Bujinkan/TSD: Compare/Contrast

[Dale Seago]

Now, I have to act stupid here (yes, it's acting...stop laughing... ) and ask, Since you (Dale) are not familiar with TSD, and you (Gary) are not familiar (it seems) with Dr. Hatsumi's teachings, how can you reliably contrast the 2? (I mean no offense to either party)

Actually I *am* pretty familiar with it, from having the occasional TSD practitioner in my dojo for a while in the past, and from having a number of the TSD videos loaned to me by one of them. I just said I have nothing to say about it.

so, simplistically put, ninjutsu is not a combat art, and taijutsu is?

Kreth's description of ninjutsu is a good one. Ninja did use taijutsu for combat, but it's not "what they were about". For example, there is not a lot of formal-transmission taijutsu in Togakure ryu; and what is there seems largely oriented toward methods applicable to resisting/escaping arrest or battlefield capture situations; fighting in darkness or low-light conditions; etc. -- the sorts of things an intelligence operative might need if he was caught in some unauthorized place or circumstance and had to escape. Lots of distraction, misdirection, creation of surprise and confusion.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Ahh. I'm starting to understand. (I think).

Thank you for the clarifications guys. I do remember 1 bit in 1 of Hayes books where he describes a training trip where he was taught to crouch to see his opponents against the horizon, as part of the fighting in darkness idea. (This is a huge summary here).

Oh, sidebar - If it is ever possible, I will gladly train with anyone, anywhere, provided I can actually 'get there'. If I hit the lotto, it'll be a fun year of immersion.

 

[Kreth]

Oh, sidebar - If it is ever possible, I will gladly train with anyone, anywhere, provided I can actually 'get there'. If I hit the lotto, it'll be a fun year of immersion.

Bob,
I'm about 4 hours from you. You can buy the beers, I'll provide the whippin'... I can show you Bujinkan training as interpreted by a large uncoordinated guy...

Jeff

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Jeff, Once I get wheels again, it's a go. I might hit Ft. Erie and get the good Canadian stuff.

 

[Jay Bell]

Kaith,

Just make sure Jeff leaves his monpa at home..

 

[Bob Hubbard]

What's a "Monpa"?



(Note - kaith is I, I is kaith. I am using a personal non-staff account for some work I'll be doing, and to try to avoid the "Kaith said it, its official" problems that have happened at times.)

 

[Kreth]

What's a "Monpa"?

A rather large hammer, similar to the one you use at a fair to ring the bell. One of it's uses in Japan was beating down gates. Oh, that and squishing enemies...

Jeff

 

[MJS]

I'm sure Gary Arthur can comment on the specifics, but for several years Hayes has been moving towards a much more structured curriculum than exists in the Bujinkan. In the Bujinkan, there is a guidebook for instructors known as the Tenchijin Ryaku no Maki, but it does not break down techniques per belt level. It's rather suggested that a student should be familiar with all of the techniques and concepts therein before reaching shodan. Hatsumi sensei gives his shidoshi (instructors) freedom to teach their students in their own style. An interesting side note is that as a result of this approach, the Bujinkan community has developed as a real world peer-to-peer network, rather than having a strict hierarchy. Ben Cole, a Bujinkan student and former longtime Japan resident, did a thesis on this phenomenon.

Jeff

Thank you for answering the question! :asian:

Mike

 

[Kizaru]

Oh, sidebar - If it is ever possible, I will gladly train with anyone, anywhere, provided I can actually 'get there'.

Don Roley lets people stay at his house for free. I like translating. Bring Dunkin Donuts French Vanilla coffee (whole bean) and Krispy Kreme Donuts and everything will be okay....

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Do they have those in Japan, or do I have to smuggle em in?

 

[Kizaru]

Do the defences change?
well only in the sense that the distancing, timing etc might be different. Jodan Uke, Chudan Uke, Shikan Ken etc are still used as are more advanced techniques like Yokuto, Danshi etc...

Maybe we can compare and contrast this point.

In the Bujinkan, the technique "Yokuto" comes from the Shoden level of Koto ryu; a basic level scroll, ie this is a basic technique. The technique "Danshi" comes from the "Jo/Tenryaku no Maki" of Gyokko ryu; another basic level scroll, therefore, another basic level technique.

If we look at the "Ten Chi Jin Ryaku no Maki" as a guide for what needs to be known by Shodan (black belt), both Yokuto and Danshi are included in there. "Shodan" literally means "Begining Step", ie everything under that is basic.

So maybe we could say "What's advanced in Toshindo is basic in the Bujinkan". For what purpose? Do Toshindo practitioners feel that more time needs to be spent on learning the basics before going onto "advanced" techniques? Do Bujinkan practitioners feel that they can polish their "basics before the basics" while working on "basic" techniques? Are the techniques done differently, or is the approach done differently?

In my experience, after I got the movements down of the basic "Yokuto", I was shown some "variations", then my teacher pushed me to use the same principle against long distance punches, close punches, grabs followed by punches, kicks, and punching attacks from kumi uchi. I thought that was pretty comprehensive instruction.

And if you think that An Shu Hayes does'nt teach Ninjutsu i.e the schools of Takagi Yoshin Ryu, Gyokko Ryu etc anymore, then I suggest you visit his school and see for yourself.

From my perspective, Takagi Yoshin ryu does have a connection to ninjutsu, but I don't think that connection is as clearly defined as the above statement.

 

[Shogun]

The typical time spent in TSD before learning the Yokuto, Koyoku, and the rest of the Shoden kata is around two years. that doent seem like MORE time spent on the Bujinkan curriculum, but less. Doesnt the average person who trains several times a week usually reach Shodan in about 4 years? sorry to make a time frame....

 

[Grey Eyed Bandit]

What's a "Monpa"?

Be afraid. Be VERY afraid.

http://www.nebujinkan.com/video/monpa3.mpg

 

[Michael Stinson]

Maybe we can compare and contrast this point.

In the Bujinkan, the technique "Yokuto" comes from the Shoden level of Koto ryu; a basic level scroll, ie this is a basic technique. The technique "Danshi" comes from the "Jo/Tenryaku no Maki" of Gyokko ryu; another basic level scroll, therefore, another basic level technique.

If we look at the "Ten Chi Jin Ryaku no Maki" as a guide for what needs to be known by Shodan (black belt), both Yokuto and Danshi are included in there. "Shodan" literally means "Begining Step", ie everything under that is basic.

So maybe we could say "What's advanced in Toshindo is basic in the Bujinkan". For what purpose? Do Toshindo practitioners feel that more time needs to be spent on learning the basics before going onto "advanced" techniques? Do Bujinkan practitioners feel that they can polish their "basics before the basics" while working on "basic" techniques? Are the techniques done differently, or is the approach done differently?

In my experience, after I got the movements down of the basic "Yokuto", I was shown some "variations", then my teacher pushed me to use the same principle against long distance punches, close punches, grabs followed by punches, kicks, and punching attacks from kumi uchi. I thought that was pretty comprehensive instruction.

Heh,

Actually here is the funny thing in this statement...Yokuto is actually taught to white belts in To-Shin Do...however it is taught more as principal than the actual waza...and the students are not even really necessarily told it is yokuto until later. The same is true of koyoku, ketsumyaku and a few others. The principals of these techniques (along with rolling, striking, tai/taeodoki, etc) are all taught in TSD in the first 9 months of training. It is mentioned that these are 'basic' techniques...however my understanding of the differences between the 'basic' scrolls and the more 'advanced' scrolls is that the basic scrolls cover the most likely situations. It is not that they are truly more 'basic' than the later material...just more likely to occur...therefore more important to get earlier on. These 'basic' waza have a LOT in them as you hinted at above.

There is a major problem with this discussion as well as this forum...there are not really too many truly experienced To-Shin Do practitioners here that can readily answer questions...or compare contrast.

No disrespect to Dale but I hardly think a few videos and a solitary To-Shin Do student give one a very large insight. If someone were to come to him and say they had a good familiarity and understanding of the Bujinkan in the same manner I am sure he would say the same. I know I have heard it said often enough that if you want to learn the Bujinkan approach one must study with Soke (or one that is has gone far enough that continues to study with Soke).

Unless one has recently studied with Mr. Hayes or any of the other senior practitioners (John Poliquin, Mark Russo, James Norris, Brett Varnum, etc) I would tend to take what that person says about To-Shin Do with a very large grain of salt.

 

[Kizaru]

...however my understanding of the differences between the 'basic' scrolls and the more 'advanced' scrolls is that the basic scrolls cover the most likely situations. It is not that they are truly more 'basic' than the later material...just more likely to occur...therefore more important to get earlier on. These 'basic' waza have a LOT in them as you hinted at above..

Interesting perspective. So then why, for example, are there responses to choke attacks in both the Shoden and Okuden levels of Koto ryu? I was under the impression that the first three scrolls form the foundation for the Okuden scroll. In Gyokko ryu, (excluding the Kihon and Taihenjutsu sections), the first section is "empty" hands vs empty hands, next "empty" hands vs short blade, last "empty" hands vs long blade. In a society where warriors carried weapons everywhere they went, (both inside the castle and out) does an empty handed attack seem more likely than an armed attack? I don't know. I wasn't taught to think one group of attacks would be more likely than another, just that "hey, in this part, all the attacks are first done unarmed, this next part they're first done against a short balde", and so on and so forth.

 

[Kizaru]

Unless one has recently studied with Mr. Hayes or any of the other senior practitioners (John Poliquin, Mark Russo, James Norris, Brett Varnum, etc) I would tend to take what that person says about To-Shin Do with a very large grain of salt.

I would wholeheartedly agree with you there.

 

[Michael Stinson]

In Gyokko ryu, (excluding the Kihon and Taihenjutsu sections), the first section is "empty" hands vs empty hands, next "empty" hands vs short blade, last "empty" hands vs long blade. In a society where warriors carried weapons everywhere they went, (both inside the castle and out) does an empty handed attack seem more likely than an armed attack? I don't know. I wasn't taught to think one group of attacks would be more likely than another, just that "hey, in this part, all the attacks are first done unarmed, this next part they're first done against a short balde", and so on and so forth.

Hmm...that is a good question...kind of makes you wonder why there are so many unarmed waza period if you look at it from that perspective. Of course all of the waza regardless of the 'basic form' can be done with weapons or without...standing...up against a wall...taken to the ground...etc. The way I have always been taught is that the first stuff you learn is the most likely methods...armed, unarmed, etc. The responses and principals contained within them are the most likely etc. Of course I do preface that with 'my understanding' based on what I have been taught to this point. I wouldn't be at all surprised if at some later point my understanding is expanded, reversed, rearranged, etc...certainly wouldn't be the first time

 

[Bob Hubbard]

As I read this, to me, it seems as if both schools have many of the same concepts, techniques, etc.

They just teach them in different orders, spend differing amounts of time on them, and have gone in different directions since they started.

By this I mean that Dr. Hatsumi's students who are with him now are seeing material that wasn't shown to Mr. Hayes in the 80's (due to it not being time for the material, or any other reason), and Mr. Hayes has continued to refine and improve his own system.

Maybe, as has been started, looking at what is in common, then comparing how each is taught or trained would be good? At some time, someone will have to do up a glossery, as I can't tell a waza from a wristwatch.

 

[Kizaru]

Hmm...that is a good question...kind of makes you wonder why there are so many unarmed waza period if you look at it from that perspective.

What I've been told is that all martial arts in Japan developed during the Sengoku Jidai had at least three skills- Sojutsu, Kenjutsu and Tai/Jujutsu. Each school chose one of these as it's base to start from. For example, "Yagyu Shinkage ryu" is a "Kenjutsu" based school, Koto ryu a "Taijutsu" based school. The theory in the taijutsu based schools was that when you put a tool in someone's hand, it becomes a distraction, so it's easier to transmit the proper body motion first through unarmed techniques. Once the student has a grasp of the distance, timing and rhythm used in the ryu, the techniques are then learned where tools are employed applying those same principles.

Of course all of the waza regardless of the 'basic form' can be done with weapons or without...standing...up against a wall...taken to the ground...etc.

Right. But first you learn the "basic form", then the variations using the same principle, then the what if? applications with tools, upside down, underwater in the dark (the Shu - Ha - Ri progression). The first three basic techniques in Koto ryu are a defense against kumi uchi (the "clinch"), defense against a hip throw, and a defense against a punch. In the United States, I'm sure that a hip throw is not a very likely form of attack, and I think because of that, it's taught later in Toshindo. Here in Japan, with Judo being taught in every High School, it's still a likely situation.

 

[DWeidman]

As I read this, to me, it seems as if both schools have many of the same concepts, techniques, etc.

They just teach them in different orders, spend differing amounts of time on them, and have gone in different directions since they started.

By this I mean that Dr. Hatsumi's students who are with him now are seeing material that wasn't shown to Mr. Hayes in the 80's (due to it not being time for the material, or any other reason), and Mr. Hayes has continued to refine and improve his own system.

Maybe, as has been started, looking at what is in common, then comparing how each is taught or trained would be good? At some time, someone will have to do up a glossery, as I can't tell a waza from a wristwatch.

It would seem so...


There is a common phenomenon when people switch organizations to vilify the old organization and herald the new one as the greatest thing since sliced bread -- the panacea for all that is wrong in Martial arts.

In reality - there is probably very little difference between them... and people tend to get hung up on "looking" for information to prove their point with. Gary is new to TSD - and is more than happy to tell you why he moved... And those that stayed are more than happy to tell him that he is an idiot for leaving...

Anyway - I wouldn't get too wrapped up trying to decipher differences (unless we count in the TSD HSC - which is likely as pathetic as the RVD Buj. HSC)...

Anywho... Just my take.

Carry on...

-Daniel