# Ninjutsu Books



## Razor (Jan 15, 2012)

I know topics about books come up quite a bit, so bear with me. My question is a bit more specific than books in general.

I am looking for another book on Bujinkan as a complement to my training. I have two books already (Simon Yeo's Ninjutsu: The Secret Art of the Ninja and Masaaki Hatsumi's The Way of the Ninja) which cover a lot of Taijutsu and other concepts. I would like a good book about weapons, preferably katana. I have looked at reviews of Hatsumi's books on Amazon and found them quite mixed. The main thing I feel however, is that I don't know if these people actually are martial artists or those who are just interested or perhaps trying to learn from the book and finding they can't, so I am unsure how valid their reviews are.

Ideally I would like something by Hatsumi, and a book that focuses more on technique than esoteric, spiritual issues that he often write about. Pictures would be preferable; I am looking for a reference guide, so for example something that I can use to look up the techniques after training or maybe practise again in my own time.&nbsp;<br><br>Any suggestions? Also, does anyone know if Hatsumi's "Japanese Sword Fighting" is the kind of book I am looking for?


----------



## gregtca (Jan 15, 2012)

*Ken, Tachi, Katana* 
[SIZE=+1][SIZE=-1]Detailing both the history and usage of the Japanese sword in a way not seen in modern budo. Hatsumi Soke once again shows the strength of Bujinkan kenjutsu in a manner most effective you can almost feel the hits he gives his senior Shihan. Supplemented by over 20 minutes of Hatsumi Soke classes on swordsmansh[/SIZE]ip.*Ken, Tachi, Katana* dvd[/SIZE]


Have you tryed this dvd?, You really should try and get to a proper sword school and get proper instruction - imho,i am sure alot more ppl will answer this thread for you as well.


----------



## Sanke (Jan 16, 2012)

gregtca said:


> *Ken, Tachi, Katana*
> [SIZE=+1][SIZE=-1]Detailing both the history and usage of the Japanese sword in a way not seen in modern budo. Hatsumi Soke once again shows the strength of Bujinkan kenjutsu in a manner most effective you can almost feel the hits he gives his senior Shihan. Supplemented by over 20 minutes of Hatsumi Soke classes on swordsmansh[/SIZE]ip.*Ken, Tachi, Katana* dvd[/SIZE]
> 
> 
> Have you tryed this dvd?, You really should try and get to a proper sword school and get proper instruction - imho,i am sure alot more ppl will answer this thread for you as well.



Unless I'm mistaken, it sounds like he's already got a school he trains with, and is looking for material to further his studies. Would I be right in saying that, Razor? I can't speak for this DVD, though I've heard things about it, and it's probably worth a watch.

As for books, almost all of Hatsumi's books are going to be full of esoteric writings, it's just his style. It can be difficult to read at the best of times, but that's just my opinion, and I've only read one or two. 
I don't think there's too much out there written by Hatsumi that will focus on technique, most old MA systems typically don't write that kind of stuff, rather preferring to rely on directly teaching the material. It might be better to write your own notes based on what you do in class and refer to those.

This is assuming you're doing the Bujinkan approach to sword, btw, correct me if that's mistaken.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 16, 2012)

Yeah, Hatsumi Sensei's books (at least the later ones) are really best used in conjunction with the lessons you get in class... as a "dry read", they can be a little difficult to see what on earth he's talking about sometimes! With regard to "Japanese Sword Fighting", it covers the Kukishinden Ryu Happo Biken Kenpo syllabus (the long sword), as well as the Kodachi Dori (well.... after a fashion, anyway), and the Muto Dori of Gyokko Ryu (the Ge Ryaku no Maki). The descriptions, if you know the kata, can be very interesting and helpful. If you don't, though, it's a different story.

For "esoteric" writing (philosophy etc), I'd look to "Ninpo: Wisdom for Life:  (http://www.budovideos.com/shop/customer/product.php?productid=19771). But, as Sanke said, there's a lot of esoterica in pretty much all of his writings. In fact, I'd probably only recommend them after a number of years of training, before that they're really more like a collection of pretty words, without the lessons being too accessible... but hey, that's kinda the definition of "esoteric", when it comes down to it!

With regard to the Ken Tachi Katana DVD, it's quite a decent one. There are a few things that I'd probably have issues with, mainly from my other Kenjutsu training, but it's far better than the way the sword is used in many other videos.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 16, 2012)

Stick Fighting and Advanced Stick Fighting are still some of the best books he has written. (particularly the first one)


----------



## Razor (Jan 16, 2012)

Sanke said:


> Unless I'm mistaken, it sounds like he's already got a school he trains with, and is looking for material to further his studies. Would I be right in saying that, Razor? I can't speak for this DVD, though I've heard things about it, and it's probably worth a watch.
> 
> As for books, almost all of Hatsumi's books are going to be full of esoteric writings, it's just his style. It can be difficult to read at the best of times, but that's just my opinion, and I've only read one or two.
> I don't think there's too much out there written by Hatsumi that will focus on technique, most old MA systems typically don't write that kind of stuff, rather preferring to rely on directly teaching the material. It might be better to write your own notes based on what you do in class and refer to those.
> ...



Yes, I already train in Bujinkan. Do you know of any book that does then? I really liked the approach to technique that Simon Yeo's book takes, but to my knowledge he has not written a kenjutsu book or have any plans to. I suppose I could try to write notes. The problem I would have though is that it is a 2 hour class and by the time I get back to my house I probably will have forgotten the details of the last technique, not to mention the first one! I sometimes have difficulty remembering even 10 minutes later and only remember when practising it again later (I do usually remember after a while though when we practise it a lot, like Kihon Happo for example).





Chris Parker said:


> Yeah, Hatsumi Sensei's books (at least the later ones) are really best used in conjunction with the lessons you get in class... as a "dry read", they can be a little difficult to see what on earth he's talking about sometimes! With regard to "Japanese Sword Fighting", it covers the Kukishinden Ryu Happo Biken Kenpo syllabus (the long sword), as well as the Kodachi Dori (well.... after a fashion, anyway), and the Muto Dori of Gyokko Ryu (the Ge Ryaku no Maki). The descriptions, if you know the kata, can be very interesting and helpful. If you don't, though, it's a different story.
> 
> For "esoteric" writing (philosophy etc), I'd look to "Ninpo: Wisdom for Life:  (http://www.budovideos.com/shop/customer/product.php?productid=19771). But, as Sanke said, there's a lot of esoterica in pretty much all of his writings. In fact, I'd probably only recommend them after a number of years of training, before that they're really more like a collection of pretty words, without the lessons being too accessible... but hey, that's kinda the definition of "esoteric", when it comes down to it!
> 
> With regard to the Ken Tachi Katana DVD, it's quite a decent one. There are a few things that I'd probably have issues with, mainly from my other Kenjutsu training, but it's far better than the way the sword is used in many other videos.



Sounds like "Japanese Sword Fighting" is what I am looking for. I am sure as the theme for this year is the katana my instructor will be teaching a lot of kenjutsu, so hopefully I will get a chance to practise some of the kata before reading about them!

Thanks for the comments guys, I am starting to approach the kyu grades where (my instructor at least) wants to see that you can handle weapons properly, so I am trying to practise with bokken, hanbo staffs etc a bit before the grading in a few months.


----------



## gregtca (Jan 16, 2012)

Hi Razor, dont worry about remembering the techniques , they will be ingrained into your mind/body , i pointed out a sword school might be a good start because imo many ppl cant hold or cut properly with a katana , so a sword school would teach you these little things get the basics correct and build on them, Soke has not produced a sword techinque basic book , Charles Daniels has a kenjutsu book which in quite interesting, As for the theme of "KEN" this year , no-one really knows what soke will teach

Best luck with your training

Regards 
Greg


----------



## Indagator (Jan 16, 2012)

Some times it can be good to find oneself as a "living note" where your solo training at home reflects what you have covered in class.
Other times you may find your solo training at home reflects what you need it to - such as when one finds insights into something they have practised, turn up to training and are told they have it right!

Notes are very good, but mine are rather sparse. There are many books out there and there may be some bad parts in good books and some good parts in bad books - I, shockingly, even found one or two things which helped my kenjutsu flow more nicely in Stephen K Hayes's "Mystic Arts of the Ninja" ! And Stephen K Hayes, especially at the time, was not exactly an expert on Bujinkan sword principles...

However the key thing, as has been said, is the integration and management of information within the context of ongoing participationin live transmission of the art. Books and so forth can augment one's training, or more commonly for me simply help to adapt mindsets.

I made a comparison between the Bujinkan and blues guitar in another thread - to elaborate on that concept, I believe the two are very similar because they both take something which has history and theory and a set pattern of knowledge (for example the kata for the ryu, and say, scales and arpeggios) however once one has internalised the basics then one can move forwards into the realm of "feeling" the movement or sound - the blues guitar is all about feel.

Perhaps there is an analogy for slide guitar, which is what I play, but I haven't thought deeply enough about it to come up with some snappy cool remark just yet


----------



## Indagator (Jan 16, 2012)

Oh and FWIW I think the esoteric side of Soke's writing can often be layered in such a way that it can mean something when you read it at a certain level of understanding, but when you come back years later it reads even deeper.

I liken it to the Summa Theologica - as a stock standard basic layman Catholic I can read the Summa and get what my mind needs from it, understand it at a level that I am at. However a theologician or philosopher can read it on levels far deeper than I, and get so much more out of it as well.
So these writings can often work on many levels.

Also for some reason in our dojo many have developed a habit of when reading books by Soke - read it three times in a row, as every time different aspects will stand out to you. Sounds odd but try it and you'll see!


----------



## Aiki Lee (Jan 16, 2012)

I agree with Brian that Hatsumi's books on stick fighting are still probably the most useful books on stick fighting that I've ever come across. They have very detailed photographs and as long as you have an instructor he should be able to help you understand the terminology.


----------



## Sanke (Jan 16, 2012)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Stick Fighting and Advanced Stick Fighting are still some of the best books he has written. (particularly the first one)


To be fair, most of the actual writing was done by Quintin Chambers, while Hatsumi provided the material. So while it's absolutely one of the best books he's been involved in, I'd personally say that's partly because it was written by Chambers, making it a much friendlier read than his other stuff.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 16, 2012)

I'm kinda umming and ahhing about how frank to be here... tell you what, I'm going to be frank and honest, but diplomatic (if I can be... let's see, shall we?).

First off, I'm going to clarify (as much as I can) where I'm coming from. In addition to the Bujinkan material that I teach (although no longer a part of the organisation, that is where my organisation came from originally, being the original schools in Australia, New Zealand, and a few other places), I am also training in a couple of Koryu systems focused on the sword, as well as having experience in the weaponry (including sword) aspects of another Koryu, and having attended and watched classes of other Koryu and their teaching of the sword. Additionally, I am friends with students and teachers of sword-related systems, and such things are frequent topics of conversation, as well as having a large personal interest in the study of the Japanese sword. Right, so that's me, then. On with the controversy.... 

As I said earlier, the Ken Tachi Katana DVD is probably the best source for Kenjutsu from the Bujinkan. This is primarily because it deals with the actual kata and material that is part of the Kukishinden Ryu, rather than the far more common approach to sword that the organisation shows, which is an exploration of principles, typically focused around Taijutsu, which happen to use a sword in the middle of them. The problem is that, in general, sword really doesn't exist in the Bujinkan. What there is is the use of a sword (or a representative, which can lead to issues all of it's own) without any understanding or acknowledgement of the realities of the weapon, used in a way where it's just a part of the Taijutsu.

Personally, I think this is because Hatsumi himself just doesn't have much interest in it. He loves his staff weapons, but sword just doesn't grab him, for whatever reason (I find this particularly ironic, considering he is the Soke of Kukishinden Ryu Happo Biken, which has as a primary focus it's sword aspects, Kenpo, Kodachidori,and Juttejutsu - he just seems to prefer the Bojutsu, which primarily comes from other lines of Kukishin Ryu). This lack of interest means that the early students weren't really taught a lot of sword... in fact, Stephen Hayes, my Chief Instructor, and others reported that they weren't really taught much in the way of sword in Japan, with Hanbo being the primary weapon explored. Occasionally the Hanbo would be used to substitute for a sword in Muto Dori techniques, but sword itself was rarely touched on. This lead to Stephen Hayes basically copying Kendo books, and making up what he thought it should be (with very mixed results, honestly), and my Chief Instructor using another Iai system as a base for our early exploration of sword. Most other Bujinkan instructors have essentially been left to their own devices to come up with what they can, or in some cases, what they want to. As you may realize, that is also a recipe for a rather mixed result.

If I'm to be blunt here, I haven't ever seen what I would consider "good" swordsmanship demonstrated in the Bujinkan. The aforementioned DVD is the closest, but there's still a lot there that isn't ideal. Charles Daniel's book (and I afford Charles a lot of respect) isn't really that good either, when it all comes down to it. To be blunt, it reads like someone who has read about certain kamae from a range of Ryu, and some concepts for strategies and tactics with a sword, but hasn't really been taught it. It was a cobbled-together piece, really.

I suppose the end result of this is as follows: The Bujinkan really doesn't deal much in terms of sword. Even those instructors who are supposed to be the "sword experts" in the Bujinkan are rather lacking when I watch them. Hatsumi himself tends, particularly when using fukuro shinai, to not use a sword like a sword, but instead like a stick. He hits with them, he doesn't cut. His Iai is more a collection of ideas, not actual Iai (there isn't really any in the Bujinkan). When using an iaito or mogito, he tends to do a range of things that, to be frank, are ill-advised at best, and downright dangerous, or, in some cases, impossible. By training in the Bujinkan, you'll be basically training in Taijutsu, and that will sometimes use a sword. But it's likely not what might be considered swordsmanship. So, the best thing is just to attend your classes, and follow the instruction of your teacher, as what they will guide you on could be very different to anything that we could lead you to.


----------



## gregtca (Jan 16, 2012)

Well said Chris ,  cant wait for the explosions now LOL


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 16, 2012)

Ha, maybe I should repost it on MAP, that could be a fun experiment....


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 16, 2012)

Point of curiosity:  Could the apparent lack of sword skill and instruction be simply that -- an appearance?  Could it be that, at one point, Hatsumi didn't teach much sword because the majority of his students _at that time, in that place_ had learned it independently, before coming to him?  So, he doesn't bother to teach it to them since they already know it... and along the way, as things progress through students of students and down the line in time, new students without that background simply didn't acquire it, unless they did so on their own?


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 16, 2012)

Honestly, JKS, I'd doubt it. Remember we're dealing with people such as Manaka, who started training with Hatsumi when he was 14 (about three years after Hatsumi started training with Takamatsu, when he was just the head of a training group under Takamatsu Sensei), who came in as a youth Judo champion. Since leaving the Bujinkan, Manaka Sensei has developed the Jinen Ryu, a system dealing primarily with sword and related (two sword, Iai, tanto, jutte) as he feels that these areas were missing in the Bujinkan. Tanemura has also gone outside of the Takamatsu material to get sword teachings. And when one of the people who show, frankly, a large amount of gaps in knowledge and understanding of sword being Hatsumi himself, that leads me back to Hatsumi not really having the interest in it as a topic. After all, he's the Soke of a sword line (Kukishinden Ryu Happo Biken), so to not continue to teach sword in any meaningful way just doesn't make as much sense as him not really dealing with it in the first place. The Bojutsu from the Kukishin lines is where his interest is, and he's very good at that, but that leaves the sword behind.

Besides all of that, not teaching his inherited sword line because the students had picked up sword elsewhere is like you not teaching your system to a new student because they already know karate, and that's a hitting/kicking art. It just doesn't make sense, as no matter what experience or understanding of sword they may have come in with, they didn't have knowledge, experience, understanding, or skill in his sword system.

EDIT: Oh, and to address the first contention, that the apparent lack of skill could just be an appearance, no. It's a genuine lack. In Hatsumi's case, I'd say lack of interest, as he could be very good, he just isn't interested in it. After all, it's not like he doesn't have the training equipment, partners, or material. And yet there are huge gaps in what he does (some of the things he was saying about the use of Tachi on the 2010 DKMS are just wrong...)


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 16, 2012)

Hey, it was just a thought.  I've seen similar things happen elsewhere.  The idea being that the master instructor doesn't need to teach the basics and relies on his earlier students teaching them, but a breakdown happens.  And, of course, the idea of mystery and deception inherent in ninjutsu...


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 16, 2012)

Ha, yeah, I know... Honestly, the big problem isn't even that it's not Hatsumi's thing. He's just like everyone else, he's going to have preferences, and that's all cool. He's interested in the unarmed approach, and likes his Bo work, and he's very good at both. The problem is what might be called the "Bujinkan faithful", who seem to want to see Hatsumi as being basically infallible and all-knowing when it comes to martial arts. And, frankly, he's not. At all. For example, he mentions Musashi and the Niten Ichi Ryu, as well as the Gorin no Sho from time to time in his books, and he is without fail wrong everytime he does. He gets the reason the Gorin no Sho was written, and how it was written, very wrong in "Way of the Ninja", for instance. He also mentioned at a Daikomyo Sai a number of years ago that a certain thing he was showing was like Einstein's Theory of Relativity in that each action had an equal and opposite reaction, and, as that's what Einstein got his Nobel Prize for, all members of the Bujinkan had the equivalent. The problem, of course, was that "equal and opposite reaction" was part of Newton's Laws, not the Theory of Relativity, and had nothing to do with any Nobel Prize... but he got applause, and I've seen that comment reposted and cited a number of times since.

Hatsumi is very good at a large number of things, his sense of balance, distance, timing, control, are all at the highest level, but the desire for him to be at that level with everything, including general knowledge, is just unrealistic. The same thing happens with things like spear, for instance, when teaching the material (on his Sojutsu DVD), it's great. Then you watch the 1994 DKMS where it was one of the two dominant themes, and the gaps come straight out (a range of issues starting from unrealistic tactics and attacks, and continuing to some things done with the spears that, while the partner stood there and waited, were fun and interesting, but had no real value as the only way they could possibly be done is if someone just stood there...).

I just think it'd be good if Hatsumi was looked at a little more realistically, that's all. He does have a lot to offer, but buying into the idea that he's all knowing isn't helping him, or the Bujinkan, as it's lead to the way the Bujinkan operates now. Which is very sad.

Oh, but on the topic of the other organisations and sword, the Genbukan would probably be the best although there are a few issues there that I've noticed. The Jinenkan (and the Jinen Ryu) seems to be more what Manaka thinks should be there, rather than actually based in anything... the Iai, for instance, is overly complicated, and the position of the kashira for all kamae is far from what any system I've come across would recommend, for a number of reasons. What this has lead to is a number of X-Kan members looking outside their own system for sword, to varying levels of success (Richard Van Donk training in an Iai system separate, and now creating his own sword system based on that and Hatsumi's use of the weapon, Brian R Van Cise I know trains in another Iai system [with better results and standards than the one RVD trains... ], the Akban guys trying to copy Katori Shinto Ryu videos, and missing a lot of what they're seeing...). The material's there, and it's good stuff, it's just not easy to find someone who knows what it's actually supposed to be like.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 16, 2012)

That's something I've seen happen more than once, across styles...  and worthy of a thread all it's own.

Do you think there are folks in the Bujinkan who are skilled with the sword?


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 16, 2012)

I'm sure there are, if for no other reason that it'd be a huge statistical anomaly for there to not be... but I will also say that I don't think they would have gotten that skill from the Bujinkan itself, and, honestly, I have yet to see it. I saw a cutting demo by one of the guys who is considered the go-to guy for sword, and was not impressed. Nor were many other people who commented on the clip in question, I must say.


----------



## Indagator (Jan 17, 2012)

I dunno. We do a lot of kenjutsu in my dojo - which is good because I am very, very drawn to kenjutsu and my only other option to augment my training would be to travel nearly 300km one way trip to train in Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu (I noticed some people break the words up differently, but this was how the instructor wrote it) which although I'd like to do is not currently an option.
We do sword vs sword stuff (with bokken mostly although on occasion I have had to face down shinken in very slow controlled kata in order to help remove the mental blocks which would pop up under the circumstances) as well as solo kata.
I can't comment on comparisons to other ryuha as I have not had enough experience in anything else however I can say that what we are taught seems to hold water with things I hear - even things such as cutting relying on "tip speed" and havin clean cuts with tameshigiri, rather than fishtails from bearing down with the forearm or trying to put "power" into cuts.
I also noticed a few things some other stuff I have seen doesn't appear to have (although I view only as an outsider with the other things bear in mind) such as the left pinky finger positioning and a phenomena I could only really describe as "flow" moving through evasion through cut through defense through whatever it needs to be.

I'd hazard that most other systems would have these things, mind, although from where I've been I've either not seen them, or not known enough about how _they_ do it to have noticed!

So another long winded space cadet post from Indagator... my .02 summed up though, no harm in augmenting with other sword systems if it's available however there is a lot more to the Bujinkan and to Soke than what is shown publicly on the internet!

My dojo has nothing publicly available aside from a minor website listing info you could get anywhere on the web. That being said, we do have our resources!


----------



## Aiki Lee (Jan 17, 2012)

What about the togakure ryu's useage of the sword as presented by hatsumi? Do you feel that the way it is presented is better than the other sword work done in the x-kans? What would you recomend a to a person studying in the bujinkan who also wanted to learn proper sword work?


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 17, 2012)

Indagator said:


> I dunno. We do a lot of kenjutsu in my dojo - which is good because I am very, very drawn to kenjutsu and my only other option to augment my training would be to travel nearly 300km one way trip to train in Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu (I noticed some people break the words up differently, but this was how the instructor wrote it) which although I'd like to do is not currently an option.
> We do sword vs sword stuff (with bokken mostly although on occasion I have had to face down shinken in very slow controlled kata in order to help remove the mental blocks which would pop up under the circumstances) as well as solo kata.
> I can't comment on comparisons to other ryuha as I have not had enough experience in anything else however I can say that what we are taught seems to hold water with things I hear - even things such as cutting relying on "tip speed" and havin clean cuts with tameshigiri, rather than fishtails from bearing down with the forearm or trying to put "power" into cuts.
> I also noticed a few things some other stuff I have seen doesn't appear to have (although I view only as an outsider with the other things bear in mind) such as the left pinky finger positioning and a phenomena I could only really describe as "flow" moving through evasion through cut through defense through whatever it needs to be.
> ...



Ha, my friend, that's far from long-winded... trust me on that.

From your basic description there, it strikes me that you're training either in something sourced from outside the Bujinkan itself, or something that your instructor is making up themselves. That's not necessarily a bad thing, I create drills myself fairly regularly. I will say that the idea of facing a Shinken is not something I'd be suggesting. I've used an Iaito with my guys, that's a close enough image to get the adrenaline going, a Shinken is something only the most experienced even consider going up against. It's just too dangerous.

In terms of there being more to the Bujinkan (and to Soke) than what is shown publicly, look, to be honest, that's a unique claim  to the Bujinkan itself. I'm going to try to couch this as gently as I can, but, frankly Hatsumi himself is the cause of that idea. Without getting into the reasons for it, Hatsumi tends to imply a lot that there are things untaught (from the material itself), which has a number of members of the Bujinkan making claims like "well, I haven't been told there isn't any crochet patterns in Gikan Ryu, so maybe there are some! Only Hatsumi can tell you, you know..." The next part on from that is members saying that they don't know what is, or is not in any of the Ryu. That is unusual to the point of being bizarre, so you know. Every other Ryu out there, the information of what is included in the syllabus is very easy to find out, even what is contained in the "secret" sections. To take Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu as an example (both forms of separation are fine, the Sugino line, and older mainline publications use the one you gave, the one I use is more common with the Otake dojo/mainline today. In kanji it's simply &#22825;&#30495;&#27491;&#20253;&#39321;&#21462;&#31070;&#36947;&#27969;), the secret sections are some Kenjutsu, as well as aspects of ninjutsu, castle fortification, battlefield tactics, and things like Kuji, although only the Kenjutsu is considered "secret teachings". The rest are higher level forms and teachings of other sections (Gogyo no Tachi, Gokui no Iai, Gogyo no Bo, Gogyo no Naginata etc). The only art where you can even ask the practitioners if something is in one of the Ryu and they'll say "I don't know, I haven't been told if there is or not yet" is the Bujinkan.

Where the claim has some validity is that the art that's really taught in the Bujinkan isn't any of the Ryu, it's Budo Taijutsu. And Budo Taijutsu is, in a very real way, whatever Hatsumi says it is at that point in time. And, with his preference for never repeating a technique (another sign that he's not teaching the Ryu, by the way), instead preferring spontaneous exploration of ideas and concepts, so long as he stays creative, then there's no limit to what he can present, and trying to capture it all is only ever going to be a futile gesture at best. He does use this a fair bit by constantly saying things like "I haven't shown this (version of this kata) before", or "if you're not here now, you're not going to understand (whatever, say, Tachi)". The downside is that most of what he's showing is completely untested, to be frank. After all, how can it be tested if he's creating it in the moment? The principles can be solid, but the explorations are sometimes less-than-ideal.

In terms of the details you're referring to (the pinky finger etc), I'd need to see what you're talking about to see where it may have come from. And when you start bringing in other sword systems to augment the Bujinkan ones, that can be a little dangerous and counter-productive as well, honestly. I'm currently allowing some of my seniors to specialize in a Ryu and a weapon of their choice, and two of my guys have been told they are not allowed to pick sword. The reason is that they are already training in a Koryu sword system with me outside of the Ninjutsu material, and the differences between the two approaches to sword are gigantic. Kamae, movement, footwork, grip, cutting, tactics, philosophy, structure, weaponry, everything is completely different. And by having two rather contradictory approaches to the same weapon leads to, at best, taking much longer to get anywhere. So I'm not letting them train sword in my regular classes. As a result, if you're going to bring in something from outside, it would need to be compatible with the rest of what is taught. But, honestly, although the Kukishinden Ryu sword syllabus is relatively small (9 kata, with variations on each, along with 3 kodachi kata with 2 or 3 variations on each, and 5 jutte kata), it's actually more than enough to have a complete focus on sword. What you're missing, though, is any Iai. So if you want that, you'd need to look outside the Bujinkan material (there are some concepts within Shinden Fudo Ryu, and some Batto methods in Togakure, but no real Iai kata).



Himura Kenshin said:


> What about the togakure ryu's useage of the sword as presented by hatsumi? Do you feel that the way it is presented is better than the other sword work done in the x-kans? What would you recomend a to a person studying in the bujinkan who also wanted to learn proper sword work?



Ah, Togakure Ryu... it's an interesting approach to sword, really. It relies, in a number of kata, on a specialist sword, taking advantage of the particular dimensions for effective use. The basic idea is one of "shielding", with frequent use of "beat" attacks and deflections. While slightly larger than the Kukishinden material, as a sword syllabus, the Kukishinden Ryu one is the better sword system. Hatsumi Sensei's Togakure Ryu Ninja Biken DVD is also fairly good, as it shows the basic form for a range of the kata (or, at least, versions of them, there are other versions that are also taught), but it's incomplete. Honestly, if you're wanting to get good at sword in the Bujinkan, I'd look to the Kukishinden Ryu Happo Biken Kenpo kata, and look to the strategies taught there. The big catch is finding someone who can teach it to you properly, without going off into personal interpretation that may or may not be viable, or safe to actually use.

Now, that's more of a long-winded post!


----------



## Indagator (Jan 17, 2012)

Long winded, perhaps, but hardly a moment of futile wind!

Just to clarify, what I referred to about more than what is publicly available refers more to personal experience (in regards to Bujinkan training itself) and first-person stories from shidoshi I have trained with and respect, in regards to Soke.
Basically what I meant was that I hear (and see) a lot about BBT being ineffective and sloppily trained (and all the rest, you've seen/heard it too no doubt!) but IRL in the dojo I see something completely different. That being said, there is no publically available resource for what happens in our dojo - only privately shared stuff.
Our shidoshi has comprised certain kata for ascertaining the kihon and basic principle concepts of particular aspects of the art - even a kusarifundo kata, and in fact our Syllabus requires one to compose their own kata at a certain point before shodan (although the primary use of this is for the shidoshi to observe and witness whether one has "understood" the principles or not, and is able to apply them under reactionary circumstances) so it is quite possible the kenjutsu kata (paired and solo) have been comprised by our shidoshi, although if such is the case their principles would remain true to the art in this circumstance - I will try to remember to make a point of asking about that.
The pinky sits just under the kashira btw, whilst the next three fingers up grip around the lower part of the tsuka. It adds a dynamic proportion which we utilise in movement, does that clear that up? I'm terrible at describing things via words alone sorry!
As for the shinken aspect it is relatively rare, and is not done without mutual consent - in fact I have been the only person in recent years who has been okay about it. That being said, everything is done extremely carefully and the primary purpose is simply to remove any mental blocks should somebody ever (let's hope not!) actually have to deal with somebody wielding a live blade...
There was a student in years gone by who did not wait to be advised by his shidoshi whether he was ready to purchase a live blade sword or not. He turned up at the dojo, and the shidoshi (to make a certain point) looked over his weapon, told him it was nice and pretty much said "Well, let's train with it..." from there he made a cut at the student, who rolled out of harms way. Now there are things around this which have not been said, that pertain to the safety within the particular circumstance and also shidoshi's belief that this would teach a lesson without harm (as well as his commitment to not harm his student!) so bear in mind there was far more to this than my story tells and it was done in a manner that no real harm was ever actually present - however the person in question was presented with the solemn belief that they would be in harms way, and thus moved!
This student learned a valuable lesson about shinken, which has been begun to be passed on to me.
In regards to augmental training, what would you opinion be about TSKSR, out of interest? Although we are in different orgs I ask de to your knowledge of koryu systems, and your knowledge of ninjutsu.

Thanks.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 17, 2012)

Indagator said:


> Long winded, perhaps, but hardly a moment of futile wind!



Ha, I try!



Indagator said:


> Just to clarify, what I referred to about more than what is publicly available refers more to personal experience (in regards to Bujinkan training itself) and first-person stories from shidoshi I have trained with and respect, in regards to Soke.



Oh, I have no doubt that Hatsumi Sensei has some information and other things that aren't publicly known or shown, but not to the degree of completely hidden entire sections of Ryu as some claim. And even when there are high level, secret kata of a ryu, it's typically known, or easily discovered, what they are (in terms of jujutsu, kenjutsu, bojutsu etc). That's more what I was getting at.



Indagator said:


> Basically what I meant was that I hear (and see) a lot about BBT being ineffective and sloppily trained (and all the rest, you've seen/heard it too no doubt!) but IRL in the dojo I see something completely different. That being said, there is no publically available resource for what happens in our dojo - only privately shared stuff.



Ha, yeah, I've seen a lot of less-than-ideal representations of the Bujinkan out there.... then again I've seen some very serious, skilled practitioners. I'm personally of the belief that the material that makes up the Bujinkan group of martial arts are very good, solid, serious arts. The issue, of course, is that it needs to trained just as solidly and seriously, and that, unfortunately, is left completely up to the individual instructors, with little reward for doing things well, and no consequences for doing it lazy.... in fact, sometimes it seems quite the opposite!



Indagator said:


> Our shidoshi has comprised certain kata for ascertaining the kihon and basic principle concepts of particular aspects of the art - even a kusarifundo kata, and in fact our Syllabus requires one to compose their own kata at a certain point before shodan (although the primary use of this is for the shidoshi to observe and witness whether one has "understood" the principles or not, and is able to apply them under reactionary circumstances) so it is quite possible the kenjutsu kata (paired and solo) have been comprised by our shidoshi, although if such is the case their principles would remain true to the art in this circumstance - I will try to remember to make a point of asking about that.



Ah, kata creation.... I'll be honest and say that I don't think it ever really works from a student level. Yeah, you can assess a students understanding by having them do that, but the nuances of what makes a kata a kata isn't really that well understood, let alone trying to create a new kata of an existing Ryu-ha without being at a mastery (Menkyo Kaiden) level. If it's not meant to be a "Ryu-ha specific" kata, and more a "Budo Taijutsu" kata, that's less of an issue. One thing we used to do was to have seniors create variations (in the form of formal henka) of Ryu-ha kata, to ensure that the principles and strategies of the Ryu were kept.

In terms of your Shidoshi creating kenjutsu kata, if they were created as Budo Taijutsu kata, following those principles, it's all fine. Creating new kata trying to follow the principles of Kukishinden Ryu Kenpo, or Togakure Ryu Biken, on the other hand, and I'd be wanting to see what he'd come up with, because that really isn't an easy thing to do. Of course, that all then brings up back to the idea of what Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu's approach to Kenjutsu is, whether it's actually Kenjutsu or if it's Taijutsu employing a sword (yeah, I know it sounds like semantics, but it's really quite a huge difference).



Indagator said:


> The pinky sits just under the kashira btw, whilst the next three fingers up grip around the lower part of the tsuka. It adds a dynamic proportion which we utilise in movement, does that clear that up? I'm terrible at describing things via words alone sorry!



Yeah, that makes perfect sense. The only Ryu-ha that has a grip with the last one or two fingers below the kashira is Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu, but I've seen it taught  for Kukishinden Ryu as well (it's not quite correct, but the spacing is more like Kukishinden Ryu's, as they tend to use a slightly longer tsuka than other systems, but not quite as long as, say, Takamura-ha Shindo Yoshin Ryu... for the record, TSKSR prefer a shorter tsuka, so to get a gap between the hands, the lower one is slightly below the kashira, although there are other reasons for that as well).



Indagator said:


> As for the shinken aspect it is relatively rare, and is not done without mutual consent - in fact I have been the only person in recent years who has been okay about it. That being said, everything is done extremely carefully and the primary purpose is simply to remove any mental blocks should somebody ever (let's hope not!) actually have to deal with somebody wielding a live blade...
> There was a student in years gone by who did not wait to be advised by his shidoshi whether he was ready to purchase a live blade sword or not. He turned up at the dojo, and the shidoshi (to make a certain point) looked over his weapon, told him it was nice and pretty much said "Well, let's train with it..." from there he made a cut at the student, who rolled out of harms way. Now there are things around this which have not been said, that pertain to the safety within the particular circumstance and also shidoshi's belief that this would teach a lesson without harm (as well as his commitment to not harm his student!) so bear in mind there was far more to this than my story tells and it was done in a manner that no real harm was ever actually present - however the person in question was presented with the solemn belief that they would be in harms way, and thus moved!
> This student learned a valuable lesson about shinken, which has been begun to be passed on to me.



Yeah, I'd still be far less eager to bring a live blade into any paired training.... many Iai schools won't let you use one until you're at least 3rd Dan. But, if he feels he's being safe enough, okay. I've just heard too many stories about injuries that occurred at times and in ways no-one would ever expect, such as people walking backwards into a blade lowered for inspection after test-cutting, to even consider it.



Indagator said:


> In regards to augmental training, what would you opinion be about TSKSR, out of interest? Although we are in different orgs I ask de to your knowledge of koryu systems, and your knowledge of ninjutsu.
> 
> Thanks.



Ah, that requires a PM... one is on your way.


----------



## Indagator (Jan 17, 2012)

Thanks for the info, much appreciated.

Yes the kata creation is more of an assessment as to whether a student has internalised the principles of BBT and is able to apply them in dynamic situations. I know of one student who designed a kata around use of a .303 (unloaded of course!) which was quite cool, although another thing entirely in certain ways!

The roots of the ones we have as aids to learn the basic principles from (alongside the kihon happo and sanshin no kata of course) are firmly planted in BBT, yes. Our shidoshi has studied several of the ryu in depth but still teaches the art as it is presented by Soke.

We do also learn the kata of the art as they are (supposed) to be, but our dojo encourages henka primarily in the sense that if one makes a mistake in training we don't stop and start over again, but carry on and deal with the new situation.


----------



## gregtca (Jan 17, 2012)

Slightly off line , but has anyone read any off Donn F Draeger books , re the Bujutsu & Budo one's & ninjutsu book ? If so what are your impressions ? also i will in a day or so quote from Master Otake from an article along time ago , about his thoughts on "Modern systems , iai etc that was in australiasian martial arts magazine , back in the 80's , if anyone is interested ,

regards 
Greg


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 18, 2012)

Indagator said:


> Thanks for the info, much appreciated.



My pleasure.



Indagator said:


> Yes the kata creation is more of an assessment as to whether a student has internalised the principles of BBT and is able to apply them in dynamic situations. I know of one student who designed a kata around use of a .303 (unloaded of course!) which was quite cool, although another thing entirely in certain ways!



Based around BBT, cool. It'd be interesting to see what criteria are used for such assessment. 



Indagator said:


> The roots of the ones we have as aids to learn the basic principles from (alongside the kihon happo and sanshin no kata of course) are firmly planted in BBT, yes. Our shidoshi has studied several of the ryu in depth but still teaches the art as it is presented by Soke.
> 
> We do also learn the kata of the art as they are (supposed) to be, but our dojo encourages henka primarily in the sense that if one makes a mistake in training we don't stop and start over again, but carry on and deal with the new situation.



It's personal expression and choice, really. You have some that say that if you can't use a particular technique against any type of attack, then you need to train it more, and others who want to focus just on henka to be able to incorporate any situation and free adaptation from the get-go. Honestly, I'm kinda in between. I believe in learning it properly first, and only moving into henka after that has been achieved. I tend to come down on my guys if they're going into variations because they can't do what's presented (haven't put in the effort to try, rather than a lack of skill), but if they can do it properly, and their partner does something different, their ability to flow with it can be very important, for safety as well as practicality in applying the skills. I like the idea of the phrase associated with Hontai Takagi Yoshin Ryu's reiho in that regard, really.

The idea of learning the kata properly is good, but it could be interesting to examine exactly what is meant by "kata" from the Ryu, as, again, I have yet to see any Bujinkan school or class actually teach the kata properly. This is really just my thinking out loud, of course, and is by no means an attack or accusation to your dojo (I just read it back and saw it could be taken that way), so I'll see if I can clarify. What I see taught is the "middle" of the kata, the attack and defense part of it. The actual kata, done properly, are a lot more than that... but really, that's my Koryu side rearing up it's head.



gregtca said:


> Slightly off line , but has anyone read any off Donn F Draeger books , re the Bujutsu & Budo one's & ninjutsu book ? If so what are your impressions ? also i will in a day or so quote from Master Otake from an article along time ago , about his thoughts on "Modern systems , iai etc that was in australiasian martial arts magazine , back in the 80's , if anyone is interested ,
> 
> regards
> Greg



Donn Draeger, along with Hunter B. Armstrong, is considered one of the "fathers" of Hoplology (the study of fighting methods throught history and across cultures, taking it's name from the ancient Greek Hoplos combative groups). He was one of the first to popularise the ideas of Koryu and traditional martial arts at a time when all that was really known was Judo and Karate (in terms of Japanese arts). Draeger Sensei showed that there really were ancient methods still in existance. He was a highly ranked student of Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu and Shinto Muso Ryu, and as such, his position within the Koryu community is highly respected. However... that doesn't mean he is universally agreed with.

Draeger Sensei is probably the most responsible for things like the idea of a distinction between "jutsu" arts and "do" arts, by simplifying the terminology in order to have the different words usage make sense to a Western audience, despite there really not being a true distinction at all. Additionally, due to his particular Ryu-ha, there were some rather sweeping, and not entirely accurate portrayals of a number of details of sytems (such as the idea that all Koryu/classical systems were based on intervention of deities, or spiritual beings). With regard to his Ninjutsu book, there were a range of sources for the information contained, including the teachings of Katori Shinto Ryu itself, and is interesting, but not hugely detailed compared with other books out there today.

In short, the influence and effect of these books, far reaching and instrumental in the promotion of true classical Japanese martial traditions cannot be underestimated... but that doesn't mean everything is to be taken as "true and unquestioned".


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 19, 2012)

Personally there are some very fine exponents of the sword within the Bujinkan.  In my opinion the ones that are the best have also augmented their training with an iaido system.  However this is just my opinion.  Chris is right in that Hatsumi Sensei has fantastic movement with the bo and hanbo.  It is some thing simply to watch.  His kenjutsu movement in many ways is also revolutionary as it pertains to the system of Budo Taijutsu.  It is however unique and or different than other Japanese systems.  There are things that I like and of course things that I dislike. (if I liked everything then there would be some thing wrong  )  I for one can appreciate that!


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 20, 2012)

Again, being as diplomatic as I can be, when it comes to sword, being "revolutionary" isn't something I would consider a positive. Mainly because, in order to be different (revolutionary), untested ideas are put forth as true, impractical is put forth as effective, and unrealistic is put forth as correct. It gets further compounded when Hatsumi himself starts talking about "this is the way the Tachi was used....", seemingly citing actual historical usage. The problem, of course, is that there are extant systems that do teach use of tachi, and it's nothing like what Hatsumi presents, as well as the small detail that he can either be revolutionary (teaching a new approach and usage) or he can deal with the historical usage, but the two cancel each other out, so both isn't possible.

Let's look at some examples of the way sword is taught in the Bujinkan:

























To be frank, none of the above shows good understanding of sword... including Hatsumi.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 20, 2012)

Some times one has to hate the internet when you are typing out a long post and then the connection is lost and you lose the post. 


Chris,

You and I probably see most things very similarly.  However the freedom of movement within Budo Taijutsu sword work is some thing that I can appreciate even though I have studied another Japanese sword system.  I have also had the opportunity to have been in the same room on multiple occasions when Hatsumi Sensei has taught Ken and it was crisp, clean and what you would expect from a Japanese Sensei.  I was fortunate to have another Shihan there to point out what I was missing. (lol)  I Have based this opinion off training in another system and working with several other Japanese Sensei.  There are several things within the type of sword work within the Bujinkan that I do not like.  Most of that stems around people teaching with very little in understanding of the movement.  There are fine exponents in the Bujinkan with the sword they are generally people who have lived in Japan and are closer to the source and also have in my opinion broadened out and practiced in a system of iaido, etc.  To many people expect some thing to be everything and that is in the end impossible.  Every system will have it's strong suits and areas where it may not be as strong.  That does not mean that you cannot find some thing important or exceptional within it's weaker areas and likewise things that you may not like as well.  It is very unlike you to bag on a system particularly a system that your system is derived from.  However, It is your opinion and I respect you for giving it. : )


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 20, 2012)

Hey Brian,

Yeah, we'd probably agree on a lot of aspects, really. And, to clarify, I'm not saying that the "freedom" of Budo Taijutsu is a bad thing in the slightest (it has the potential to be both great and terrible, depending on who is approaching it, I've found), the issue is more that what is taught isn't really swordsmanship, it's Budo Taijutsu incorporating a sword. And, looked at in that light, it's fine.

My biggest issue is when Hatsumi starts trying to make it be everything, which he seems to do with the entire system. It is traditional, with archaic weaponry, designed for real modern combat, including using handguns and more. He has a personal usage of a sword based, not in swordsmanship, but as an extension of his Taijutsu (as most of his weaponry use is), and talks about it being the way tachi were used on the battlefield. It's either one or the other, a modern interpretation, or a traditional, historically based approach. It can't be both.

When it comes to the issues I see in the Bujinkan approach to sword, it really should be taken in that light. I'm looking at it in terms of actual swordsmanship. That's not what the Bujinkan presents, and if you're happy with the Bujinkan approach to the weapon, fantastic. But if you want to actually learn the weapon, the Bujinkan is not a good place to do so. And, honestly, it's not due to not understanding the movement, as the movement that should be seen in all aspects of the Bujinkan is Budo Taijutsu, whether armed or not. It's due to not understanding the weapon, it's properties, it's strategies, and it's tactics.

To take the clips I posted last time in order, the first one (Luis Acosta) shows very poor mechanics, bad distancing, but most importantly, a lack in understanding of the usage and tactics of a sword, moving to weak positions, not recognizing what the initial cut to the wrist would do, and using ineffective actions after that. The second (Moshe Kastiel) shows no cutting at all, instead basically just swinging the sword or bokken, and a plethora of non-sword tactics. Essentially, it's a combination of Hanbo (with a sword) and things that he thinks sword actually is. The third (Jeff Prather) is a badly done cut, cramped and cutting with a poorly chosen part of the blade, overly muscled, and over-swung. It was done to be impressive, however the sword cuts an object so easily that there's little skill needed or shown to do such an action.

The fourth clip... Kacem. Ah, Kacem. Firstly, his linguistic argument is rather flawed, which seems to be more to try to give some credence to his Gyokko Ryu Tojutsu teachings. But more to the point, although Kacem is far more clean and precise than many others, there are still huge issues. His use of the sword is still Budo Taijutsu, not Kenjutsu. His blocking actions (seen at 0:24, 0:27 etc) are bad to the point of ineffectual against a full cut, his tactics are not congruent with Kenjutsu, his cutting is cramped, his Iai is full of ineffectual actions, his distancing is too close, and more. As you may tell, I'm not a fan of his.

The last clip is Hatsumi Sensei himself, and is a series of short shots from a Tai Kai in 2004. Note the shots of Takamatsu Sensei teaching in the beginning... deliberate cuts, proper kamae, everything at proper distance (using the mono uchi to cut with, not hitting with whatever part you happen to). Then, when we get the clips of Hatsumi Sensei moving, he is using some rather ill-advised actions (the cross-step and single hand/reverse hand thrust, for instance), hitting rather than cutting, a lack of consistency of blade placement... and then there's the thing where he's holding the shoto and daito at the same time, and tries something that would have the shoto knocked straight out of his hands, weaken his grip on the daito to the point of being unusable, and being immediately killed. This is far from the only case, during another DKMS (I think it was the 2006 one) he's holding two katana by gripping both tsuka together, and the blades both pointing forward, with a small gap between them, using this to trap an incoming sword. I'm sorry, no. Not a chance. Creative, sure. Swordsmanship, nope. His constant justification of it being "you need to be able to do these things in a real fight" are rather sad, really, as it shows a lack of understanding in that instance as well.

As far as being surprised that I'd be "bagging on a system my system is derived from", that's not really the case either. We never did the Budo Taijutsu thing, really, with our training being based in the methods of the Ryu and exploration of those. And the sword methods that exist in the Ryu of the Bujinkan I feel are fantastic, particularly Kukishinden Ryu. It is a very solid sword system, devoid of anything flashy, direct and to the point, with a particular strategy and series of tactics congruently displayed throughout the kata of the Ryu. And if they are being properly, truthfully taught, that's great. But I see no evidence of it, as it would pervade the other usage of sword throughout the system. The Bujinkan itself, and Budo Taijutsu, I am also not "bagging", all I am really doing is offering the observation that sword really isn't present in terms of actual swordsmanship. This is from training in, researching, and studying swordsmanship, far from just Iai. That's why I can say that Hatsumi's take on things such as tachi usage, the Niten Ichi Ryu, Musashi, and other areas are, frankly, wrong. It isn't to take away from what he's incredibly talented at, exceedingly knowledgable about, or anything else. It's just an accurate observation of somethings where he isn't completely correct. As you said, too many people expect something (or someone) to be everything, and that's impossible.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 21, 2012)

Quick question...  I was once told that in Japanese swordsmanship, there are no blocks.  Note that this is not saying no defensive actions, but that all defensive actions are cuts directed at the arms.  Any truth, or maybe just a miscommunication?


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 21, 2012)

Kinda a miscommunication, I'd say. The dominant tactic of Japanese swordsmanship is evasive cutting, so blocks of various types are obviously minimised, as they risk damage to the sword (both to the cutting edge, and the risk of it being broken in half, if the wrong angle is used), as well as simply taking longer. That said, there are a range of "blocking" actions, ranging from deflective actions to jamming ones. Within Kukishinden Ryu, there is one jamming action, and one deflective action... the rest is all evasive cutting.

With what you were told, it sounds like a misinterpretation of Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu. They have a range of their actual techniques "hidden" within their kata, with the blocking actions seen there most often representing cuts to various parts of the body, or something else entirely. A good demonstration is found in these clips:





Go to just after 6 minutes for the Omote no Tachi





Showing the application of the Omote no Tachi. You can see where the "blocking" actions come in, and how the application works.

Some other systems do something similar, but not to the same degree. In many systems, when you see blade on blade contact, that's the way it's supposed to be.

Katori Shinto Ryu are, of course, rather unique in their kata. More commonly they are shorter, more direct. The following are Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, and again, the primary tactic is evasive cutting, although a range of jamming and deflecting (blocking) actions are found.






So I'd say that the person who told you there were no blocking actions was misinterpreting what they had heard or read as it pertains to Katori Shinto Ryu methods, and applied that to all Kenjutsu, which you just can't do.


----------



## Sanke (Jan 21, 2012)

jks9199 said:


> Quick question...  I was once told that in Japanese swordsmanship, there are no blocks.  Note that this is not saying no defensive actions, but that all defensive actions are cuts directed at the arms.  Any truth, or maybe just a miscommunication?



It depends on the system you're talking about. I've seen systems where that is absolutely true, but I've also seen many where there actions that are definitively blocks. Ideally every action should be leading towards cutting down your opponent, but blocking comes into that in many ryu-ha.

EDIT: Whoops, looks like I'm late to the party again. I'll defer to Chris on this


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 21, 2012)

Beat ya.....


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 21, 2012)

Chris,

Like I said before you and I would agree on most points.  What I disagree with is broad based comments that are incorrect.  You see I and others have been in the room when kata for Kukishinden ryu were covered.  So if we can agree that there is good sword work within that ryu then we can agree that people within the Bujinkan can have sword skill sets that are fine.  What the Bujinkan can lack quite often is people teaching to quickly with little to no understanding of what they are doing.  This is and always has been the organizations main issue.  An organization that grew unproportionately like no other system in the world. (headed under one man and not a government)  The Bujinkan did this and it is still an issue of immense proportion.  Hand in hand would go the way ranks are handed out and you get many, many people completely inept as teachers.  However, with this great growth you also have exponents who traveled or lived in Japan and while attending Hatsumi Sensei classes they also attended and received primary instruction with one or several of the Japanese Shihan.  Many of these people have received the proper training and in turn passed it down to their students.  The Bujinkan I would say has as many people of quality (actually more in my opinion) than in the Genbukan or Jinenkan or any off shoot.  What they unfortunately also have is many, many more who are very, very bad.  Still in the end I am happy to have been and be a part of this because you actually do have the opportunity to be closer to the person who is the source for all of the Takamatsuden arts.  What is important though and I mentioned it earlier in my previous post is that it is very, very hard to expect any system to have all the answers.  That is some thing that people in any system need to understand.  Older instructors from back in the day did a lot of cross training and that is some thing that should continue today!


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 21, 2012)

I quite often think people get confused when watching Hatsumi Sensei.  This includes very experienced martial practitioners as well as people that study within his system.  I have often believed that Hatsumi works in the world of possibilities and the what could happen.  This has been proven out in that at this stage if you want a good basis in the system then you need to study with his origional students. (ie. the Japanese Shihan)  Because he works in the realm of possibilities of what could happen he takes the basic fundamentals from the ryu-ha comprising Budo Taijutsu and applies them in a variety of different ways.  He applies his skill sets without worrying about being perfect as in actual combat or any violent situation perfect simply will not happen.  He shows this and is not worried about it.  Not worried about criticism, not worried about anyones opinion.  He teaches within the possibilities of what could happen and some times that is not perfect and yet in other times he shows perfection. (or as close to it is possible)  When you look at iaido instructors and most Japanese systems there is a striving for constant perfection and rarely will you see an instructor show anything that is not very, very close to a very, very tight performance.  This is a difference in approach of teaching.  Having experienced both I can appreciate both.  I think when learning a system one should work very, very hard towards perfection.  However, later on in ones training one needs to place yourself in positions where the perfect cut, technique, etc. is impossible.  Whether through technique training, sparring, etc.  When rolling with my students I have to constantly take a technique and slightly change it to the moment in conjunction to where the other practitioners body is.  Is the technique perfect?  No it would not be textbook per se but it incorporates all the fundamentals and has been maneuvered to get the desired result.  To many people simply do not understand this in Hatsumi Sensei's approach!


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 21, 2012)

Jks9199,  

Chris gives a very good description regarding blocking in the Japanese sword systems.  Spot on in that regard!


----------



## Indagator (Jan 21, 2012)

Out of interest, does anybody know of pubilcally available clips showing good examples of Kukishinden ryu kenjutsu?


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 22, 2012)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Chris,
> 
> Like I said before you and I would agree on most points.  What I disagree with is broad based comments that are incorrect.  You see I and others have been in the room when kata for Kukishinden ryu were covered.  So if we can agree that there is good sword work within that ryu then we can agree that people within the Bujinkan can have sword skill sets that are fine.



Hey Brian,

The material held within, say, Kukishinden Ryu Happo Biken Kenpo is great. However, in order to get that out of it, you need to have an understanding of the sword in the first place. There are plenty of clips of people using the material, but getting it completely wrong, because they don't understand the weapon. Having great material does not necessarily equate to having skilled practitioners, sadly. Here's an example:





Jeffery Miller doing things that wouldn't work in reality, mainly as he misses the timing, tactic, and situation that the kata deals with.

Then we have the Pittsburgh Bujinkan, as part of their "Living Densho" series showing Kukishinden Ryu Kenpo Kamae:




Aside from the fact that a couple aren't from Kukishinden Ryu, there are a number of errors with most of the kamae themselves... and what is with that terrible draw at the beginning? You can hear the ha scraping across the inside of the saya! With a real sword he'd find himself splitting the saya and taking off a few of his fingers pretty quickly!

This lack of understanding of sword is further supported by both your and my observations that the only decent sword people in the Bujinkan are those who have gone and sought sword training outside of the Bujinkan itself. The material might be there, but the people to teach it don't seem to be.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> What the Bujinkan can lack quite often is people teaching to quickly with little to no understanding of what they are doing.  This is and always has been the organizations main issue.


 
Yep. Of course, why that is could stand some objective introspection....



Brian R. VanCise said:


> An organization that grew unproportionately like no other system in the world. (headed under one man and not a government)  The Bujinkan did this and it is still an issue of immense proportion.


 
No, I really don't buy the "we're the biggest, we grew so quickly, that's why it's out of control" argument. The Bujinkan's lack of quality control is not due to the rate of growth or size, but the opposite argument could hold some merit. Again, some objective introspection is good.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> Hand in hand would go the way ranks are handed out and you get many, many people completely inept as teachers.


 
So the question begs why are they awarded a teaching rank and taken into the fraternity of instructors if they're nowhere near ready for it?



Brian R. VanCise said:


> However, with this great growth you also have exponents who traveled or lived in Japan and while attending Hatsumi Sensei classes they also attended and received primary instruction with one or several of the Japanese Shihan.  Many of these people have received the proper training and in turn passed it down to their students.


 
I'm afraid even that argument gets shouted down by some.... There has been the argument put forth that the amount of time in Japan doesn't matter, the rank held in the organisation doesn't matter, the relationship to Hatsumi Sensei doesn't matter, the amount of experience doesn't matter, as no Westerners have ever "got it" (aside from Doron Navon... I'm sure you know who I'm referring to that puts this argument forth)... In fact, the argument is that if you're learning under a Westerner, you might as well not be learning the art, as you need to be learning in Japan from one of a few select individuals... who are the ones who taught the previous Westerners.... who you shouldn't learn from, as they didn't get it... which does put some doubt on the teaching credentials of the Japanese you should be learning from! After all, there are over 3,000 Shidoshi these days, and if none of them ever got it, why would you put any faith in their teachers?

I will say that I think that argument (no Westerners ever got sufficient skill) doesn't hold a lot of merit either, but I will say that I see plenty of issues with even the Japanese Shihan's use of sword, so learning from them, due to their status, wouldn't be enough for me. To learn Budo Taijutsu? Absolutely, go to them. To learn usage of the sword? Sadly, no.

I'll put it this way.... one of the things heard in Koryu sword circles, at least in some training sessions I've been in, is "no lazy Bujinkan sword!" It really does pervade the entire organisation.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> The Bujinkan I would say has as many people of quality (actually more in my opinion) than in the Genbukan or Jinenkan or any off shoot.  What they unfortunately also have is many, many more who are very, very bad.


 
Hmm, I don't know that the numbers would actually support you, to be honest Brian. But, more important is the second half of your statement. Simple number of "good" people doesn't actually indicate anything other than that those people would probably have been good no matter where they were. Having it be statistically far fewer (1 in 10, say, for the Jinenkan, 1 in 12 for the Genbukan, 1 in 1,000 for the Bujinkan), but relying on the fact that there are more Bujinkan members to give a higher number of "good" Bujinkan people than Jinenkan or Genbukan is frankly fudging the numbers.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> Still in the end I am happy to have been and be a part of this because you actually do have the opportunity to be closer to the person who is the source for all of the Takamatsuden arts.


 
The most important thing, I feel, is to be happy where you are, so fantastic. However, it might be noted that the only person who claimed that Hatsumi was Takamatsu's only heir was, well, Hatsumi. Takamatsu Sensei had other successors in a range of lines, so saying that Hatsumi is the only source for the Takamatsuden arts isn't really accurate either. It gets magnified when the actual Ryu aren't really taught... Hatsumi may hold the lineage of them, but he really doesn't teach them.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> What is important though and I mentioned it earlier in my previous post is that it is very, very hard to expect any system to have all the answers.  That is some thing that people in any system need to understand.  Older instructors from back in the day did a lot of cross training and that is some thing that should continue today!



Hmm, historically, the concept of cross-training, and it's prevalence in certain periods of history was far from a "standard" thing. Certainly a number did train in a number of arts and systems, but the reason wasn't necessarily even to be better at anything... it was that certain Daimyo would reward their retainers with higher wages, better appointments, swords etc for attaining Menkyo Kaiden in different systems. Then there were some systems that wouldn't let you train in anything else if you were training with them.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> I quite often think people get confused when watching Hatsumi Sensei.  This includes very experienced martial practitioners as well as people that study within his system.


 
I think the confusion, to be frank, is something deliberate that he does. It's much easier to be marveled at when people aren't sure what you're doing, or how you're doing it. The problem is that he's put himself in the position of being a "teacher", and if everyone is confused, and doesn't know how he's doing what he's doing, that's not teaching, it's putting on a show.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> I have often believed that Hatsumi works in the world of possibilities and the what could happen.


 
Hmm. I'd agree if I hadn't seen so many, many instances of what he does being completely outside the realms of possibilities and realism. What he does is put on a show, and plays with concepts, whether they have anything to do with reality or possibility or not. Which is fine, provided that is understood. If you want to learn the finer details of controlling distance, balance etc, if you want to experience a truly creative martial artist in free expression, which is an amazing thing to witness, Hatsumi is the man, no doubt. But reality and actual possibilities? I'm afraid not.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> This has been proven out in that at this stage if you want a good basis in the system then you need to study with his origional students. (ie. the Japanese Shihan)


 
Unfortunately, we then get back to the idea that none of the other students of the Shihan have really "got it" (according to some)... Additionally, you really shouldn't need someone like Noguchi Sensei to teach you the Kihon. I can certainly agree that he can provide a wealth of insight and knowledge to your performance of them, but you shouldn't need to go to someone of that level for such basic instruction. Maybe some fine-tuning, but that should be it.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> Because he works in the realm of possibilities of what could happen he takes the basic fundamentals from the ryu-ha comprising Budo Taijutsu and applies them in a variety of different ways.  He applies his skill sets without worrying about being perfect as in actual combat or any violent situation perfect simply will not happen.  He shows this and is not worried about it.  Not worried about criticism, not worried about anyones opinion.  He teaches within the possibilities of what could happen and some times that is not perfect and yet in other times he shows perfection. (or as close to it is possible)


 
The biggest problem with this is what he says, though. If it was put forth that way, fine, but Hatsumi Sensei does have a tendency to say things like "this is what you need in a real fight... in a real fight, you need to be aware of these things...", even when what he's just shown is so unlikely to occur he might as well have told you that you need to know every language on earth in case the girl you meet tonight is from Lapland, and only speaks Swahili. He also has a tendency to show things that are so unrealistic as to never occur (an unarmed person punches when you have a sword or two in your belt, Hatsumi shows how to draw your sword in responce and use it to cut/lock up the attacker, then says that "you need to be able to access your sword, and draw it this way"(?). No, as that attack doesn't come up in any of the Ryu, and it's Hatsumi playing with ideas, not possibilities or reality. He just dresses it like he is. And completely agreed that he's not fussed about other people's opinions or criticism... but, honestly, that's another part of the issue in the first place.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> When you look at iaido instructors and most Japanese systems there is a striving for constant perfection and rarely will you see an instructor show anything that is not very, very close to a very, very tight performance.  This is a difference in approach of teaching.  Having experienced both I can appreciate both.  I think when learning a system one should work very, very hard towards perfection.


 
Yep, agreed. 



Brian R. VanCise said:


> However, later on in ones training one needs to place yourself in positions where the perfect cut, technique, etc. is impossible.  Whether through technique training, sparring, etc.  When rolling with my students I have to constantly take a technique and slightly change it to the moment in conjunction to where the other practitioners body is.  Is the technique perfect?  No it would not be textbook per se but it incorporates all the fundamentals and has been maneuvered to get the desired result.  To many people simply do not understand this in Hatsumi Sensei's approach!



There's quite a difference between needing to adjust a technique in the moment and going off on creative tangents, though.



Indagator said:


> Out of interest, does anybody know of pubilcally available clips showing good examples of Kukishinden ryu kenjutsu?



If there is, I haven't seen it! If you're looking for material to aid in your exploration, though, I'd suggest a combination of Manaka Sensei's DVD (which covers them in more "technically correct" fashion), and then bring in Hatsumi Sensei's Ken Tachi Katana DVD. He never actually shows the kata properly, but shows the concepts and ideas in a very close fashion (closer than Hatsumi Sensei tends to in any other DVD, he usually has the senior students show the formal kata first, then he explores concepts from it). In this one, there are a few things that are ill-advised in swordsmanship (to say the least), but you'll get a feel for the system itself. You'll still need someone to show you the formal kata, though.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 22, 2012)

I really hate it when every point that a person wants to address is broken up into little quotes.  It is an over whelming kind of a thing and I do not care to address all quotes in that fashion.  So, having said that I will address things in one paragraph as always.

*
Chris we will obviously agree to disagree on some points*!  You are right on some things and we would agree on many points.  However, it would appear that you are also misinformed in other areas.  Typically I stay out of internet discussions like this for just this reason.  I certainly do not like to generate ill will towards anyone and especially towards me and hope that none has been or will be generated here as I respect you.  There is no debating or trying to inform someone on the internet when they already have a perception developed and in a fortress like mode.  I do not feel that you are necessarily the best suited to address all issues within the Takamatsuden arts.  Not that you do not have a wealth of information, are a great guy and a fantastic martial practitioner.  Just that you are not in my opinion the authority on the Bujinkan, Genbukan or Jinenkan because you have not studied within those groups. (ie. your primary training is an Takamatsuden off shoot and by all accounts a good one)  If you base everything solely of internet video of dvd's, books, etc. then that is simply not good enough.  I am not saying that you cannot have an opinion just that it may not be accurate.  The lord also knows that I would not catagorize myself in any way "the expert" on the Bujinkan, etc.  Certainly someone with experience who has trained at times with Hatsumi Sensei, the Japanese Shihan, many western Shihan including Doron Navon but not an expert at all. (many of the western Shihan I have trained with are great by the way)  The Bujinkan is not my main focus so even though I have been practicing for around twenty years in it I will leave it to the "real experts" to defend it who have sacrificed quite a bit more than someone like myself.  Unfortunately most of them stay off MartialTalk at this point in time. Sorry to have bothered but felt the need to address misinformation on several levels.  Bagging on another system even when making some correct points does no one any good.  Instead it can and does create a culture of this which unfortuantely I believe pervades the internet.  it also does no good for the perception of the system of the person putting it forward.  Like I said before you and I would agree on many points but neither of us benefit in any way from this conversation.  I hope we can though still be internet friends and would love to meet you in person and disucss all things martial and do some training.  No ill will or hard feelings on my part.  Just my opinion!  *A conversation like this only lessons each of us!  *No one gains I will have an opinion that there is some good sword work within the Bujinkan because I have actually witnessed it first hand plus have a perspective on Japanese sword work outside the Bujinkan in order to base that on.  You will have a different opinion based on your information.  There you have it!


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 25, 2012)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> I really hate it when every point that a person wants to address is broken up into little quotes.  It is an over whelming kind of a thing and I do not care to address all quotes in that fashion.  So, having said that I will address things in one paragraph as always.



Ha, sorry about that... I have a tendency to prefer to be thorough.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> *Chris we will obviously agree to disagree on some points*!  You are right on some things and we would agree on many points.  However, it would appear that you are also misinformed in other areas.  Typically I stay out of internet discussions like this for just this reason.  I certainly do not like to generate ill will towards anyone and especially towards me and hope that none has been or will be generated here as I respect you.  There is no debating or trying to inform someone on the internet when they already have a perception developed and in a fortress like mode.  I do not feel that you are necessarily the best suited to address all issues within the Takamatsuden arts.  Not that you do not have a wealth of information, are a great guy and a fantastic martial practitioner.  Just that you are not in my opinion the authority on the Bujinkan, Genbukan or Jinenkan because you have not studied within those groups. (ie. your primary training is an Takamatsuden off shoot and by all accounts a good one)  If you base everything solely of internet video of dvd's, books, etc. then that is simply not good enough.  I am not saying that you cannot have an opinion just that it may not be accurate.  The lord also knows that I would not catagorize myself in any way "the expert" on the Bujinkan, etc.  Certainly someone with experience who has trained at times with Hatsumi Sensei, the Japanese Shihan, many western Shihan including Doron Navon but not an expert at all. (many of the western Shihan I have trained with are great by the way)  The Bujinkan is not my main focus so even though I have been practicing for around twenty years in it I will leave it to the "real experts" to defend it who have sacrificed quite a bit more than someone like myself.  Unfortunately most of them stay off MartialTalk at this point in time. Sorry to have bothered but felt the need to address misinformation on several levels.  Bagging on another system even when making some correct points does no one any good.  Instead it can and does create a culture of this which unfortuantely I believe pervades the internet.  it also does no good for the perception of the system of the person putting it forward.  Like I said before you and I would agree on many points but neither of us benefit in any way from this conversation.  I hope we can though still be internet friends and would love to meet you in person and disucss all things martial and do some training.  No ill will or hard feelings on my part.  Just my opinion!  *A conversation like this only lessons each of us!  *No one gains I will have an opinion that there is some good sword work within the Bujinkan because I have actually witnessed it first hand plus have a perspective on Japanese sword work outside the Bujinkan in order to base that on.  You will have a different opinion based on your information.  There you have it!



Here's the funny thing, Brian, I agree with almost everything you say here.... except in some finer details. Really, I haven't "bagged" on the Bujinkan at all, I have stated that sword is not a focus, and it shows. While you state that I'm not in a position to be an "expert" on the Takamatsuden groups, honestly, I'm probably in a better position than most, having had dealings with all three Kans (which includes training, conversations, comparisons, and more), seen how we approach things (we may be an offshoot, but we weren't when I started), trained in Koryu (sword specific), and more. Someone who is pretty much just dealing in one, on the other hand, would be less able to comment on similarities or differences, I feel.

When it comes to using videos as references to base my ideas on (not solely, I might add...), by commenting that I haven't seen what isn't on video, honestly, falls flat. There's, what, 40 odd years of video out there now, including all the DKMS's since 1990, multiple "Training with Hatsumi/Training in Japan" videos and DVDs, then of course, there's the Hiden Densho series, which is basically the video of every one of Hatsumi Sensei's classes over the past 15 years or so as they come out. And, unless the senior membership "turn off" their swordmanship ability whenever a camera is rolling, making observations as to the general state of swordsmanship in the Bujinkan based of such a wealth of video evidence could be taken as being rather valid. 

The thing I find most interesting here is that you seem to be arguing against things that I have said. I have stated that it is not my opinion that the Western seniors aren't good, or don't "get it", but that that was an argument that I have heard put forth, as have you. I also stated that I believed that there were good Bujinkan members with sword, but that they got that understanding from outside of the Bujinkan. You agreed with me by basically saying as much yourself.

My argument is really fairly simple. The Bujinkan Ryu contains some very solid swordwork, but, due to Hatsumi Sensei not being interested in it to the degree that he is in Bo and Taijutsu, it isn't focused on. Instead, there is a focus on using Taijutsu, and employing a sword within that framework. This has lead to a lack of actual swordsmanship (kenjutsu) skill within the Bujinkan overall, which you agreed with. This is supported by all evidence that has been presented.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 25, 2012)

*Chris where I have a problem* is someone insinuating that there is no good swordsmen or women within the Bujinkan.  That simply is not the case.  What I do agree with you is that there are some bad ones out there but they are not representative of the best practitioners in the Bujinkan. (this goes with the overall Bujinkan in all areas)  The best ones in my opinion also have training outside of the Bujinkan in iaido and that gives them another perspective to work with.  I appreciate the concise, technical aspects in my iaido training.  Yet, I also appreciate the freedom of movement in Hatsumi Sensei's method of teaching.  Having a good foundation from long ago in the Takamatsuden arts I have been blessed. (as have many others)  I would not appreciate anyone tearing them down or their teachers.  What I also have a problem with is in people going out collecting video clips from some bad examples and then saying here it is everything is crap.  That simply is not true and you know it as well as I do.  With Soke yes I would expect you can find an interesting clip here or there because he has been filmed like no other martial practitioner ever.  However, look at my explanation in a previous post on his methodology and you can understand why or at least attempt to.  Hatsumi Sensei is the inheritor of the Takamatsuden arts.  This is without question.  He also is the principle teacher to the other founders of the Genbukan and Jinenkan.  Once again this is without question.  He was also a teacher to your teacher as you well know.  I find it not to my liking when others are "bagging" on him.  He is a revolutionary martial practitioner and there has been attempts recently (few years) to really go after him.  I have a problem with that!

Once again we do have many things that we agree with each other on.


----------



## gregtca (Jan 25, 2012)

Gee this is getting a bit repetative, so i wonder if there is a difference between aiado and iai jutsu , and what you guys think of each , since were going off into sword systems etc, 

Regards ,

Greg


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 27, 2012)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> *Chris where I have a problem* is someone insinuating that there is no good swordsmen or women within the Bujinkan.  That simply is not the case.


 
No, Brian, I've insinuated (actually, outright said) that swordsmanship is not the focus of the Bujinkan, that the way sword is approached is not what would be classed as swordsmanship, and as a result, if you are seriously wanting to focus on sword, the way it is approached in the Bujinkan is not an advised plan. It's really the same as saying that you don't really learn sword in an Aikido school, which you don't. You learn Aiki principles expressed through use of a sword... the same way that, in the Bujinkan, you learn Budo Taijutsu principles expressed through use of a sword. If you're unsure of that (the Aikiken aspect), head to a sword-specific forum and look for anyone claiming to know how to use a sword due to their Aikido lessons. 

And the reason for sword not being a focus is that it's not a focus of Hatsumi Sensei's. That's not an attack on him, it's an observation. It's evidenced quite easily by simply watching him with a sword, or a representative weapon. Look to the thread on "Iai in the Bujinkan by Hatsumi Sensei" over on MAP. The clips are removed from you-tube now (I was looking for them for this thread, actually), but they're still easy enough to watch if you have the Ken Tachi Katana DVD, as it's the "extra material" on that disc.

As I said, though, if you look at it as an expression, or exploration of Budo Taijutsu principles with a sword, it's exactly as it should be. The problem comes in when it's thought of as swordsmanship training, and as that was the focus of the book request at the beginning of this thread, it's pertinent to make that point.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> What I do agree with you is that there are some bad ones out there but they are not representative of the best practitioners in the Bujinkan. (this goes with the overall Bujinkan in all areas)


 
No, but what they are is representative of the Bujinkan, whether most of the membership wish to admit that or not. The elitist argument of "well, the ones that put videos out but aren't really any good don't really represent the Bujinkan, because they don't really get it" is frankly no argument at all. Of course they represent the Bujinkan, they are putting up videos based on their Bujinkan rank, showing their take on the Bujinkan art, under the name of the Bujinkan. Whether you (or others) like it or not, they do represent the Bujinkan.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> The best ones in my opinion also have training outside of the Bujinkan in iaido and that gives them another perspective to work with.  I appreciate the concise, technical aspects in my iaido training.  Yet, I also appreciate the freedom of movement in Hatsumi Sensei's method of teaching.


 
You know, Brian, that just supports what I've been saying... in fact, it's actually repeating what I said first. JKS asked whether there were any Bujinkan members who were skilled with a sword, and I answered that I'd think absolutely there are... but that they would have gained that skill from outside the Bujinkan itself. Since then you've argued against me by restating the exact same thing I already said. Interesting, don't you think?

And when it comes to appreciating Hatsumi Sensei's teaching method, fantastic. Although I have to say that it's completely beside the point, honestly. It doesn't mean anything when it comes to whether or not actual sword skills are taught.... in fact, it's an indication that they're not. That, once again, doesn't mean that what's being taught is bad, without value or merit, or anything else... just that it's not swordsmanship. For the record, though, it's a lot easier to see when you've trained in Kenjutsu, rather than Iai. 



Brian R. VanCise said:


> Having a good foundation from long ago in the Takamatsuden arts I have been blessed. (as have many others)  I would not appreciate anyone tearing them down or their teachers.


 
I haven't torn anyone down, Brian. I have made observations. None of it has been attacks, stating that Hatsumi is wrong in a number of areas isn't an attack, it's an observation. And believe me, Brian, he is wrong in a number of cases.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> What I also have a problem with is in people going out collecting video clips from some bad examples and then saying here it is everything is crap.  That simply is not true and you know it as well as I do.


 
Actually, I looked through every example I could find, and couldn't find anything that I would consider good. It wasn't just a deliberate sample of poor examples... I mean, I included Kacem Zoughari, who many feel is one of the most technical around at the moment, I chose a 13th Dan Shihan, I also had a clip of Hatsumi Sensei himself (after the one I wanted, which centred on sword, was removed), and there is a consistency throughout all the clips. Some hide it better, but the same issues are present. That indicates that it is common to the Bujinkan approach. I mean, if every single example you'd ever seen from a wide range of sources all showed the same thing, ranging over 40 years worth of material, would you still be saying "oh, I haven't seen everything, I shouldn't make judgments about them yet" if it wasn't the Bujinkan? Do you think that, although it isn't your main martial focus, you may be a bit to close to the issue to be looking at it objectively? This is an extreme example, and I mean no comparison between Hatsumi Sensei and the Bujinkan, but how many clips of Ashida Kim to you need to watch to known that there are areas in which he is rather lacking in understanding and knowledge?



Brian R. VanCise said:


> With Soke yes I would expect you can find an interesting clip here or there because he has been filmed like no other martial practitioner ever.  However, look at my explanation in a previous post on his methodology and you can understand why or at least attempt to.


 
Yes, I saw your explanation, and, as I said, I found it flawed. I see the idealism you're employing with regards to him, and understand it, but no. The explanation failed. And in terms of "an interesting clip here or there", honestly, I've got gods know how many hours of footage of him, and, when it comes to sword, I'd be hard pressed to find any example where I would say the swordsmanship passes muster as swordsmanship. It would be interesting to sit with you and discuss something like a DKMS video (any of them, really), to compare what we're seeing, but at this point in time, that's not an option. I will say that we are obviously seeing different things due to different experiences and backgrounds, though... but I really do think you're a bit too close to see what I'm actually saying.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> Hatsumi Sensei is the inheritor of the Takamatsuden arts.  This is without question.


 
No, it's not without question, actually. Hatsumi Sensei is an inheritor of Takamatsu Sensei's teachings. There were others. And even the ones he claims have been disputed, such as the court case surrounding Gikan Ryu, and one or two other things. 



Brian R. VanCise said:


> He also is the principle teacher to the other founders of the Genbukan and Jinenkan.  Once again this is without question.


 
With regard to Manaka Sensei and the Jinenkan, sure. But it's also important to note that Manaka also created the Jinen Ryu to focus on swordsmanship, Iai, Jutte etc as he felt the Bujinkan teachings were very lacking in that regard, so there's further evidence of a lack of sword training in the Bujinkan... after all, he was a student of Hatsumi Sensei's for, what, 40 years? Since he was 14?

With regard to Tanemura Sensei and the Genbukan, that's more a matter of debate, and you may get an answer you don't expect if you asked Tanemura himself. Although he spent the most amount of time under Hatsumi, out of all the lines in the Genbukan, only the Gyokko Ryu line comes from Hatsumi Sensei. Nothing else does. They are lines that Tanemura Sensei recieved from Sato Kinbei Sensei, Kimura Masaji Sensei, Ueno Sensei, Fukumoto Sensei, Nagao Sensei, and so on. The line of Hontai Takagi Yoshin Ryu he teaches is a completely separate one to the Bujinkan, for instance. And, in order to focus the swordsmanship for the Genbukan, lines such as Mugen Shinto Ryu are present, and Tanemura has structured an entire syllabus for sword out of that, Kukishinden Ryu Kenpo, Togakure Ryu Biken, sword found in Daito Ryu (from Nagao Sensei, Ono-ha Itto Ryu), and his own perspective. So, no. Not without question.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> He was also a teacher to your teacher as you well know.  I find it not to my liking when others are "bagging" on him.  He is a revolutionary martial practitioner and there has been attempts recently (few years) to really go after him.  I have a problem with that!



Yes, I'm aware of the relationship to my teacher... a fair bit more than you might be aware of. But again, I was not "bagging" on him. I was observing that there are some things that he does incredibly well, and other things where it seems more that the student body allows, or encourages, the image of him as expert in all areas. This is part of where people have a problem, citing the perceived "cult of personality" problem. And, to be frank, saying such things as "he is a revolutionary martial practitioner" is part of it. He's certainly a unique teacher and practitioner, with some fantastic skills gained from a lifetime of training and experience, but he's not really changing anything other than the way the Bujinkan arts are seen. He's not what I would consider revolutionary... as he has caused no revolution. MMA has, as has BJJ in recent decades. Hatsumi Sensei, for all that he has accomplished, has not. Outside of the X-Kan area, he's actually not that well known. 



Brian R. VanCise said:


> Once again we do have many things that we agree with each other on.



That we do. In fact, most of your arguments against me were done by repeating what I had already stated... so we're probably a lot closer than might be thought.



gregtca said:


> Gee this is getting a bit repetative, so i wonder if there is a difference between aiado and iai jutsu , and what you guys think of each , since were going off into sword systems etc,
> 
> Regards ,
> 
> Greg



Hey, Greg.

Yeah, it's a little repetitive... so let's look at your question there! Sadly, there's really not a clean answer, as, as with all such things, the only answer can be "it depends". And what it depends on is what the heads of the systems decided to call it. There's really no hard and fast distinction in Japanese arts that would make one a "do" art, and another a "jutsu" one. For example, I train in a system that contains Iaijutsu (and uses another name as well, again a "jutsu" term), and another which refers to it's approach as Iaido. The Iaido system is bigger, and is certainly a combative form, with a great focus on ensuring the opponent is dead, so it's hardly a more "spiritual" system. Then there are systems that do away with the idea entirely. I was invited to attend the training of a system (as an observer) who refer to their Iai syllabus as just that, Iai. No "do", and no "jutsu". And you'd be hard pressed to find any real distinction between it and the other two other than the individual idiocincrasies that exist in each system anyway.

I'll put it this way: Shinto Muso Ryu, up until the 25th Headmaster, Shimizu Takaji, referred to their system as "Jojutsu". Shimizu decided to change it to "Jodo", in line with Seitei Jo, which he helped create out of Shinto Muso Ryu methods, albeit simplified in a number of ways. However, the change was not universal... and today you can find different lines teaching the same art (with their own "flavour", depending on the teacher and line... the Kyushu line and the Tokyo line can be quite different) named either "jutsu" or "do", with no real distinction between them.

Oh, but just to confuse you, even the usage of the term "Iai" isn't universal... some systems use the term "Batto", some "Battodo", and some "Battojutsu".... and some Jujutsu systems use the term Iai to refer to their Jujutsu unarmed suwari waza!


----------



## skuggvarg (Jan 27, 2012)

Indagator said:


> Out of interest, does anybody know of pubilcally available clips showing good examples of Kukishinden ryu kenjutsu?



I like this one:




Apart from that, anything by Mr Zoughari. Check out the Shinobi winds DVD where there is a lot of footage on kenjutsu by Mr Zoughari. Chris may not like it but youll be hard pressed to find something better within the Bujinkan (in my opinion).

Regards / Skuggvarg


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 27, 2012)

Ah, he's an interesting one... honestly, if it didn't say "Bujinkan" on his clips, I'd swear I was watching a Genbukan practitioner. And that's because he seems to mainly be copying Genbukan material. His Asayama Ichiden Ryu clip is basically copying the way Tanemura Sensei shows Asayama Ichiden (which is distinct and different from other lines), his Takagi Yoshin clip shows him performing versions of the Ishitani Den, which is the line in the Genbukan, rather than the Mizuta Den, which is the one found in the Bujinkan, and then there's this one. The movement, the chiburi and noto, the kamae (with the very straight front leg) are all very much what is found in the Genbukan. So I'd say he's basically copying Genbukan material, or was with them originally.

To the clip itself, though, the first technique is performed with poor sense of distance (moving in to strike with the kashira, then trying to draw and cut with a gyakute nuki), which is done in a way where the cut isn't supported by his wrist, and would have issues in terms of cutting power. The overcut on the second one isn't really very good either, but is pretty much a copy of one of Tanemura Sensei's demonstrations (not actually Kukishinden or Togakure, for the record, but part of the Genbukan Bikenjutsu syllabus, created out of those sources and others, but not strictly the Ryu methods). The third is Togakure Ryu Biken, but done with too much strain on the wrists, which can cause issues with hasuji and absorbing the impact when cutting... but again we see the very Genbukan form of reiho (sword held out to the side, also seen in their form of Tenshin Hyoho Kukishin Bojutsu). The next one is better (and I'm assuming only out of distance for safety), but the fifth, basically a version of Kiri Sage, has a few issues, namely the jam (although safety concepts were probably coming into play there), the running when he didn't have the advantage, and would have been sent onto his backside, and the placement of the kick itself.

Saw that one in my search.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 27, 2012)

Chris,

You are taking shots whether you feel it or not.  You are right in that BJJ/MMA has incredibly revolutionized martial arts in recent years.  It is the boom that is going on right now.  However, if you go back to the 80's there was the Ninja boom which for better or worse did have a revolutionary effect in that you, I and probably anyone else who studies the Takamatsuden arts would not be studying it unless that happened.  It did happen, he is a revolutionary martial practitioner. (in this regard your opinion is well unimportant)  No, I am not that close to the situation but instead very objective!  that is why it is easy for me to see that you are taking shots at the Bujinkan.  I have and do practice Budo Taijutsu and am a member in the Bujinkan but..... that is certainly not my main focus of study.  In regards to Tanemura Sensei he came to those teachers already a finished product based on his training with Hatsumi Sensei.  So much so that he could easily assimilate minor nuances in teaching and allow them to find someone to carry on their lines. However, he was principally taught by Hatsumi Sensei and there is absolutley no doubt in that! (irregardless of what he says, you say or anyone else says)  Maybe knowing a little more regarding Manaka Sensei and Jinen Ryu there is no doubt that he created this ryu-ha so that he could pass on his approach in his way.  I would expect anyone at his level to do so!  His sword training based though comes from the Takamatsuden arts and teaching directly from Hatsumi Sensei with I am sure some outside influcences as would be expected by anyone studying as long as he has.  Both the Jinenkan and Genbukan have maintained extremely tight quality control and it shows.  Though I would have to give the edge to the Jinenkan.  I applaud them for this as I believe in extremely tight quality control! (that is how I go about my business)  As I said before I do not necessarily think you should promote yourself as "the expert" on the Takamatsuden arts.  Your system broke off a long time ago and has missed out on maintaining a current feel of the movement and training.  I would not bag on your instructor and would appreciate it if you would show the same restraint on the individual that taught your instructor.  I think you owe it to him as your training in your system would be mute without him.  Once again I would place myself in the exact same position in that I would not characterize myself as "the expert" and would want the people reading this to know that there are other people out there with more experience and more knowledge in this area than both of us.  Unfortunately they are not here.  My biggest issue with your take here is that you present yourself as this is the way it is when it is not!  Sorry!  That and you are bagging on Hatsumi Sensei and the Bujinkan and I have a problem with it!  

We can continue to go around in circles here.  My opinion that you are "bagging" on Hatsumi Sensei is not going to change.  Yes, we agree on a lot of things but the above is not going to change.  So....... maybe we should drop it!


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 28, 2012)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Chris,
> 
> You are taking shots whether you feel it or not.


 
Seriously Brian? You're telling me what my intent is now? Really?

Brian, I have a lot of time for you, and a lot of respect from your posts on this and other forums, but you seem to be deciding what I mean in my posts here, regardless of my actual intent or phrasing.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> You are right in that BJJ/MMA has incredibly revolutionized martial arts in recent years.  It is the boom that is going on right now.  However, if you go back to the 80's there was the Ninja boom which for better or worse did have a revolutionary effect in that you, I and probably anyone else who studies the Takamatsuden arts would not be studying it unless that happened.  It did happen, he is a revolutionary martial practitioner. (in this regard your opinion is well unimportant)


 
The MMA boom and the BJJ boom have changed the way the martial arts are seen and trained across the board. Ninjutsu has been affected by it, along with pretty much every other system... things such as the "aliveness" movement, and the idea of a system working in the context of MMA/BJJ has pervaded the martial arts consciousness. Ninjutsu enjoyed large popularity in the early 80's, but it didn't change the way other arts trained. Besides, if anything, we could afford the credit for "revolutionary teacher" to Stephen Hayes, if we're just looking at popularity being given to the system, rather than Hatsumi.

But I have to ask, how is my opinion "unimportant"? Because it disagrees with yours?



Brian R. VanCise said:


> No, I am not that close to the situation but instead very objective!  that is why it is easy for me to see that you are taking shots at the Bujinkan.  I have and do practice Budo Taijutsu and am a member in the Bujinkan but..... that is certainly not my main focus of study.


 
Hmm, you're not too close to see objectively, yet see attacks where they aren't, and want to put Hatsumi up as a "revolutionary" teacher, then say that my opinion is "unimportant" when I disagree with that assessment, argue that, regardless of even what Tanemura has to say about what he teaches, and where the influence came from, your take is so accurate that "there is absolutely no doubt!"... frankly, Brian, you're getting rather emotionally involved in this discussion, which I'm not. And that kinda shoots your comment down there, honestly.

Besides, the only members of the Bujinkan that I have genuinely "taken shots at" are those who insist that Hatsumi is borderline infallible, a master of everything he does, and anyone who doesn't agree is questioning him and the art. That's who I have a problem with. 



Brian R. VanCise said:


> In regards to Tanemura Sensei he came to those teachers already a finished product based on his training with Hatsumi Sensei.  So much so that he could easily assimilate minor nuances in teaching and allow them to find someone to carry on their lines. However, he was principally taught by Hatsumi Sensei and there is absolutley no doubt in that! (irregardless of what he says, you say or anyone else says)


 
Seriously? Regardless of what Tanemura Sensei says about his own training? Surely he would have some perspective on the matter, yeah? Yes, he trained with Hatsumi Sensei for a long time, was the Vice President of the Bujinkan, but a number of the lines he learnt feature a lot more than "minor nuances" in terms of differences... and then there's the Ryu that aren't in the Bujinkan as well. 



Brian R. VanCise said:


> Maybe knowing a little more regarding Manaka Sensei and Jinen Ryu there is no doubt that he created this ryu-ha so that he could pass on his approach in his way.  I would expect anyone at his level to do so!  His sword training based though comes from the Takamatsuden arts and teaching directly from Hatsumi Sensei with I am sure some outside influcences as would be expected by anyone studying as long as he has.


 
So... you're saying you're unfamiliar with Jinen Ryu, but are stating where it comes from? I will say that aspects such as the Iai don't really match anything I've seen in the Bujinkan, so I'm not so sure about your assumption there...



Brian R. VanCise said:


> Both the Jinenkan and Genbukan have maintained extremely tight quality control and it shows.  Though I would have to give the edge to the Jinenkan.  I applaud them for this as I believe in extremely tight quality control! (that is how I go about my business)


 
That they have. 



Brian R. VanCise said:


> As I said before I do not necessarily think you should promote yourself as "the expert" on the Takamatsuden arts.


 
I don't. I just present my observations based on my experience and understanding.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> Your system broke off a long time ago and has missed out on maintaining a current feel of the movement and training.


 
See, this argument I just don't get... I understand having consistent contact with seniors to ensure you don't go off the track, and to be corrected as you continue, but as members of the Bujinkan are free to go off in any direction they want, and there seems to be very little correction, rather constant newly created expressions, correction isn't an argument either. To be blunt, the reason the argument is made is so people keep coming back to Hatsumi, not for improvement of their teaching and training of the art. This is then further encouraged (positively reinforced) with fast rank promotions. 



Brian R. VanCise said:


> I would not bag on your instructor and would appreciate it if you would show the same restraint on the individual that taught your instructor.  I think you owe it to him as your training in your system would be mute without him.


 
I'm more than used to my instructor being attacked... there was a thread about his blog on Alpha Style over on MAP. And really, Brian, all I've said is that Hatsumi has gaps, and one of the is sword. I am being restrained.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> Once again I would place myself in the exact same position in that I would not characterize myself as "the expert" and would want the people reading this to know that there are other people out there with more experience and more knowledge in this area than both of us.  Unfortunately they are not here.


 
Here's the thing though... what would you say if those more knowledgable and experienced people agreed with my assessment? Because, when it comes to sword practitioners, they really do seem to. At least, all the ones I've talked with in various fashions.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> My biggest issue with your take here is that you present yourself as this is the way it is when it is not!  Sorry!  That and you are bagging on Hatsumi Sensei and the Bujinkan and I have a problem with it!



Seriously, Brian, I'm not. I'm making observations. I've also pointed out a number of times that these observations are not even indicative of anything inherently negative... as I've said, it's not swordsmanship, it's Budo Taijutsu incorporating a sword. And if you want to focus on Budo Taijutsu in all it's aspects, that's fine and great. There's no problem. But that doesn't make it swordsmanship, just because you think the observation is by definition an attack.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> We can continue to go around in circles here.  My opinion that you are "bagging" on Hatsumi Sensei is not going to change.  Yes, we agree on a lot of things but the above is not going to change.  So....... maybe we should drop it!



So... you are now saying that the idea of my attacking Hatsumi and the Bujinkan is just your opinion... without really knowing where my perspective is coming from.... but my opinion based on my observations is "unimportant"? And I'm "taking shots whether (I) say so or not"?

I agree with dropping it, though. If for no other reason than you have not actually presented any counters to my arguments or observations, other than claiming that my observations don't count, even when you state the same thing that I have. Hmm.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 28, 2012)

Chris, 

It is a very old tactic to say some thing nice about someone and then say something negative.  You did this in this conversation by saying Hatsumi has great Bo and Hanbo skills but really has no swordsmanship skill. (or some thing to this effect)  You did this.  *You created this*.  It is on you!  I agree with you that his Bo and Hanbo skills are fantastic. (they really are)  I also agree that there are a lot of Bujinkan practitioners with terrible sword skills.  Your words were more along the lines that there is no swordsmanship in Budo Taijutsu just using a sword with stick movement.  In that I disagree.  We both know that the ryu within Budo Taijustsu have sword skills within them.  I also disagree that there are no good sword practitioners in the Bujinkan.  Where we agree again is in the opinion that the best sword practitioners in the Bujinkan also have outside influences in iaido, etc.  That doesn't necessarily mean that the sword technique in the Bujinkan is bad just that in "my opinion" it helps to give them another perspective which I think is important in all Japanese sword work.  I would say the same thing if a Japanese sword practitioner only practiced iaido in that they would benefit greatly from studying another line of Japanese sword work.  My contention is that Tanemura Sensei came as an almost finished product to his other teachers.  Everyone knows of the enmity that Tanemura Sensei feels toward Hatsumi Sensei and probably vice versa.  I would not expect him to give Hatsumi Sensei a lot of credit but that does not change that he owes him credit for his development just as if you had a riff with your teacher and broke off you would still owe him a lot for your development.  You may feel that your just making observations here but...... your criticism is taking shots whether you have the intent or not.  In some regards you seem to be taking more shots on here and elsewhere at the Bujinkan and that is just sad Chris.  I regret getting in this conversation because I do not like to push back or point out to people online that they are being disrespectful or bagging on a system but here we are.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 28, 2012)

Chris,

Just wanted to point out that while I might disagree with you on a few things that does not mean I do not think you are a great guy without a lot of knowledge.


----------



## Aiki Lee (Jan 28, 2012)

Perhaps it's time we let this thread die? It really has nothing to do with the OP anymore and though it has been an interesting study in how people percieve differently, I feel no good will come out of continuing this discussion in this fashion.

Just my opinion. For whatever it's worth.


----------

