What is "American Ninjutsu"

[Flatlander]

====================
Moderator Note.
Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). Thank you.

-Dan Bowman-
-MT Moderator-

====================

 

[Satt]

Never told you to do anything.

I didn't name you specifically. Sorry if you thought I was talking to you. No, someone keeps sending me bad rep points and telling me on there to change things. I just figured if they were important enough, they would be able to do it themselves. The points are silly anyway, that's not what ticks me off. It's when someone demands things they have no place to demand. Sorry Flatlander for being rude though. I will just stop posting on this thread. I am obviously not welcome.

 

[Flatlander]

Satt, if you feel that someone is abusing the rep point system, then please PM a Supermod and they will commence an investigation. Rep point abuse is against the rules, and not very cool either.

Please, continue posting wherever you choose. You are free to post where you like, provided you follow Martial Talk posting policies.

:asian:

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I looked at who had 'dinged' Satt.
here were more than 1 person commenting on the sig bit.
Said sig bit is not a violation of our signature rules.
I see it in a jesting manner.

My only problem is the misspelling of "Always". :wavey:

 

[Shizen Shigoku]

I have no qualms about fessing up for that, and this is certainly not an appology.

Kaith Rustaz: "I looked at who had 'dinged' Satt. There were more than 1 person commenting on the sig bit. Said sig bit is not a violation of our signature rules. I see it in a jesting manner."

My comment was not about the signature line, "Good rep points ALLWAYS welcome!!!" I too think it's cute, and have no problem with it. I really like "MORE COWBELL!!!!!!!" too - a great SNL bit!

Maybe I should send you some good rep' because I like your sense of humor, that should balance things out a bit.

However, I did 'ding' you, Satt, for the following:

"I meant no disrespect to ANYONE. I was trying to be funny. Ouch, I guess I crashed and burned on that one eh??? The link I provided was just purely info for the curious to his point of view. Sorry if I offended anyone. I allways try not to."

It was for, what I saw to be, assuming that Nimravus was offended because of what he responded with. It seemed overly defensive and accusatory. That is what I disagreed with.

The comment about, "Oh, by the way, please only give me 'good rep points'. ..." was more of an after-thought. I thought it an immature attempt at trying to shield yourself from criticism.

If you want people to agree with you and give "good rep points" then write agreeable posts. That's how the system is supposed to work.

Writing the following, however, "Alright jerk. ... Stop sending me bad reps ... ... Who the hell are you anyway??? ... Stop being a prick." is not an example of writing agreeable posts - especially when followed by a tag-line that says "Good rep points ALLWAYS welcome!!!"

"I will just stop posting on this thread. I am obviously not welcome."

You are certainly welcome here (probably more so than I am, 'cause I'm just here to stir up trouble ), and I don't think anyone is making demands of you - at least I'm not - rather I am offering suggestions to better help you take advantage of the system that is in place for your benefit.

If a moderator informs me that what I did is considered abuse of the reputation point system, then I will definitely give you some good rep' because I like your sense of humor - that will balance it out. However, now I feel I have to ding you again because of the "Alright jerk ... Who the hell are you anyway??? ... Stop being a prick." incident.

So in the end, nothing will change unless you decide to earn a good reputation instead of trying to beg for one.

I appologize for participating in the thread drift and taking things off-topic.

 

[Shizen Shigoku]

I really didn't want to waste my time discussing this (http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=311453#post311453),

but I am still confused about the following:

Rick Tew: "A[font='Times New Roman', Times, Serif, serif] paper trail will not help you to survive a life or death situation. Just because you are born or bred as part of a lineage does not mean you will succeed either. "[/font]

[font='Times New Roman', Times, Serif, serif]Shizen: "Irrelevant. Discussing effectiveness and authenticity of lineage in the same sentence is meaningless, they are two completely separate issues."[/font]

Enson: "your opinion of course"

Explain to me how 'effectiveness' and 'authenticity' being separate issues is just my opinion.

I am not disagreeing with what Mr. Tew said. What he said is completely true. A paper trail or lineage or being part of an authentic tradition will not help you survive anything or succeed at anything. What he said actually reinforces the fact (or is it just 'my opinion' ) that a style's effectiveness and its claims of historic lineage have little to do with eachother.

A style can have the most authentic, most verifiable historic lineage that goes back for eons, and still not be effective in combat.

A style may have no authenticity, no lineage, be made up on the spot, and even be making fraudulent claims about itself and be the most kick-*** fighting style the world has ever known.

However, both of the above are true vice-versa. That is why it is irrelevant to discuss such things - it does not further Mr. Tew's case that his style is better because it has no verifiable history (at least that's what the purpose of the article seems to be about).

The only thing I can see that links authenticity (read: verifiable historic lineage that spans many years) and effectiveness is that something that is authentic is more likely to be effective than something that is not because it has been around longer, more people have studied it, it has had more opportunities to evolve and improve, and so on. But then again, said traditional style may just be a dead art with little or no effectiveness, so again - it's irrelevant.

If that's just my opinion, then at least it's reasonable; however, if it is just an opinion, it is unable to be disproved. If you would like to cede that it is a fact, then at least you'll have the opportunity to argue against it.

Would anyone else like to agree or disagree with the following: "effectiveness and authenticity of lineage . . . are two completely separate issues."

 

[Flatlander]

Would anyone else like to agree or disagree with the following: "effectiveness and authenticity of lineage . . . are two completely separate issues."

Because that particular discussion is not going to specifically address the definition of "what is American ninjutsu?", I'll ask that you begin a new thread to persue it. :asian:

 

[Shizen Shigoku]

Flatlander: "Because that particular discussion is not going to specifically address the definition of "what is American ninjutsu?", I'll ask that you begin a new thread to persue it."

Ah, good point. Perhaps I'll do that. But I don't know yet what forum to bring that up in. It is general enough to belong in the general section, but I would most like to see it discussed from a modern vs. traditional ninjutsu viewpoint.

There are these threads already in existance:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17421 - Benefits / Drawbacks of Modern

and

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17877 - Traditional / Neo

One is in the American Ninjutsu section, the other in the general (Japanese) Ninjutsu section.

Would either of those be appropriate to bring it up in . . .

Nevermind, the Traditional / Neo thread has been locked.

Would the Benefits / Drawbacks thread be appropriate, or should I really just start a new thread? And if so, what forum does it belong in?

Thank you and any other moderator that could help me with this.


p.s. as for my question in my above post (#166), maybe Enson could just send me a PM to help me understand his viewpoint. If no one else is interested, no need to clutter up valuable forum space.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Said sig bit is not a violation of our signature rules.

Bob,

The only guideline he maybe in violation is the length, meaning the number of lines. I think he has changed it since your comment, yet teh current one is as of this post is over the 6 line recommendation.

Other wise, I would recommend you guys check out the Bob and Tom Show at BobandTom.com and they have a whole skit, show about Cowbells, and even recommended listenting.

 

[Flatlander]

Perhaps I'll do that. But I don't know yet what forum to bring that up in. It is general enough to belong in the general section, but I would most like to see it discussed from a modern vs. traditional ninjutsu viewpoint.

Start up a new thread in this forum, and we'll see what develops. :asian:

 

[Shizen Shigoku]

Flatlander: "Start up a new thread in this forum, and we'll see what develops. :asian:"

Okie-dokie!

Here it is: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19408

:asian:

 

[sojobow]

It was Stephen Hayes's text, not Hatsumi sensei's!!

Sure it was (even though the name "Stephen Hayes" is not mentioned). We see Hatsumi's pictures, Hatsumi speaking in the "first person," Hatsumi speaking of "his inheritance." I do realized that Hatsumi has a limited use of the English Language and do understand the concept of translations. But, you may disregard the entire Book if you like. It only proves that very few actually training in Hatsumi's schools actually know what it is they train in. Example: in another Forum, I asked the simple question: "What is Ninjutsu." Out of over 50 replies, NONE were even similar to any other reply. Usually, the Boogs entered at least 3 answers until they finally gave up and just said "that's why I always say that we don't train in Ninjutsu, we train in Taijutsu."

Look at the Charters of all these sections and subsections. Show us where there is a definition of Ninjutsu anywhere in this entire Forum. But they want to force their definition of Modern on this section. The overwhelming number of modern schools use the term "Ninjitsu" and not "Ninjutsu" but if you wish we call it Modern Ninjutsu, so be it. Blaming not knowing what the definition of your artform on Stephen Hayes is ok with me. Do as you wish. Me student. No teacher. Hayes is wrong. I am wrong. Hatsumi is wrong. It's all good. Just trying to help Kaith with his quest.

As an aside: Here is what SKH says about Ninjutsu as taught by Hatsumi. Interpret as you wish but, to me, it confirms Hatsumi's statement and not any reinterpretation by anyone posting in this thread.

"From An-shu Stephen K. Hayes:
There was heavy emphasis on what 16th Century aggressors would throw at a defender. These attacks were based on the ways people moved, the way they dressed, and the environmental conditions of those days. In the classical training of those days, we did not go into anything like defending against boxer jabs, wrestler takedowns, kick boxer round kicks, and small group verbal-hassle-and-test surprise muggings - those were not things that were threats in the Japan of the 1500s."

 

[sojobow]

Yep. And I think that if Sojobow were really interested in the truth, he would ask other people if they thought that the passage meant what he says it says (i.e. "Ninjutsu is the study of how the Ninja accomplished their accomplishments"), or if it is instead what I say it says (i.e. what they did was called ninjutsu). I am sure that the vast majority of people will go with what I say and not him.

Since the "vast majority of people" are Bujinkans, they will go with whatever you say. Doesn't take rocket science to figure out the outcome of your one-sided poll. So, we'll end up with "your truth" and not "the truth." I'll stick with Hatsumi and SKH and let the Bujinkan Budo's stick with Roley. You guys are no fun at all. I'll bet you guys think Ninjas used the Katana too.

 

[Grey Eyed Bandit]

It. Was. Stephen Hayes. Who Wrote. That. Book!!!:rpo:

It's called ghostwriting, for crying out loud!!

 

[Don Roley]

Since the "vast majority of people" are Bujinkans, they will go with whatever you say. Doesn't take rocket science to figure out the outcome of your one-sided poll. So, we'll end up with "your truth" and not "the truth."

I said ask people. Not just Bujinkan people. But if you don't want to ask, well I gues you can just continue on with your quest and I will reference this portion whenever the subject comes up again.

And yes, ninja used katana.
:-offtopic

 

[sojobow]

It. Was. Stephen Hayes. Who Wrote. That. Book!!!:rpo:
It's called ghostwriting, for crying out loud!!

Hatsumi is very much alive. Says he will not leave the Island or send otheer Japanese teachers outside the Islands, but he's very much alive and need no ghostwriter. To be even more correct, the Secrets Book was written by Stephen Hayes, Masaaki Hatsumi (if incorrect, post the page as my own came from Amazon.com). Point in discussion is not who wrote the book, but the quote defining Ninjutsu by Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi. Is the definition directly attributable to Masaaki Hatsumi or not? If the definition is a direct quote from Hatsumi, end of discussion. If the definition is not directly attributable to Hatsumi (which I believe is the wish of most of the repliers here), present to us a definition attributable to Hatsumi Sensei.

Why would anyone wish Kaith the responsibility of defining their artform. Doesn't seem to fair to me since we have all these brilliant Japanese minds on this Forum . One would think that a very simple way to install these definitions would be:

Ninjutsu: Directly from a quote by Masaaki Hatsumi;
Ninjitsu/Modern: Direct quote from a Founder of a Modern System/Style. Our opinion of the Founder is not relevant. If he/she has a style/system in practice today, it's Founder's definition is what matters;
Kali: Direct quote defining the art from a Founder of Kali.

The Founder or students of Kali should not be harnessed with the burden of defining another's Martial Science/Art especially if the Founders of these (other) systems/styles have Books, Articles, Websites that contain their definition of what they do. (poor english but I think you understand).

So, if you don't agree with the quoted definition of Ninjutsu that I have presented, find another attributable to Masaaki Hatsumi and post it for Kaith's and our benefit.

Lighten up and have fun. No need to cry out loud

 

[Moko]

Not what you say it is Snowjob.

By your definition, if a Firefighter wears his boots, suspenders and pants and swings his hose around calling it Ninjutsu, then we have to accept it as ninjutsu.

What an amazingly stupid and acrimonious concept.

We can also make this a Russian firefighter, or a Nigerian and it is still a valid form of Ninjutsu. It would not seem to matter to the definition if these Sokeys gagged on wasabi, What they say goes for you, Snowjob.

Which if fine if you have low standards. In light of who or what you train with this is consistant.

As for a definiton of what is ninjustu and what is schlong-jutsu, please leave that up to the adults.

Say Hi to HamandCheese for me. I may be heading into Seattle shortly, got an address for him?

Robert

 

[tshadowchaser]

Moderator Note.
Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). Thank you.
Sheldon Bedell
-MT Moderator-

 

[Don Roley]

Hatsumi is very much alive. Says he will not leave the Island or send otheer Japanese teachers outside the Islands, but he's very much alive and need no ghostwriter.

I would agree. But Stephen Hayes seemed to think that in order to make what he wrote more understandable to an American audience, he would have to add in material for them. Some things that are understood to a Japanese audience would not be by an American one. So he took some things from various books Hatsumi wrote in Japanese and translated some of it, as well as added in a lot of other stuff that cannot be found in anything Hatsumi has written in Japanese.

And unless you have the original Japanese books and can read them, you are not in a position to tell which was originaly written by Hatsumi and what was added in by Hayes with his level of understanding at the time. Rather frustrating for many of us as we try to tell people that nothing that Hatsumi has written in Japanese supports certain sections like that about ninjas supposably being persecuted minorities, them not having access to curved swords, etc.

 

[Kizaru]

I'll bet you guys think Ninjas used the Katana too.

OF COURSE NOT!!!!

Everyone knows that Suzuki Motors only started manufacturing the Katana motorcycle a few years ago!!! There's no way the ninja of feudal Japan, Moscow, Tahiti or Dagobah could possibly have gotten their hands on one before then. We must look sooo gullible if we look like we're under that impression! REALLY! Motorcycles in feudal Japan!?!

Well anyway, it's a good thing we have members here that can straighten us out and let us know how things really are. :asian: