Don:
I am going to respond before one of the more excitable members of the arts you mention do and explain the differences.
Here's the thing: What, exactly, is the difference between a lie and a legend? How many generations pass before a lie turns into a charming story?
I am not the only Bujinkan member I know of that say we train under Hatsumi because we see nothing that indicates he is being completely honest about what he claims. At the same time, many of us are quite vocal about how much of our history should be treated as legend and not as fact. Mistakes happen and errors slip in over time.
This is a privilege you have because Toshitsugu Takamatsu is dead. If he was alive, talking about being Puyi's bodyguard and a shugenja magically curing him of tapeworms using kujikiri, what would you say to that?
I am well aware that in many cultures, the line between fact and allegory is not as sharply defined. I realize, for example, that Hatsumi may be talking in a combination of metaphysics and real occult belief (with a bit od deception tossed in for spice) when he claims that the tiny spirit of a samurai hangs out by his left ear. This is different from claims of fact, like:
* Toshistugu Takamatsu was the bodyguard of Puyi during the occupation of Manchuria.
* Doshin So is the 21st inheritor of a Shaolin lineage art whose Japanese name is Gwaimonken.
* Ed Parker studied and taught the use of sounds to activate physiological equivalents of chakras, but never wrote it down.
* Bruce Calkins studied Toad Style CMA and Iron Shirt Qigong.
Take a look at the story of Aikido's founder, Morihei Ueshiba, doged bullets that was recently mentioned. Stanly Pranin did a search a few years back and could not find anything traceable to Ueshiba about the story or to when he was still alive. The story seems to have been started after he died by a starry- eyed student and not Ueshiba. But now it is part of his legend.
If this was one wierd story in an otherwise reasonable common account of Ueshiba's life -- but it isn't. There are numerous allegations of Morihei Ueshiba saying fantastical things. The firing range incident is one thing; claims of precognition and the ability to teleport/vanish and reappear are others.
If you go to Hatsumi and ask him about what he claims, he will be totally open to the questions and answer them for you. He can produce not only certificates and scrolls from his teacher, but point you to interviews his teacher did with a newspaper where the fact that Hatsumi was his succesor was mentioned as well as third parties who witnessed the relationship they had.
Compare this with Bruce. Can you honestly point me to one claim he has made that has been completly and honestly proven?
I wasn't referring to the issue of Hatsumi's sokeship. I'm referring to the popular history of the Takamatsuden and Toshistugu Takamatsu himself (though allegations that Hatsumi seems to have subtly transformed from a reenactor to a alleged lineal descendant are worth noting, and 34th, when the Katori Shinto Ryu has fewer heads?). I'd say the primary difference is that Calkins doesn't have the education and eccentric panache to get away with nearly as much, and that (and this is an important point for later) the Takamatsuden have produced some exceptional martial artists and Takamatsu's skills have been recognized by other great martial artists.
I want to believe that there is a mistake and if he would only take the time to prove his own training history that we will see that he is being honest. But since he has not done that with any of his claims, I can't bring myself to help him correct his many mistakes for fear that I may be helping a fraud to make his story sound better.
Honestly? I have a feeling that Bruce Calkins would not be able to convince anyone of even true facts about his life over the internet. Calkins appears to have serious problems communicating via text, to the point where I seriously suspect (and this is as somebody who is an adult educator) that he is dysgraphic or dyslexic.
Let us look at his claims of training under a ninjutsu teacher. Hatsumi has a DVD of his teacher and him that I could show you. Bruce claims to have trained under a teacher named David Frost and can't seem to show that he even existed. Worse, he says that he saw a picture of Frost and Hatsumi training together when he was a live- in student of Frost in 1976. But since the number of non- Japanese training with Hatsumi prior to 1980 can be counted on one hand it was easy to determine that no one by that name had trained with him. So how can he explain his story of seeing a picture that could not have existed?
Easy. Frost lied to him. Do you really think it's hard for people to back their deception with misappropriated photographs? In fact, the most notable example of this fraud I can think of is Terry Dukes aka Nagaboshi Tomio. Dukes appropriated old pictures of other karateka and used a combination of misattribution, clever cropping and plaigiarism to make it look like he trained in Okinawa and demonstrated for the Dalai Lama.
I want to believe that there is a mistake and that Bruce's memory is failing him or any other mistake. But with just that on the table I can't risk the chance that I would be helping a man who made up his story of training in ninjutsu to better deceive his students.
Well, given your options are:
* Bruce trained with someone who taught fake ninjutsu
* Bruce lied about learning ninjutsu
. . . you can't actually help him. He's either a dupe or a liar. No available option legitimizes his training within the Bujinkan.
And it is not just that. His experiences with the USMC... his iron shirt training.... his bodyguard experiences... his personal injuries... all these and more are claims he made without prompting and then refused to try and prove.
The marine thing interests me because it's easy for a third party to actually check his service record (and there are, I believe, folks who do so as a public service to weed out fake vets). Plus, Calkins has so much trouble expressing himself that this could be his using fancy language to indicate that he trained informally with other marines when he was a marine (if he was).
As for iron shirt, "toad" style, etc. This is either an deliberate abuse or a misunderstanding of how CMA skills ought to be recorded. I currently study Mizongluohanquan (aka Lost Track Monk Style). My school includes the Mantis form Bung Bo and Tam Toi. This does not mean I can say I know Praying Mantis and an entire style of Islamic CMA, but if I listed them the wrong way, it might look like that. Lots of schools will teach one or part of one 8 Immortals form, 1 Monkey form or a bit of Iron Shirt Qigong, but this is not the same as dedicated training in Drunken style. Bruce is not the first guy who'd have extrapolated his knowledge of a form or exercise into a claim that he practices an entire system.
We would like to help Bruce to overcome the many mistakes and ignorance he has about the martial arts. But I think it only fair that he show the proper respect to those that are more skilled and knowledgeable than him and prove his sincerity and honesty by backing up everything he has found the time to mention here.
And this is where I don't agree at all. Nobody really has the right to demand face based on lineage. First of all, if you don't belong to the same lineage, what gives you the right? We aren't all one big, chummy hierarchy.
What *is* a lineage good for? A lineage is a way of finding out how likely it is anybody is likely to be any good. As I've said before, the majority of my training is an an art with no reliable lineage at all, but I respect lineages with proven practitioners. I've trained with Bujinkan BB J. Courtland Elliot, and despite my feelings that some of the Buj history is a tad dodgy, he is a top-notch martial artist. I have the utmost respect for Mas Tsuruoka's Chitoryu line because I've sparred with a few of their yudansha. And I'm proud to be a student of one of Robert Walther's students, because he's amazing.
But I do believe that this situation is in some way a parody of the unfortunate facts of lineage in many martial arts, and it should inspire people to ask themselves if their lineage concerns trumpt the realities of training. Asking for respect based on lineage? Meh. Respect comes from good martial arts; a lineage lends the credit earned by good martial artists to others and helps signify whether or not the cultural practice is legitimate -- that is *all* it does. It does not make you an inherently better martial artist. Ask for face on the basis of lineage alone -- especially from someone outside your own -- is not especially appropriate.
I see your point, though. Calkins reminds me of Simon Olaf. Olaf was a talented, self-taught martial artist who was, for a time, associated with Ed Parker. Then the lineage bug but him and he turned himself into a fraudulent "kung fu master." The pity is that according to former students, he was actually pretty good before he went crazy (and the kenpo guys he left behind are actually pretty good, though many of the "Temple Kung Fu" guys aren't.
I can see Calkins losing it Simon Olaf style, but I think this is more a *function* of lineage worship (and the need for validation outside of pure skill) than disrespect for it. I think he's an extreme example of very common problems.
As for the man, he looks like a kenpo guy with a fairly severe untreated learning disability who, through a combination of being duped, rose-coloured glasses and a touch of deception, has convinced himself that his "kenpo with extras" ought to be a style of its own.
