I didn't mean to come across as such a judgy mcjudgypants, i could have done better in expressing this concern. there is so much hype and nonsense surrounding the Shinobi traditions, I had hoped that the community would by now have routed out alot of the mystique by avoiding commonly misunderstood terminology, like 'ninja' and 'ninjutsu'. but, i suppose it still sells memberships.
To be honest, I don't think there's much "hype" anymore... in the 80's, and even into the very early 90's? Sure. But these days, I don't think so... additionally, most practitioners don't use any terms like "ninja", and the few who use terms like "ninjutsu" usually do it for brand recognition, for want of a better term. Whether that's a good idea is another discussion, of course...
to answer your question, traditions kept alive beyond their relevance in modern application are what they are-living, but on life-support. that 'life-support' is the paying consumer.
Word to the wise here... I'd refrain from commenting on koryu, application, and the state of such arts in todays world. I really don't have time to cover it all here, but... that comment smacks of a complete lack of education on the subject.
Martial Traditions are what remains of a Martial Art 100 years after it has ceased to exist in dynamic relevance. kept alive for it's wisdom, but not as functional as it was once, because it has stopped growing, adapting, and seeking relevance in a changing world.
Yeah... you have no idea what you're talking about, and don't have the context or framework to understand it. That's not an attack, more an observation, to be clear... and you're far from alone in being in that position.
kinda like me, i suppose. nothing exists in a static state. all in the universe as we know it is either growing or dying. nothing can remain as is forever, and tradition itself may impede creative expansion, barring a path of relevance into the future. If there is anything I hold dear that I have learned from the philosophy of Ninpo, it is the importance of full creative involvement on the part of the practitioner.
This is what I'm getting at... Bujinkan practitioners are often very happy to parrot Hatsumi's comments on "classical martial arts", where he bemoans that they are "stuck, unchanging", but his art is "a living art"... then you get the "we train for the modern world" idea (and, honestly, no, most don't, as there isn't much understanding present in the vast majority that I've seen, from the very top down), all the while basing their presumed credibility on the claimed histories and ages of the arts... you really can't have it both ways. Either you're studying a classical art, in which case, study it in it's classical context, or you're doing a modern art (which may be derived from, or based on, some classical or traditional material... and, really, is a fair enough description of the Bujinkan), dealing with modern situations and contexts... or, recognise what they are (individually), and teach them as such (individually)... the modern is not the classical, and the classical is not modern... both have their place, and, believe it or not, both have their application in the modern world (which is not the same as saying they are equally suited to modern violence, it must be stated), but deriding classical arts, then trying to claim to be one, is quite... schizophrenic? It's the classic "well, I never wanted to be in your club in the first place" after you get rejected...
What's the difference between 'shinobi' and 'ninja'?
Nothing, really... different preferred terms in different ages. "Ninja" is pretty much a Meiji term.
the term Ninja was coined in the 1970's.
Nope. About a hundred years too late, there... perhaps a bit longer, actually.
the people who developed Ninjutsu and Ninpo Taijutsu were known throught history by many names, Shinobi no Mono (the people of Shinobi) was most common, from what i've read.
Shinobi no Mono does not mean "the people of Shinobi", unless you have a weird approach to grammar... it's like translating "thief" as "people of stealing"... next, I'd be pretty careful the claims I made about "the people who developed Ninjutsu and Ninpo Taijutsu" as any kind of historical individuals... ninjutsu, being the skills of espionage and information gathering, developed as a pretty natural application of military strategic approaches... it would be bizarre if only one person developed it as a concept (yeah, I know the whole En no Gyoja story, and others... they are not really anything close to it, for the record... En no Gyoja was a priest who brought a form of Buddhism, which was combined with native Shinto to develop studies such as Shugendo, who has been co-opted into some of the "ninja" mythos). It has existed in some form since two opposing forces tried to get some kind of advantage by figuring out some of their enemies strengths and weaknesses before a battle. It could be argued that it was driven into a state of refinement by the introduction of the 5 Chinese Classics, most notably Son Shi (Sun Tzu), and the 13th Chapter dealing with spies, but it was already in development. What made it Japanese (and, therefore, ninjutsu) was the application of the Japanese cultural concepts (religious teachings and ideas, Shinto, Taoist, Buddhist), and so on.
Next, the term "Ninpo Taijutsu" really doesn't seem to have existed before Takamatsu... well, I suppose he's had a number of names over his lifetime (Jutaro, Chosui, Toshitsugu...), so, yeah? But, if you're referring to historical persons (not Takamatsu), then, you're gonna need to back your work up...
Koryu arts are steeped in tradition, but of any arts have remained relevant right up until the present, imo. when most martial arts began to teach adaptations for sport and exhobition, the Shinobi arts went back underground.
Er... what?
Let's break this down... Koryu arts ARE traditions. They aren't steeped in them, they are them. Then there are other traditions associated within the school, but the school itself is a tradition. The rest doesn't make much sense, but if I was to parse it, it seems you meant "... but IF any arts have remained relevant right up until the present, imo, when most martial arts began to teach adaptations for sport and exhibition, (it's) the Shinobi arts (who) went back underground." Assuming that's correct, then there's a bit to cover.
When Japan came out of the Pax Tokugawa, and into the Meiji Restoration, there was a lot of upheaval in the country, with some (quite understandable) resentment towards the samurai who had been, in many ways, the oppressors for some 900 years. However, many of these former samurai were now set up as business and political leaders, and they didn't necessarily want their older traditions to just stop... so there was a concerted effort in a number of areas to repackage some of the older arts in a way that could be preserve their essential spirits, while limiting the association with the old regime. This lead to the development of what we now call Kendo, Judo, and later, Aikido, Iaido, and so on. Even Sumo was largely re-structured and re-worked to provide a wider appeal. However, to say that that was the teachers "begin(ning) to teach adaptations for sport and exhibition" is grossly inaccurate. Kano's Judo, for example, was more related to being adapted to be integrated into the education system... the "competition" was meant to be a minor aspect, and part of Kano's original vision was to have the Kodokan be the centre for all Japanese martial arts... he wanted all senior members to also be well versed in the older classical arts (he brought in Shimizu Takauji of Shinto Muso Ryu, and four shihan from Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu to teach staff and sword arts to the senior students, as he felt Judo by itself was only a part of the equation). Most of the modern arts we have today are more a reflection of post WWII than the end of the samurai rule, to be honest.
As far as "the Shinobi arts went back underground", well, the first thing is to realise that they never were in the first place... while they wouldn't be exactly advertise, they were just part of the overall military education... there weren't really "ninja traditions" to go underground in any real way.
Takamatsu Soke entered WWII as a spy, and I'll bet he was a damn good one.
HA!!!
No. He didn't. There are rumours that he acted as a kind of spy in China in the early 1900's (around 1910-1920)... by the time WWII rolled around, he was about 60 years old... for a more realistic idea there, Fujita Seiko, claimed 14th (and last) head of the Wada-ha Koga Ryu, acted as a special guest instructor at the Nakago academy for officers, where skills such as spycraft were taught... but he was there as a karate instructor (for the record, they also had guest instructors from the Kodokan, from Aikido, various weapon arts, especially Toyama Ryu, a school developed at another military academy in the early 20th Century), so, no, the Japanese army were not being taught to be "ninja" in WWII, nor was anyone employed as one outside of regular spy craft that all armies were engaging in.
Ninpo Taijutsu still has no sport application, competitive sport itself is an adaptation to modern relevance, but a deviation from tradition,
Er... what? No. Many classical traditions had a form of competitive practice, gekken/gekiken competitions (the precursor to modern Kendo) were held semi-regularly (Musashi's father engaged the Yoshioka school in one such competition in front of the Emperor in the late 16th Century, winning two out of the three bouts, and being named the "Greatest Warrior Under Heaven" [loose translation]), Judo's competition approach grew directly out of the competitive practice methods Kano was exposed to and enjoyed in both his Kito Ryu and Tenjin Shin'yo Ryu studies... that's not even getting into the rich history of sumo, and various jacketed and seated wrestling sports that the samurai (and others) engaged in.
martial arts were for war not competition,
This is a common, but deeply misunderstood and misapplied statement. Bluntly, if you think martial arts training is for use in war, you have very little idea of war, the necessary elements and training, the requirements, or martial training. I'll put it this way... a new recruit to the army is taken through boot camp, which typically lasts for 8-10 weeks... after which, he's able to be deployed. How long do you think it would take to have an army ready if you had to wait until they'd completed a 10-15 year study of a complete martial tradition? More to the point, why would you bother that kind of investment when soldiers were being sent with only a relatively small chance of survival? It just doesn't make sense...
Where the idea of these arts being for "war" is more about learning military strategy and leadership, as well as approaches to tactical thinking, and so on, which would be taught largely though the medium of combative techniques... but, even there, the actual techniques weren't necessarily directly applicable to the war of the day... many arts focused on the sword, but that's not a battlefield weapon... it is, however, a great teaching tool to focus on tactical methods and concepts... and that's only dealing with the actual "military" arts... many systems simply aren't military ones. Shinto Muso Ryu (and it's associated fuzoku ryu-ha), really is a policing art... others are focused on assassination (and they aren't the ninjutsu ones, either! Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu, I'm looking at you...), or on duelling functionality, or on deep study of spiritual or philosophical concepts, or political ideologies, and so on.
Martial arts are a lot more than most people think or are aware of...
although challenges and tournaments did exist, they were not the focus.
They were in some cases. To be honest, at this point, you're not even aware of how much you're not aware of.
agree, Ninpo is probably the most flexible of any martial philosophy to my knowledge.
But how far does your knowledge extend? Is it wide enough for that to be meaningful in any way? I mean... I'm pretty sure the JKD guys might take you up on that comment...
i do not think what i wrote should be interpretted to imply that Ninpo is a dead art, quite the opposite. it is because of the evolving and adapting element that i have embraced it as the core of my training on a physical and philosophical level as it is complimentary to all of the many other things i seek knowledge of in the name of survival, like the themes you mentioned.
And that's cool, but that's your take on things... and it shouldn't preclude similar things being present in other arts, even if you're unaware of them, or are unable to recognise them.
I would take down my original post if i could, i did not clearly express what i was getting at and i see no need now to make the point at all. there are a lot of great conversations on here about these arts, i've scarcely commented because i have so little to add that has not been covered by people far more knowledgeable than me.
Ninpo Ik Kan,
tim
I don't know that taking down the original post is the best idea... look, I know things don't always come out the way we intend, but it can provoke comments from, as you state, people far more knowledgable than yourself... which can help others far less knowledgable to learn more. So, even if you may be a bit embarrassed by it, don't be... it can help in ways you may not at first see.
More to come!