attempt to disavow the responsibility to a tradition one has chosen to be a part of.

The book then follows with some weapons drills and finally some firearms methods and roots of the spiritual traditions.

A spiritual tradition completely separate from the Bujinkan teachings, no less.

In my view nothing but a great book outlining what Hatsumi Sensei was probably teaching at the time.

And you base this assumption on what, praytell?

Even in the Ohara series the Godai is only really mentioned in the first two volumes. Volume three, four and five contain other material, that relates very much to Ninjutsu.

Not true. Number four was the first book I purchased and there's an entire chapter dedicated to it in there.

Oh and one final thing, as I intend to end this post here.

I am very tempted to respond, but as I quoted earlier above I feel I have said all i need to say. The post was about whether the SKH books are representative of the Bujinkan and I have already stated that I do not think any book is totally representative of the Bujinkan. How can any book represent 900 years of history covering the teachings of nine schools.

Now whether you like the books or not is down to you. One cannot take away the fact that the books by An Shu Hayes got a lot of people on the path to the Bujinkan Arts. Everything else is personal opinion.

Gary Arthur
www.toshindo.co.uk

It's certainly true that Mr. Hayes' books generated a lot of interest in the art of ninjutsu. Sadly, they enabled frauds to claim they were teaching "ninjutsu" though I don't think it's fair to blame him for that. I was glad to get those books in the 80s and know a little bit about the system; I hadn't realized that there was such disagreement about whether or not the books provided a good representation of the actual system.

I hadn't realized that there was such disagreement about whether or not the books provided a good representation of the actual system.

Yes. Many people think that they are representative of the art. I once had someone ask my teacher what kind of elemental feeling they were supposed to have while doing the technique he had us doing. It was an amusing experience.

The way Hayes presented history, religion of the ninja and the five feelings are the most incorrect and yet the most prevelent myths out there today.

There is an article where Hayes gives his side of the story. I am sure that some people will point out that it sounds like an excuse and a justification rather than an honest recounting of the truth. Please, let us just put that aside for this conversation.

http://www.quest-l.com/collection/godai.php

It seems to me that he is confused about the origin of the Kihon Happo. I think Nimravus has pointed out that Oguri had a conversation with Takamatsu about the Kihon Happo, and Takamatsu died a decade before Hayes says the Kihon Happo was created. I also have never heard of it being created when Hayes said it was. I think that he is thinking more of the Tenchijin no Maki which fills the description better and I know was created basically because training had grown farther than Hatsumi had intended overseas. The Tenchijin is supposed to be a curriculum of techniques that are to be stressed in the Bujinkan, especially at the beggining level.

But there is a somewhat distrubing passage in the above article.

However, at the time of the establishment of the Bujinkan Dojo Kihon Happo, I had already been teaching the Go-dai no Kata for several years. Rather than change all the material that by then had appeared in several books and that made up my students’ curriculum, I simply adopted the “new” kihon happo into my training plan and incorporated the 8 techniques as part of my curriculum, which I still do to this day. Our instructors teach the kihon happo along with the go-dai.

Boil it down and you see that Hayes is saying that despite the fact that the Japanese wanted the art taught in a certain way, Hayes decided that he had too much invested in his own way of teaching to listen much. There was no Go-dai as he taught it being taught in Japan, and rather than drop it- he continued it.

So you can see that from a very early time, Hayes had decided to go his own way rather than try to follow the way things were done in Japan as closely as possible.

Gary, why are you using more than one account on martialtalk and saying that you are someone else?

Up to now, we thought we were dealing with one of your students. But you just sighned your name while posting as Gina Jordan.


I didn't catch on to that. Now I'm more than a little upset that I responded to a poster who was not who I thought they were. I thought that I was dealing with a sincere student of Stephen Hayes, but now I don't know WHO or what I was resonding to. This is very disappointing.

This might be somewhat off-topic, but...

One of the problems I have with Stephen Hayes' books happens to be his portrayal of Tantric Buddhism. In Japan, the principles espoused evolved into the rokudai but they have their origins in earlier formulations found within Tantric sects in India and Tibet.

My feeling is that Hayes makes use of a very "Americanized" and "pop-culture" interpretation of the Tantric chakra system --- simply describing them as different "feelings" or "moods" an individual can have across a horizontal spectrum of intention. This, of course, is not at all how the concepts are actually explained in their native systems.

Just my perspective, mind you.

Laterz.

Plus, I used to study skh's stuff. BTW, its Gracie Jiu JitsuUnderstand, I was just pointing out that your regal comments from someone that is actually cross training their taijutsu with Gracie Jiu Jitsu is totally bogus!

Take a look at what is it that you want out of your martial arts and stick to one... unless you plan to make a "Gracie Ty jItsu"! :eek:

I'm not saying Gracie stuff doesn't work for them, but a dedicated practitioner should realize that something like "Kukan" is not exposed in Gracie stuff. And something like tying yourself up around an attacker and not caring out your positiong and balance is is not exposed in taijustu.

IMO I think that Shihan Haye's work (unless you were there) can only be speculation. No one can tell because they weren't there. Fortunatley this doesn't affect my training in anyway, but does give me a point of reference from where we all started. Most of us anyway.

FN

Take a look at what is it that you want out of your martial arts and stick to one... unless you plan to make a "Gracie Ty jItsu"! :eek:

I've never actually practiced BJJ on a class basis, only occasionally seminar-wise. However, should the right opportunity arise I'm quite willing to do it again, for one reason and one reason only - it's fun as hell.

I'm not saying Gracie stuff doesn't work for them, but a dedicated practitioner should realize that something like "Kukan" is not exposed in Gracie stuff.

Well, not in the Bujinkan sense of the word, but similar principles do exist...extend your arms too much with someone mounting you and you're asking for an armbar, same thing with a kimura if you keep your elbows far out from your body when someone's side mounted on you.

I've never actually practiced BJJ on a class basis, only occasionally seminar-wise. However, should the right opportunity arise I'm quite willing to do it again, for one reason and one reason only - it's fun as hell.



Well, not in the Bujinkan sense of the word, but similar principles do exist...extend your arms too much with someone mounting you and you're asking for an armbar, same thing with a kimura if you keep your elbows far out from your body when someone's side mounted on you.

Sounds to me like High School Wrestling! I personally think the moment you feel like cross training is going to help you... you completly missed the point of what your teacher is trying to teach you. Almost the same as if you were trying to learn Japanese and then go and learn a few words in Russian and think that you can use them speaking to a Japanese person. Doesn't mix and should never. Pick what you want and dedicate your life to it... if not... well I won't go there.

I think a lot of people practice taijutsu and don't study it. And thats the difference. They are trying to learn a few techniques so it doesn't bother them to go out and find a new set somewhere else. Too bad.

FN

We're getting slightly off-topic here, but...there's just one thing I'd like to ask.

If Hatsumi sensei had never put out the "What Is Martial Arts/Budo Wa Nan Desu Ka" tape, would anyone ever have guessed that we're allowed to use shrimping to get rid of someone mounting us within the "boundaries" of Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu?

I personally think the moment you feel like cross training is going to help you... you completly missed the point of what your teacher is trying to teach you.
. . .
I think a lot of people practice taijutsu and don't study it. And thats the difference. They are trying to learn a few techniques so it doesn't bother them to go out and find a new set somewhere else. Too bad.

FN

I believe I understand your opinion, but don't support it and consider it wildly off topic.

You might find a thread actually dedicated to your topic, and restart the conversation there. Here's are two you might try, one in the traditional forum and one in the general Ninjutsu forum:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27337
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25671

IMO I think that Shihan Haye's work (unless you were there) can only be speculation.

According to this fallacious logic, I can't know the details of the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor because I wasn't born yet.

Sorry, not buyin' it.

Laterz.

Understand, I was just pointing out that your regal comments from someone that is actually cross training their taijutsu with Gracie Jiu Jitsu is totally bogus!

Take a look at what is it that you want out of your martial arts and stick to one... unless you plan to make a "Gracie Ty jItsu"! :eek:

I'm not saying Gracie stuff doesn't work for them, but a dedicated practitioner should realize that something like "Kukan" is not exposed in Gracie stuff. And something like tying yourself up around an attacker and not caring out your positiong and balance is is not exposed in taijustu.
sounds to me like you don't know a damn thing about either art so I'm gonna drop it.
If you wanna roll and see how much its like high school wrestling, drop me a line and I'll set something up, otherwise don't trash talk to people online who actually can and will fight .

-mod Note-

Thread Locked Pending Admin Review

Carry on.

Okay, let me shed some light on all of this. One thing I would like to say is. I see why Sensei doesn't like the internet. This is just a bunch of grabage. It has no bearing on training. But if you want to know exactly what Sensei has told me here it is:

"I am the only one in the Bujinkan. The Bujinkan is me." This is a direct quote from Sensei to me. We were in his livingroom one day and I was asking about using the Bujinkan name for a website. So to answer everyones rants. NO Steve's books do not represent the Bujinkan. No one's do. Only Sensei's represents the Bujinkan. Period. Anyone and everyone else's are only that persons limited understanding and perspective of what Sensei does.

As to my ablility to say this. I have lived within a twenty minute walk from Sensei's house for the past 14 years. I train with him, have been to private parties, and even sang on stage with him. I have also studied traditional Japanese dance with Mrs. Hatsumi for over 11 years.

So to answer everyones rants. NO Steve's books do not represent the Bujinkan. No one's do. Only Sensei's represents the Bujinkan.

That is fairly obvious. But I think the question is whether the stuff you see in Hayes' books about the the five feelings while doing techniques are valid or not. I have not heard of a 'fire technique' from Hatsumi, so the answer is no. But I have heard him talk and teach the kihon happo- so that is more representative of the Bujinkan than a book that does not teach them as such.

I have seen people ask about what kind of feeling they should have while doing a technique. The teacher was a bit put off by the question. So I think that letting people know that the way things are taught in Japan is very different from what you see in the stuff by Hayes is a valuable service.

Mike,

It is good to have you over here! I hope that
everything is well with you? I think you are spot
on when saying that the Bujinkan is Sensei! It
is good to have your input! Anyone interested
in Shihan Pearce or Legare can visit their
website at www.shinkentaijutsu.com (http://www.shinkentaijutsu.com) ! They
offer a wealth of information regarding Budo
Taijutsu.

Brian R. VanCise

That is fairly obvious. But I think the question is whether the stuff you see in Hayes' books about the the five feelings while doing techniques are valid or not. I have not heard of a 'fire technique' from Hatsumi, so the answer is no. But I have heard him talk and teach the kihon happo- so that is more representative of the Bujinkan than a book that does not teach them as such.

I have seen people ask about what kind of feeling they should have while doing a technique. The teacher was a bit put off by the question. So I think that letting people know that the way things are taught in Japan is very different from what you see in the stuff by Hayes is a valuable service.
You are correct Don. In all the years I have been here Sensei has never talked about the feelings of Earth, Wind, and what ever. That is part of Mikkyo training though. Once when asked about this Sensei said "If you want to study that go to a Mikkyo priest and study that. I teach Budo." The only feeling that Sensei talks about with us is the Kukan. Kukan losely translated is Void, but that is not acurate either. We have been trying for years to translate that properly.

Sensei has never told me when the Kihon came about. He talks about it as if it has always been around. I would say that what Steve has done has value. Would I say it is acurate, no. Only because I am here with Sensei and even he says what he was teaching five years ago is no longer acurate. Does the art change, yes it is always changing. Do the basics change, very little. What has changed is the understanding of the basics not the movements. Does Steve show those movements acurately, not to the level I have been shown. That now brings it back to my first post. In that Sensei is the only one that represents the Bujinkan. Sensei even yells at and corrects the other Shihan on their basics. Because he sees openings and weak points in their movement.

Thank you Brian, that is very kind. All is going well, I have been very busy so that is good. I hope all is well with you.

I would say that what Steve has done has value. Would I say it is acurate, no. Only because I am here with Sensei and even he says what he was teaching five years ago is no longer acurate. Does the art change, yes it is always changing. Do the basics change, very little. What has changed is the understanding of the basics not the movements. Does Steve show those movements acurately, not to the level I have been shown.


I don't really have anything to add to the above. I just wanted to point to it and urge others to read it again. It is a pretty damn good description of how I feel as well. Hayes' stuff is better than 99 percent of the stuff out there. I just can see that he is going in his own direction while some of us are trying to learn what the heck Hatsumi is doing and follow it as close as possible.

Does anyone know if it's true that Hatsumi and Akimoto Fumio were the only students of Takamatsu who were actually taught kihon happo?

I have seen people ask about what kind of feeling they should have while doing a technique. The teacher was a bit put off by the question.
Are you speaking of feeling as in emotion? I was under the impression that there really shouldn't be any of that when doing a technique. emotion creates barriers.

Are you speaking of feeling as in emotion? I was under the impression that there really shouldn't be any of that when doing a technique. emotion creates barriers.Feeling is usually referred to when we train as a feel of a certain school. Not an emotional feeling but like a physical feeling.

:ninja:
FN

Feeling is usually referred to when we train as a feel of a certain school. Not an emotional feeling but like a physical feeling.
ok. I wasn't sure if thats what was meant. Thats what I thought but It kinda sounded like he was talking about "feelings" rather than "feeling"

Are you speaking of feeling as in emotion? I was under the impression that there really shouldn't be any of that when doing a technique. emotion creates barriers.

No, "feeling" as in "which elemental/godai feeling should be involved?"

oh ho ho....so relating back to Godai....NO wonder Hatsumi was dumfounded.