Gary, Sometimes I wonder where you get your facts from. Donn Draegar never said anything negative about Hatsumi ever. He said he doubted the lineage of Togakure Ryu, that is not saying anything negative about Hatsumi. Draegar several times said and wrote that he thought Hatsumi was an outstanding martial artist and physically talented. It was Draegar and friends that referred the James Bond filmakers to Hatsumi and it was Draegar that sent his friend Andy Adams to Hatsumi to first get him in Black Belt. How many more of your misfacts am I going to have to clean up? I still have your email that you wrote me two years ago about Kukishinden Ryu "yarijutsu" and Ishitani being descended from ninja.
Hi ChrisMoon Two years is a long time you know. I look back at stuff I myself wrote two, three even ten years ago and cringe. How little I knew back then! In two years I'll probably be saying the same thing about the stuff I write now. It's the nature of things. In two years, opinions can change, knowledge and understanding can broaden and deepen.
I think that if you look at what Gary originally wrote, he was saying that Draeger was supposably an early student of Soke and yet Bujinkan folks now have nothing good to say about him. Neither of which seems to be the case- which I don't think would surprise you. Just part of the on going effort by him to support Steve at the expense of others.
Grimjack posted Sorry probably did not make myself clear. What i am saying here is that the Bujinkan people hold Draeger, and people like Terry Dobson up to be the first westerners training yet these people i.e Dobson and the others seem not to say much that is positive either about the training or Dr Hatsumi. e.g. or Sorry you misread it. My fault Gary Arthur
HEY! Long time no see everyone... I think this answers the air-raid question (kinda): First, this quote: Retrieved June 4th 2006 from : http://www.shinjin.co.jp/kuki/hyoho/mystic_e.htm Paragraph 6. Then we find this on the next page... Retrieved June 4th, 2006 from :http://www.shinjin.co.jp/kuki/hyoho/mystic2_e.htm Paragraph 11. This raises an interesting poser. Where are the original scrolls? Why are the ones in the archive, re-written by Takamatsu sensei (Like George mentions) and not originals? The way the webpage is translated is a little unclear and it deserves more research. -Russ
Sorry for the wait.... I’ve given up waiting for one particular piece of information, but seeing how Connovar recently started up with his attacks again, I’ve decided to just make do with the information that I have. Fasten your seatbelts, folks. This is going to be one LOOOOONG post. When considering the validity of a given ryuha, there are four things that one must consider. First, can the instructor making claims as Soke (or other teaching authority, such as Menkyo Kaiden holder) be tied to the art? Second, is the instructor named as Soke or Menkyo Kaiden holder of that particular art? Third, can the art itself be traced back historically in some sort of verifiable way? And fourth, can the actual documents or other artifacts that the individual possesses be historically verified in some form? I would like to walk thru each of these four points with respect to Masaaki Hatsumi with the information that I, bencole, have at hand. This information is NOT complete but it CAN BE verified if you actually care enough to locate the sources yourself. The translations of the Japanese are mine (including the titles of books and chapters). 1. Can the instructor making claims as Soke (or other teaching authority, such as Menkyo Kaiden holder) be tied to the art? This first question is one that most frauds (Frank Dux, Bryce Dallas, Ashida Kim, etc.) cannot answer. They claim to have studied an art but they cannot provide any proof that they even trained in it in the first place. Don Roley has written significantly on this issue and so I will not bore you with my regurgitation of Don’s rants on the subject. Don hangs out at Budoseek and Martial Talk. Do a search of his posts on these various frauds.... As for Hatsumi-sensei, it is very clear from both photographic and filmographic evidence that Hatsumi-sensei did, in fact, train with Toshitsugu Takamatsu. Takamatsu-sensei CLAIMED to be the Soke of several Ryuha, some of which were passed to Hatsumi-sensei. (More later on whether these claims can be verified.) 2. Is the instructor named as Soke or Menkyo Kaiden holder of that particular art? Anyone who has been to Hatsumi-sensei’s home can easily view several of the Menkyo that bear his name as the designee and Takamatsu’s name as the designator. Photographs of these menkyo are floating around in various publications or in private collections of people who have been astonished with the clutter in Hatsumi’s home. I don’t think that anyone will dispute these first two questions and answers because they require almost no work to verify personally. Now, we turn to the third question.... 3. Can the art itself be traced back historically in some sort of verifiable way? When trying to verify something historically, you will run into all of the issues that any historian will encounter. Many times, this requires piecing things together from various sources. Sources can be documents (such as the books I will mention below) or even locations (such as shrines, where members of the Kuki family can be engaged). All of the following documents can be purchased or found in a Japanese library. Your best bet would be the National Library, because they have just about everything. Kakutogi no Rekishi (“The History of Fighting Arts”), p.508-517 This section of this book describes a periodical published in 1843 that lists twenty famous Ryuha in particular, including Takenouchi Ryu, Araki Ryu, Youshin Ryu, and others. The book then states, “Even though they are not mentioned in this particular periodical, there are several schools that are well-known for being ‘effective arts’ (jitsuryoku ha).” Among the schools listed in this section are Gyokko Ryu, Gyokushin Ryu, Gikan Ryu, Kukishin Ryu, and Takagi Ryu (see below), and Asayama Ichiden Ryu (which in not part of the Bujinkan’s nine schools but was studied by Hatsumi-sensei via Ueno-sensei). So this is a good start for a few of the schools. Let’s turn to another tome: Bugei Ryuha Daijiten (“The Encyclopedia of Martial Schools”). As one would expect by the name, this is probably the most exhaustive list of martial arts schools in Japan. There were versions published in 1969 and 1978 (at least). What’s particularly interesting about this book is that it lists the full lineage of an art. So you can turn to the page for Gyokko Ryu and look at the last entry and see who was the recognized Soke at the time of publication. For Gyokko Ryu, we can see “Hatsumi Yoshiaki (Chiba-ken Noda-shi)” listed after Takamatsu Toshitsugu, Toda Shinryuken, and others all the way up to the beginning of the Ryuha. This book has entries bearing the name of Hatsumi-sensei below Takamatsu-sensei for the following school entries: Gyokko Ryu, Koto Ryu, Shinden Fudo Ryu, Kukishinden Happohiken Jutsu, Kumogakure Ryu, Gikan Ryu and Takagi Yoshin Ryu. (Please note that if you look at the entry for Takagi Yoshin Ryu, you are referenced to the listing for Takagi Ryu (which was also listed in Kakutogi no Rekishi as I described earlier). Hatsumi-sensei is one of six individuals listed below Takamatsu-sensei in this listing (because Takamatsu-sensei split his scrolls among several students, including Akimoto and Hanaoka, among others)). Please note that there are numerous other Ryuha (not Bujinkan Ryuha) that are mentioned in the Bugei Ryuha Daijiten, whose lineage members prior to Takamatsu-sensei are listed in the history of these other schools. Among those schools, see: Izumo Ryu, Kishu Ryu, and Bokuden Ryu. So here is the score based on researcher publications: Gyokko Ryu – KKTNR, BGRDJT Gikan Ryu – KKTNR, BGRDJT Kukishin Ryu – KKTNR, BGRDJT Takagi Yoshin Ryu – KKTNR, BGRDJT Shinden Fudo Ryu – BGRDJT Kumogakure Ryu – BGRDJT Gyokushin Ryu – KKTNR Koto Ryu – BGRDJT Togakure Ryu – BGRDJT So with just two books, we have been able to verify that the Bujinkan Ryuha were at least recognized sufficiently by two independent third-party researchers to include these schools in their books on Japanese martial arts, and that their publishers believed enough in the verity of this information to include the Ryuha as entries in their encyclopedia. While imperfect, it’s certainly not a bad start. And it certainly provides sufficient evidence that differentiates the claims of Hatsumi-sensei FAR, FAR AWAY from the claims made by Bryce Dallas and Ashida Kim. Given this, Connovar’s chiding that “So you think it is irrelevant that practioners of an unathenticated fighting system attack the authenticity of another fighting system” is nothing more than sour grapes and ignorant sniping, in my personal opinion. So at this point, we have Yoshiaki Hatsumi training with his teacher, Toshitsugu Takamatsu. Takamatsu is the recognized authority from such famous schools as Kukishin Ryu (recognized even by the Kuki family themselves) and Gyokko Ryu. Takamatsu teaches Hatsumi various things, and provides certifications that name Hatsumi as the guy in charge of these ryuha, and Hatsumi receives lots of stuff from his teacher. While Connovar may not be, I personally am not surprised that Hatsumi-sensei did not rush off to carbon date these documents and check to see if his teacher was lying. Call me a bit old fashioned, but is there really a need to do so? In Connovar’s opinion, yes. Because “otherwise, how would you know that your teacher, this Takamatsu guy, didn’t just make up this stuff?”” Fair enough. I guess there is always a chance that Takamatsu-sensei did make up some of the stuff…. Yet an important question to ask would be: If he did construct false schools, complete with documentation and a history of characters, why would he do such a thing?!? First, Takamatsu was already the undeniable heir to some very famous schools. Why would he risk his reputation (as the Soke of these other arts) by “claiming to be a ninja” when the average Japanese would think he would be as whackie as some guy in the U.S. claiming to be a cowboy from the 1830s? As a Soke, one’s primary job is to protect the integrity of the schools one has been entrusted. If one starts making up fake schools, and trying to pass them off as real schools, then one runs the very real risk of endangering the reputation of the legitimate schools. The incentives point us AWAY from the idea that Takamatsu would make fraudulent schools. But what about other incentives? People will do just about anything for the right price, right? Well, money and fame do not appear to be valid incentives either. Takamatsu lived a simple life, and ended up an ordained priest. Moreover, when he died, his neighbors were astonished to discover that he was such a renowned martial artist. Does that sound like a money-seeking, publicity-seeking fraud to you? I personally cannot think of any logical reason to presume that Takamatsu would create false schools. Perhaps Connovar will come up with one.... But let’s move to the fourth question, which is one that Connovar insists is the key to his claim against the Bujinkan, even though I believe I have highlighted three other VERY important (and arguably MORE important) facets of establishing “legitimacy.” Earlier in this thread, Connovar asked: “Have any of the scrolls been documented as authentic other than on the word of Hatumi (i.e external validation from outside reputable specialists)?” It is important to note that now we are talking about actual physical ARTIFACTS (i.e. the scrolls), rather than the traditions/history of the Ryuha (which HAVE BEEN DOCUMENTED in the previously mentioned materials, as well as several other sources that I will not discuss here because this already has taken me about five hours to write). 4. Can the actual documents that the individual possesses be historically verified in some form? Let me first start by saying that, in general, it is not "common" for people to submit their scrolls for scientific dating or examination unless there is a purpose in doing so, such as for joining a particular organization. To do so "just to check," would be akin to saying, “I think my teacher lied to me,” which conflicts with the teacher-student trust that should be expected between a grandmaster and his named heir. It would be the same as a woman who has her engagement ring checked out, just to see if the guy really loves her. That’s a bit crass for most people (perhaps not Connovar ). As I mentioned earlier, given Takamatsu-sensei’s unimpeachable status in two very important Ryuha (Kukishin Ryu and Gyokko Ryu), it actually is UNINTUITIVE to think to have the actual artifacts that Takamatsu-sensei gave him verified. That being said, the Bujinkan as a whole *HAS* been recognized by the Zen Nippon Todo Renmei (All Japan Sword Federation). Duncan Mitchell was present in Japan during the months that the Bujinkan was under review, which included checks into the background and history of the Ryuha. Duncan commented on this on E-budo a couple of years ago, but I think it was lost with the server crash. Perhaps someone has a copy somewhere. If you are interested, you should look around or contact Duncan. Does that mean that each and every school was verified by this organization? I dunno. But it does provide SOME evidence (as with everything I have cited earlier) that the schools that were investigated (whichever they were) were NOT illegitimate in nature. As for historical verification, there are other ways to do this without actually looking at the artifacts themselves. For example, another researcher, Koyama Ryutaro, discovered that Daisuke Nishina (one of the names listed in the lineage of Togakure Ryu) actually EXISTED in history. That’s encouraging! Hatsumi-sensei is given a list of names that could be all made up by his teacher, yet a third-party researcher uncovers the fact that one of the names on that list was actually a REAL HUMAN BEING! That’s pretty cool, and again, provides SOME additional evidence that what Takamatsu-sensei says he was teaching to Hatsumi-sensei was NOT all made up. Hatsumi-sensei has absolutely no problem in letting researchers view the densho, provided they view them in his presence. He’s not going to let someone he does not know take them home to pore over. I’d have similar limitations if I were in his shoes as well. Certainly, no one wants to see a “Kunii Zen’ya” of Kashima Shin Ryu, who evidently left some of his densho in a taxi cab in 1965 (Source: ISBN: 0-8248-1879-2). In the past, I have made the offer (to such researchers as Dr. Karl Friday, the author of the Kashima Shin Ryu book mentioned above) to act as intermediary in trying to get access to the scrolls for research purposes. These researchers would examine characteristics of the densho, such as the writing style, to determine whether they appear authentic. No one has taken me up on the offer because they simply are not interested. As I said before, only people who are interested in assessing a particular thing will actually go through the trouble to do so. I’ve certainly been more than kind in addressing the sour grapes of Connovar, when he himself has been unwilling to do research on the subject and instead lobs grenades from afar. I’d like to wrap up by answering the other two questions that Connovar put to me earlier in this email. I dunno. But it is important to remember that not all historical schools necessarily had "official scrolls." Some arts are transmitted via densho. Other arts are transmitted via oral transmission (a.k.a. Kuden). Applying the litmus test of one to the other is simply inappropriate. Also note that as with any human endeavor, the impact of politics clearly played a role in determining why certain Ryuha survived till today and others did not. Many of the Ryuha that have the oldest densho-based transmission, for example Katori Shinto Ryu, received sponsorship by powerful political or religious leaders in historical Japan. Does that make them any "better" than those who did not curry favor with certain leaders? Nope. Just different. I dunno. But any Soke is free to re-write or alter the scrolls however he sees fit, including rearranging the techniques, replacing techniques with other "better" techniques, or removing/adding techniques that the Soke feels better captures the essence of the tradition. The Soke is charged with ensuring that the Ryuha survives, and this may entail adding a hand here or there. From my understanding, some of the Kuki documents had been lost; NOT Takamatsu-sensei’s documents. He replaced the Kuki documents at the request of the Kuki family, and not solely from memory. I base this on conversations with people who have conversed with members of the Kuki family about Takamatsu-sensei. All together, I hope this post was helpful. -ben
Very helpful indeed, Ben -- thanks. Brad Ellin, what do you think of the idea of duplicating this post and making the duplicate a locked "sticky" at the top of the forum?
2nded: great post Ben. It is good having information like this around. If no one has a substantial disagreement with what is written above - making it a sticky is a great idea.
Bencole, thank you for the reply. I appreciate your research. So I think we can say that current facts support Takamatsu and Hatsumi as legitimate heirs of the system. While the documentation is not perfect, most documentations has simliar issue and I think that question can be layed to rest. For me I still have some questions as to the accuracy of the scrolls only because it isnt clear if the scrolls that we copied were before or after they destroyed. Obvioulsy a scroll copied from the original by referencing to it is much better than from memory. However it doesnt appear that can be clarified. But thats ok. Its better than nothing. There are some people that claim Takamatus added some chinese systems to his teachings and to their question I would have no answer either way. So in essence I think this a good gathering of info. I think it would also be good kept as a sticky. So in essence we can say we can have reasonable confidence that the materials being taught are legitimate japanese samurai and Ninja arts. I thank you for your diligence Now as to the question of whether the training methods are legitimate ...........we will just have to argue that another day, but heck thats what these forums are for. Thanks again!!
Good to see you act like a gentleman rather than a prepubecent about this Con. As for the accuracy of the scrolls, you have to realize that this man (takamatsu sensei) had extensive training in these arts. At the moment I could probably write down most, if not all, of the techniques in certain ryu ha.... I could also write, and be pretty accurate with, the history of ninpo and some stories etc of people before me. I am just a lowly Genbukan student. I can easily assume that Takamatsu could recreate a scroll that he had mastered and studied for a while AT LEAST semi-accurately. Just my opinion though.
Good article. One question. Why isn't Hatsumi recongize as the lineage holder for Gyokko Ryu, Koto Ryu or Shinden Fudo Ryu from the Ko Ryu Federation?
Just to straighten one thing out - There is no koryu federation. There are the Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai (Society for the promotion of Japanese classical martial arts) which is the oldest and there is the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai (Association for Japanese classical martial arts). The Shinkokai promote koryu budo by holding public demonstrations every few months, at venues like Riverside Sports Centre, Asakusa in April & Meiji Jingu, near Harajuku in November. The Kyokai only hold one major demonstration a year at the Nihon Budokan in Tokyo, every February. Membership of a ryuha to one of these associations is rather stringent, however, the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai has the strictest membership guidelines for koryu entering into the association. To become a member, either as a ryu or as an individual, it is necessary to provide documentation of the individual's lineage, the ryu and, sometimes, a number of other matters. Both groups are governed by a board of directors, comprised of people generally recognized to be "senior" exponents and the membership committee Usually when documentation is researched, the oldest document is required for carbon 14 dating (Just a sliver of fabric, not the entire document!) to certify it's authenticity. (The usual rumour going about cyberspace is that sometime in the late 1960's/early 1970's, Mr. Hatsumi applied and was rejected, since Takamatsu sensei had reproduced most of the densho. Another version is that he didn't want the densho to be defaced by scientists for the carbon 14 tests, so he withdrew his application. Rumours are rumours though, you can never learn the truth unless you hear it from the horses mouth. That being Mr. Hatsumi himself & the members of the Kyokai who interviewed him.) Here's where it gets complicated - not all "legitimate" ryu have joined one of these organizations, nor do all "legitimate" members of a constituent ryu belong to them. Some don't want to join or be associated with "old enemies" (Some fuedal rivalries are still apparent with some ryuha), some can't be bothered with the paperwork, and in other cases it's just due to the kyokai or shinkokai determining that the person is not suitable for membership yet (e.g. if the applicant has been involved in some unsavoury activities, like organized crime, gambling, or it could be due to just plain old rivalry.) A number of rather good quality koryu are not members of either organizations. Most of the time, it's just down the headmasters' choice. Hope this helps.
Both Napoleon and Hitler saw the folly of fighting a war on two separate fronts. That’s why I always find interesting the debates on these forums which lurch from questioning the Bujinkan’s old fashioned training methods and arguing that we have to update to modern MMA styles to then argue that we aren’t “koryu” enough. Stories on the internet tend to get a life of their own. It seems the best source for urban legends. The Bujinkan is neither a member of the Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai or the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai. The only response I have heard as to why from anyone in a reasonably official position is “We are not a member because we don’t need to be”. It is “rumoured” that Hatsumi-sensei once applied for or inquired about applying for membership to one of these organisations. Maybe. But no-one has asked Hatsumi-sensei about it (to my knowledge) and no-one has shown anything from either of these organisations to confirm anything. So the nature of the inquiry / application and if it even ever occurred are still just internet rumour. Obviously we probably won’t ever be a member because Hatsumi-sensei doesn’t seem interested in associations (unless they approach him and do all the work) but mainly because we don’t fit in to a definition of having “no significant change since the Meiji Restoration”. The Koryu vs Gendai argument is pointless for us because we don’t need labels for our Budo.
