so one thing i noticed in the Ogawa ryu clip that bothered me was the way the guy in the white hakama had it tied. so i am asking the experts does that look right, is that exceptable? i was taught different. ours had a nice bow in the front. it was very clean and neat. i know there are different ways, kyudo keeps the knots out of the way as example. the japanese tend to have a formal way to tie and fold everything the knots on this guys hakama just looked wrong to me.
Sorry, which hakama are you referring to? In the Ogawa Ryu clip, both the male and female practitioner are wearing indigo hakama… the only clip where white pants are worn is in the Asayama Ichiden Ryu one (video number 5)… and that's not hakama.
For the record, the dress-sense that raises eyebrows in the Ogawa Ryu clip is the use of tatsuke with keikogi… although the momohiki method shown by the gent is… unusual, to say the least.
Here we start to get into the difference between a fraudulent individual (one who claims experience or credentials he doesn't have) and a fraudulent system.(one where the actual history is not what it is claimed to be). Your friend is not a fraud, but by your standards his system is fraudulent.
Yep, that's pretty much exactly the way I'd put it. I'd probably be tempted to label his godfather (the founder of the system in the UK) as a fraud… but my friend (and, to a fair degree, his father) are more victims of a lack of education, or being taken in by false claims and not being informed enough to recognise the lies.
The thing is, I'm not sure that "fraudulent" is the best term for describing a system where the claimed history is inaccurate.
I will agree that it's not always the correct term… the times it will be appropriate, in my mind, are when it's a deliberate, knowing act. This is why I'd describe my friend's system as fraudulent, but not him… he genuinely believes even the rather obviously false ideas present… such as the usage of "warrior animals and colours" given to each dan-ranked member… which is supposed to be a callback to the usage of such identifying ideas with clan loyalties… except, of course, there is nothing in Japanese history to support such a weird idea.
Martial artists are not historians.
That will depend on the martial artist in question… for example, Koryu practitioners tend to be far more than any other… as the history, lineage, and so on is a major aspect of the study. And, if we're still using my friends system as an example, that's precisely what he believes it to be (or, at the very least, directly related to them).
Most martial artists (if they particular care about their art's history) generally accept whatever mish-mash of myths, half-truths, and bits of genuine history that get passed down from their teacher, their teacher's teacher, and so on.
Again, it'll depend on the art. Honestly, if the martial artist genuinely does have a real interest in their history, they will look far beyond whatever stories they get given… and, again, in Koryu terms it's very common for people to do a lot of independent research into their schools lineage and history, separate from any stories of the school itself, or as a way to see the truth behind the poetry, so to speak.
Whatever bits you consider the greatest sins against historical veracity may have originated as lies, legitimate misunderstandings, or advertising spin in the current generation, the previous generation, or a hundred years ago or longer.
Yep, true.
Examples ...
When I was in college, I talked to an acquaintance who was a 3rd dan in TKD and who believed the myth about TKD being an ancient Korean art. (He told me that Karate was "bastardized Americanized Tae Kwon Do."
) He wasn't a liar, he just believed what his teacher had told him. Is Tae Kwon Do a fraudulent martial art because a false history was being spread that many practitioners believe.
This is where it starts to get very grey… no, I wouldn't consider TKD a "fraudulent" art… but I would consider such claims to be fraudulent.
When I was in the Bujinkan, I was taught that Togakure Ryu is an 800-year old art and that Hatusmi was the historically documented 34th generation grandmaster. In fact, only 3 of the 9 disciplines taught in the Bujinkan can be verified as existing before Takamatsu and Togakure Ryu isn't one of them. However far back Togakure Ryu does go, it almost certainly isn't 800 years old. Are the Takamatsuden arts fraudulent?
Ah, Togakure Ryu… here's a case of an unsubstantiated claim being made (one that is, honestly, highly likely to be, at the very least, greatly embellished and exaggerated). I have my personal beliefs of where it comes from, and have seen certain documents claiming to be evidence prior to Takamatsu, but when all's said and done, I'd absolutely agree that it's not the 800 years old that it's claimed to be. I'd also cast serious doubt on the claims of the history of Gyokko Ryu, Shinden Fudo Ryu, and Kukishin Ryu for that matter… but we'll take a look at how certain cultural considerations can play into things in a bit.
I will say that one out of the 9 having doubts on it's historical veracity doesn't quite equal the entire Takamatsuden being labeled fraudulent (honestly, there's a huge can of worms on many fronts there)… but can agree that a case might be well made for Togakure Ryu on a number of levels. I might also ask just how much Togakure Ryu was actually being taught at the time, of course…
In the early decades of BJJ, Helio Gracie claimed that his Jiu-Jitsu was the true art of the samurai and that Judo was just a watered down version of the art that the Japanese had created to fool westerners.
Ha! That's adorable! And yes, I'd have major issues with any claim that BJJ is "the true art of the samurai". Again, though, a false (fraudulent) claim within the art
Later on (after his brothers had passed away) he changed his tune and claimed that he had single-handedly created BJJ by watching the rudimentary Judo that Carlos had learned from Maeda and improving it so that a smaller individual like himself could defeat large opponents. Many schools still teach this second version of BJJ history, which isn't much more accurate than the first. Is BJJ a fraudulent art?
Again, a distinction between a fraudulent claim and a fraudulent art is found here.
The commonly taught legend of Wing Chun's origin from Ng Mui and Yim Wing-Chun is probably not true. Does that mean Wing Chun is a fraudulent art?
No… but I'll deal with why more in the next example.
Those of us who are not Shintoist are unlikely to believe the claim that the secrets of Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu were originally given to Choi-sai by Futsunushi no kami. Is Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu a fraudulent martial art?
There is a real danger in looking at arts from a different culture… one of which is to take things on face value, when that's far from the intended. This is the case with Shinto Ryu, Kashima Shinryu, Wing Chun, and potentially at least, some of the Takamatsuden traditions, as well as many, many others.
To take the Shinto Ryu story… Iizasa Choisai was an experienced warrior, a veteran of battle and war, skilled with a spear and sword, who had come to near the end of his career. In his journeys with his entourage, he came to the Katori Shrine… where he stopped for a time to train and meditate on the experiences of his life. During this time, he was vitiated in a dream by the God of the shrine, Futsunushi no Kami, who presented him with a scroll detailing the secrets of all martial arts… which became the basis of Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu.
Now, if we take this as literal, it's obviously not a realistic story. Choisai received a scroll in a dream (in most versions, he woke up holding the scroll)… but is it meant to be literal? I don't think so. What's it really saying? Well… it tells me that, after many years of experience and warfare, Iizasa Choisai was in a position unusual for someone of his occupation… old age. He'd managed to gather quite a number of followers and retainers… who looked to him for guidance and instruction. When arriving at Katori Shrine, he took it upon himself to dedicate himself to gaining a greater understanding based on everything he'd experienced so far… and, I believe, had what is often referred to as a "Eureka" moment… a sudden revelation of a training methodology, an insight of how to formulate a single system that taught everything a warrior would need to know. And he worked on that methodology, eventually writing it all down in a scroll to formalise the lessons. But where did this revelation come from? Well… it came from Choisai himself… as he meditated in this Shinto Shrine… focusing his thoughts towards the guardian deity, Futsunushi no Kami. As a result, is it surprising that such a revelation, such a new understanding would be taken as a divine inspiration? Especially in the mid-15th Century?
These stories aren't literal, any more than the Bible is literal. They're allegorical… and, as such, are as true and any actual historically verified event or location. And they are not what makes a system fraudulent… as they are an expression of a truth, not a deliberate misdirection and denial of the truth (such as the claim that TKD is 2,000 years old).
I think it's sufficient to note the places where the claimed history of an art diverge from what is known or what is likely and reserve "fraud" for the individuals who are knowingly attempting to deceive.
Honestly, I think we need at least one more category. I think we can divide the issue of fraud in martial arts into the following:
- Fraudulent person: someone who has presented false credentials, claimed aspects of their history and training, or of their art, which are deliberately and demonstrably false.
- Fraudulent system: a system which is designed specifically to mislead, or to portray itself as something that it's not.
Note that a fraudulent person might be teaching a legit art (or, at least claiming to be… say, someone who had taken a couple of years of TKD creating their own school and claiming to be a 10th Dan master with 30 years experience), or a fraudulent system itself (the same TKD instructor who re-styles themselves as the only practitioner of the super-secret samurai art of Dim Mak Tai Chi Jutsu)… and that a fraudulent system, particularly if it's past it's first generation, might well be taught by people not fraudulent by nature, but simply teaching as they've been taught (both my friend and Junsei Ryu on the previous page are examples of this).
When it comes to places where the claimed history of an art diverges from historically verified reality, that's honestly not enough to label a system as fraud… depending on what and why the claims were made in the first place. One way to look at it is to examine internal consistency… these fraudulent systems simply lack it (again, Junsei Ryu claiming to be a preservation of traditional Samurai martial arts, but using Okinawan basics for Japanese weaponry, my friends system doing much the same, as well as having a range of telltale signs in the "Japanese" aspects that betray the actual origins, and so on).
When it comes to examples such as the TKD stories, here you have a case of a legit system having fraudulent claims (primarily for propaganda purposes). Same with the various BJJ history versions. But these arts maintain an internal consistency… which is a hallmark of a legitimate system. The fake systems don't have that.
For example, these are all the same system… one which claims to be tied to traditional Japanese arts, and is focused on preserving those traditions:
When inquiring about the weapon work, I was told that "obviously there's some Shinto (Muso) Ryu there…" For the record, this is Shinto Muso Ryu:
… so… no.
It should also be noted that these are hardly the greatest offenders that I've seen from that system… but they should be enough to make my point. I should also note that just because a system is modern, and eclectic, doesn't in and of itself make it fraudulent. Elder's system of Miyama Ryu, for instance, is a modern, Western take on Japanese arts… but there is no claim to be anything other than what it is. The systems that it is derived from are all documented, as is the training time and experience of the founder… no fraudulent claims of being an old samurai methodology are found.
Fraud is a very difficult thing to get a handle on… in some cases, certain aspects are fraud, but the overall approach or system isn't. Or an individual within a system might be (or, at least, claiming to be within a system)… or you might have very genuine people who further poor information and incorrect understandings or expressions. While not their fault at all, it doesn't remove the damage done… to once again take my friends system, as noted, the students train hard and diligently… my friend is a dedicated and sincere teacher and practitioner… but what is being taught is incorrect and based in gross misunderstandings of Japanese martial arts and history. Which would lead to a new generation of martial practitioners who have a lot of false beliefs… which, no matter how far from the origin of the art (the founder in the UK) we get, is never going to be correct, accurate, or anything other than false.