No problem.
Thanks. When it comes to "internally chang(ing) energy", I didn't read that in your answer at all... I was simply attempting to clarify that your description of a tactical application of elemental concepts was not the same as Tarrycat appears to be describing... so all good there!
One thing I didn't mention is that, despite the common English translations, the same "elements" in the Godai and Gogyo aren't necessarily the same.... most notably Earth. In the Godai, "earth" is chi (地), with the intent being more in line with the ground, or the surface of the Earth (as distinct from the Heavens), whereas the Gogyo uses the term Do (土), which has more of a meaning of "the soil/dirt", instead of simply the ground (as a surface). Take that for what it's worth....
Yeah, I figured that was likely the case... just remember, this is a text-based format... and tonality and body language can be easily missed and misunderstood... often posts aren't as harsh as they first appear...
Cool.
Hmm... this is not so much the case. You are either a part of the Bujinkan, or you're not. You're either a part of Toshindo, or you're not. And you can't be both.
And when it comes to your school, the Facebook page is full of mentions of Toshindo South Africa, the introductory video (dated August 12th this year) starts with the words "Toshindo South Africa Presents...", mentions Toshindo South Africa at the end, and gives a website address of
www.toshindosa.co.za... the school address I found is
www.ninkaibujutsu.co.za, which mentions your teacher being awarded a Shodan in "ninjutsu" (no organisation) from a Emanuel Maisel in 1989... which itself raises a few questions, as the only mention I can find outside of this is a mention of him beginning with Roy Ron Shihan of the Genbukan in 1991, and leaving in 1995... followed by a Nidan in Toshindo in 2010 from Stephen Hayes and (your teacher's personal teacher in the US) Brett "Dotoshi" (a Toshindo "warrior name" given to yudansha, for some reason...) Varnum, who attained a Godan in the Bujinkan in 2003 (before the split between Hayes and the Bujinkan), and later a 7th Dan in Toshindo in 2011... making him a Toshindo practitioner and teacher.
In other words, pretty much everything points to your dojo being part of the Toshindo (Stephen Hayes') organisation... as that is where the bulk of your teachers authority comes from (Shodan is not a teaching grade in the Bujinkan or Genbukan, so that conveys no authority there). There is also the distinct possibility, knowing some of South Africa's "ninjutsu" community that Emanuel Maisel, when awarding the Shodan in "ninjutsu" was teaching one of the more fraudulent "Koga-ryu" groups that seem to pop up there semi-regularly, hence no organisation being mentioned... and no mention of Maisel's prior training to the Genbukan, which he began training in after awarding your teacher a Shodan.
None of this is to disparage your teacher, although I will also say, and this is kinda a side note, that there are some rather unusual, or questionable things I find on your website... mostly in terminology and use of Japanese. Your schools name, for instance, is a bit unusual... but before I say anything about it, can you give me a translation/meaning for Ninkai Bujutsu (忍海武術), and tell me what the kanji on the other side of the badge is meant to say (忍法貫)? If you can't, that's okay... honestly, I don't expect you to be able to... but I'd be interested in your teachers answers if he is happy to answer.
Yeah, I didn't suggest disregarding anyone or what they say... simply to be aware that different organisations and teachers have different perspectives on these arts... for example the Santo Tonko no Kata from Togakure Ryu has been taught as a Menkyo level of Gyokko Ryu in the Genbukan, but not anywhere else... Manaka of the Jinenkan teaches that the Shinden Fudo Ryu Dakentaijutsu and Jutaijutsu are two syllabus' of the same school, but others teach that they are two separate lineages (which is a view I subscribe to, by the way)... there are different contents to some of the arts (Takagi Yoshin Ryu being the main one, as it's the Mizuta-den in the Bujinkan, and the Ishitani-den in the Genbukan... although both are known there, one is the "official" line)... and this is well and truly before we get to differences in the interpretation of kata, kamae, waza, and more... so a Genbukan practitioner and a Bujinkan practitioner can be in disagreement, but both be "right" according to the teachings of each organisation. Makes it a bit difficult for those caught in the middle, of course... but if you remember that what anyone says is right in their organisation only... then you should be okay.
Tha Japanese are interesting... there is a sense of superiority, certainly... but masked by a public politeness that, unless you're quite in tune with the culture, you'd probably mistake for them liking you... tatemae and honne are important concepts to be familiar with... that said, martial art teachers (particularly classical art teachers... and I do not really count any of the Takamatsuden teachers in that, for the record) are more and more excited by Westerners coming along... there are still pockets of resistance and racism, but it's much better than it used to be.
My pleasure.
I've taken the next question and a few of the answers out separately, as I felt it deserved to be looked at away from the other topics...
Yes, it can be quite confusing, on a few levels... for one thing, a martial art should be a cohesive, synthesised approach to addressing combative questions within it's context... as a result, it's meant to be unified in it's approach to things like tactical weaponry, power sources, range(s), context, and so on... to bring in something else that contradicts that is rather difficult.
To put it this way... say you're training in an art that relies on staying out at a range and kicking, using a power source of pivoting on the support leg to whip the hips around, using the full extension of the leg (say, TKD)... and you then start training in system that teaches you to move in, and employ kicks sparingly, with a power source of driving the hips forwards, and kicking low with minimal extension... you've now trained two opposing and contradictory methods for applying kicks. Now, the "common sense" thing to say here is "well, I'll just use the most appropriate at the time... if they're out, I'll use the TKD approach... if they're closer, I'll use the close quarters one"... except it doesn't work that way.
It's not a matter of using the range you're in... both arts teach you to move to the distance that they work best from... their tactical range... and you can't move forwards and back at the same time... you can't use a full extension whipping kick by moving in past their hands... and you can't drive your hips forwards with a low kick while whipping your hips around for a high, long-extension kick. You have to do one or the other. So which one do you do? Well, that decision is often made on an unconscious level... basically, your unconscious (trained) response will be to select the option that your unconscious believes is the most powerful of the two... which might be the right one, and might not... and might or might not be based in reality. You see, if you spend years watching bad Kung Fu films where everyone seems to do these big kicks, you may have taught your unconscious that that is the most powerful method... even if you haven't developed much skill in that area, compared with the other or not.
At best, you have two options that will never be utilised, so half of your training is wasted... at worst, you have two options that contradict each other, so you have simply taught yourself the entire time that neither of them are powerful, as the other method contradicts them, and you end up with nothing in your toolbox that you can rely on, as your unconscious mind believes neither are good enough to actually work.
Now, that's one case... where the two arts are relatively similar. Let's look at another scenario... where there is little cross-over, and the application of each are clearly separated. Let's look at a close-quarters grappling system and a mid-range striking one... such as Judo or BJJ and Boxing. The rise of MMA would seem to indicate that this is a good approach... after all, many MMA gyms teach this quite successfully, and MMA competitors don't seem to have the issues described above... so why does that seem to work?
Well, a lot of it is that these aren't approached as actual martial arts... they're approached as skill sets... and, as such, are adapted with the individual to limit, or even eliminate problems such as contradictory power sources. This leads to alterations such as the MMA practitioner taking a slightly deeper (wider) stance when boxing than a boxer normally would, being a bit slower, but more geared up to launch grappling attacks as well as defend against them (which a boxer doesn't need to worry about). The skills are also drilled together... boxing into a takedown, into a submission sequence, or kicking into a takedown defence, and moving into boxing, so on and so forth. As a result, these skill sets are combined to create a new training methodology, rather than being distinct martial arts themselves. You will also note that this is most successful in sporting systems.
John, all this does is confirm to me that you have little more than a superficial grasp of what makes something a martial art, and what the differences are. You train skill sets, not martial arts. And none of that is anything to do with training in different systems... it's superficial misunderstanding, and at the same level of a video game grasp of "systems" (with a single distinct "move" used to define them). And seriously, the bizarre fantasy you have about the amount of damage your punch can do, often talking about them "killing" people, is worrying and rather sick. Just so you know how you're coming across.
I'd be willing to bet you don't... you do three or four skill sets drawn from particular systems, but not actual systems in the main. At most, you may do BJJ as a separate system, but the rest is more likely skill sets.
I know you don't... we've tried to cover this with you before... the issue with the language one (which is the closest) is that you end up trying to speak French with the grammatical structure of Japanese, and a German accent. By the same token, dancers do often have issues with disparate forms of dance... they tend to specialise in one or two, and are competent in another, but the fact that they are a tango dancer first and foremost shows when they go to do some hip-hop dancing, and vice versa. Different guns don't shoot all that different to each other, and is again just an adapted skill set, and in running, again, typically athletes specialise... the marathon runner doesn't do 100 meter sprints...
In other words, while you don't understand it, there are some major pitfalls, and each of your examples are susceptible to them... although, given the nature of martial arts, it's a bit different (closest to the language one, but without the time to think things and try to remember the right word in this particular dialect).
It's not your mind that has to get around it, though... that's the issue.
Which is you missing that it's the fact that it's martial arts that are the difference...
Hi Encho,
This is quite an unusual thing to hear from a Koryu practitioner... it's often us who are the most vocal against training in more than one thing at a time... as Koryu training is about shaping the practitioner in all ways to the thinking and mindset of the ryu in question, and having a number of contradictory mindsets is not good for the ryu or practitioner in question... I'm not saying it's impossible (I train in a few myself), but it's typically frowned upon until the student at least has quite a few good years under their belt. Do you mind if I ask what ryu-ha you study, and who with? I wanted to ask in the Aikijutsu thread, but that's becoming quite a train wreck... ha!
On the topic, from a Koryu perspective, the following I feel is quite a good representation of the issues and pitfalls from Ellis Amdur, a senior practitioner of two classical systems:
Studying More than One Koryu – 古現武道
...don't know anything about it. 
