I know someone who can read what it says. Who also told me that the reason a fairly well-known 15th dan hates my guts is the fact that I remind him of the truth.
I don't get the second reference but I'm not suprised someone can read it. I didn't suggest no-one will be able to read it just that many people who have seen it won't be able to. regardless though whether you can read it or not... you cannot simply look at something and judge it's age. If it was that easy we wouldn't need dating labs.
I guess you missed my point. You said that there was a governing body. - I said there was no governing body and that it was an association. You reponded saying that they get to say who is on their list of what they define as koryu. - And I brought up that the fact that they allow non-koryu schools. The point you keep missing is that they are an association and that they can (they have the right to...) pick who they want in their association be it a koryu or a non-koryu (Daito-ryu and Okinwana Karate). Another fact that you keep missing is that Hatsumi Sensei didn't want to give his scrolls and densho to the association for their review. Not what you keep implying, which is that he doesn't have what the organisations require. He very well may not have what they wanted, but until those scrolls and densho becomes public, we would only be speculating.
If someone claims to have something and refuses to prove it... the sensible position to take is one of skepticism that they have what they claim. If they had it why not just prove it? Imagine someone who claimed to have an unknown version of the bible that they claimed was hundreds of years old, showed it to a select few people but refused to let it be dated or biblical scholars to examine it. Most people would be sceptical of it's authenticity and rightly so! Accepting claims without evidence is not a good thing nor should it be advocated as the default position.
I was referring to this comment: It suggests that being sceptical is 'just speculating' when in fact it's the sensible position to take. The guy with the bible from the analogy could following your logic say I was 'just speculating' that he didn't have what he claimed. It's placing the burden of proof on the person questioning the claim which is the wrong way round.
We are talking about two different issues. The comment I was referring to was "I merely said that Hatsumi doesn't have what the organisations require" which was not even the case. The issue was that they asked for Hatsumi Sensei's scrolls to review them, which meant handing them over to the organization. Hatsumi Sensei declined handing them over and then withdrew his application. The misinformation that seems to be continuously put out is that he was "not accepted." We are only speculating that if he did hand them over, that he would not be accepted.
No, that is not certain. Dr. Hatsumi was asked many years ago to provide documentation of some of his lineage for admittance to the Kobudo Shinkokai, perhaps the most reliable of the major organizations of traditional Japanese martial arts, and according to Donn Draeger, in a conversation to me, he was not able to provide documentation which proved his lineage to their satisfaction. Thus, there are uncertain areas in Dr. Hatsumi's lineage. Amdur, Ellis. "Re: KOGA NINJITSU or NINJUTSU (whichever you prefer )" rec.martial-arts. 1999/06/09). You can double check this by searching the past messages of rec.martial-arts
I get what your saying but I don't think it's a different issue. You are saying because Hatsumi withdrew his application and didn't provide the necessary evidence it is 'only speculation' to assume they would not be accepted if he did provide his evidence. I am arguing against this position by highlighting that when someone refuses to have evidence verified which they claim is authentic the proper position is skepticism not complete neutrality. It's not just speculation to be skeptical because the fact that the claimant refuses to have his 'evidence' verified counts against the evidence. If the guy with the bible declined to hand it over and withdrew his application to have it listed in a reputable museum then the reasonable response is skepticism over the bible's authenticity. I really don't think we are talking about seperate things here. I understand the specific example you are focusing on and I am arguing that it is wrong to suggest that doubting the scrolls authenticity is pure speculation.
That's just the thing - he's not refusing to have it verified, he's refusing to relinquish control over it.
It feels somewhat like I'm bashing my head against a brickwall. Does Hatsumi have the facilities or expertise to accurately date and authenticate his scrolls? No. So in effect by not 'relinquishing control' (i.e. lending them to a reputable lab for a brief period) he is refusing to have them verified. If you aren't going to let them be verified then they aren't evidence they are just an extra unverified claim. So to summarise: - Hatsumi has some scrolls he claims are authentic and which he uses to argue for his own authenticity. - Hatsumi does not have the ability or expertise to have them authenticated and there would be a serious case of bias if he was to date them himself. - There are reputable labs and associations that are capable of authenticating them. - Hatsumi refuses to 'relinquish control' of the scrolls to have them dated. Which leaves us with: - Hatsumi has a bunch of scrolls he claims to be old and to support his claims but they have not been verified by any independent body. So in effect he uses them to support his claims to authenticity while refusing to let any independent body actually test their authenticity.
You're basing your argument on a post from a newsgroup? This may or may not be of interest to those posting in this thread.
I'll try to be really clear on my opinion regarding the scrolls. Hatsumi won't have them authenticated. Hence, as far as I'm concerned, he doesn't have authentic scrolls (go ahead, flame on) and thus doesn't have what the association requires. Until they are authenticated, they are just scrolls. As said before, the onus is on him to have them authenticated if he is claiming they are hundreds of years old. I'm not going to just blindly trust that Hatsumi is such a great guy and because he says they are x years old that it's true. Now, people can argue about him refusing to relinquish control or whatever else, but I'd put my house on the fact that the scrolls don't contain the secret of the Kennedy assassination or anything sensitive/controversial, so they aren't going to suddenly disappear myseriously. It's a research lab for christ's sake, and it's only some ninja scrolls. The general public doesn't care that much about it.
It's quite clear that Takatmatsu and Hatsumi never had any proof of authenticity related to authentic Ninjutsu. Their claims aren't taken into account in Japan. Anyone stemming from them fall under the same category. This information comes straight out of Japan from Japanese resources. The only arguements come from foreigners outside of Japan (or some foreigners in Japan). I don't even know why this continues to be discussed. In Japan: Masaaki Hatsumi, To*****ugu Takamatsu, and anyone related to them claiming authentic Ninjutsu are not taken seriously.
Honestly, i don't care nor do many other members of BBT i have talked to. Whether or not the scrolls are real or authentic has no impact on my training whatsoever. The techniques, methods and philosophies i learn and teach work really well and make me feel good about the art i have chosen to dedicate myself to. You, silv, seem to by trying to throw mud on an organisation you don't even associate with to make yourself and the style you practice feel more authentic. All i can say is that if the art you practice makes you feel so insecure about its authenticity that you have to attack other arts then you probably are learning a useless system. This also goes for other arts that blatently attack BBT and the other x-kans, why do you feel so insecure about your styles that you have to put other people down. Why waste so much bloody time on the internet when you could be training and discussing the positive aspects instead of always bringing out the negatives. If you can't see the positive aspects of another style then i consider you to be a waste of my time.
When someone falsely claims authentic roots to something for decades and it is known to be false then the truth should be made known. That is the case here. Pure and simple.
I don't agree with Silv's mandate that there is an alternative authentic practitioner but I have to agree that looking critical into claims made by martial arts is a worthwhile exercise. It's good simply if your interested in history and it's also good for a person to develop the ability to sift through information and find the credible story. It's also not about 'attacking people's training' whether you love or hate your training is of no concern to me. I'm simply interested in whether the evidence is there for the historical claims being made. Something having an exaggerated or false history does not mean it could not be teaching good things it just means that it has an exaggerated/false history. It seems to be a common argument to brush aside debate to say that anyone questioning claims is a close minded attacker who must be uncomfortable with their own training. I'm not uncomfortable in the slightest with my training and I don't think of myself as a close minded person. I'm a person who is interested in Japanese history, martial arts and with critical thinking/investigation of history/myths. All of this makes Ninjutsu claims something I have an interest in.
With all due respect Silv, you're an ****. If you were more like CKava who actually presents reasonable, constructive, arguments then I'd be more inclined to actually care about anything you had to say about anything. I don't mean to sound rude but when you've ignored all my questions as well as coming up with nothing except throwing a few links in our faces it begins to get a little tiresome. Name the 'Japanese resources' then. Tell us the story of how this Koka Ryu was passed to the 'Last Living Ninja' and by whom, then perhaps you'll actually be taken more seriously. Thus far your argument is grounded on nothing that hasn't been discussed before except you are turning it into X-Kan hatemongering. Even benkei hasn't just attempted to stuff a load of links, from a bias museum, into this thread and tell us that everything we train in is a lie and founded on nothingness. The case here in double-edged... Where is your proof? It can go either way really. The Ban-family, yep, where are they now? I wash my hands of you.
