Originally Posted by Ninjew
BTW what about the other two ninja schools: Gyokushin Ryu and Kumogakure Ryu? Same thing?
Another question. If we accept that the Togakure Ryu itself as a ryuha didn't exist, there is still the question about where the techniques within it came from. For example all the bikenjutsu, the santo tonso no gata, the ukemigata, all the stuff with shuko, kyoketsu shoge, shinobi gaeshi etc. etc. Were all of these techniques also invented by Takamatsu? Or did he merely invent the ryuha as an entity?
Last edited by shmuel; 4/20/2007 4:03am at .
It was suggested a few years ago during a nother round of "Did Takamatsu fake this stuff???" that it might be better to look at the Togakure Ryu material as Kuden that Takamatsu turned into a more formallized Ryu. In doing so he likely fleshed out areas of the Ryu based upon his other experiences.
Originally Posted by shmuel
It is certainly possible that the Kuden could have a very long lineage to it but it would be impossible to trace in any definitive fashion. Oral traditions are notoriously problematic that way.
Well I guess Bujinkan people should find it encouraging to know that Gyokko Ryu, Koto Ryu and Shinden Fudo Ryu are verifiable. That is really something I wasn't aware of and I think it should be made more widely known.
Even the Skosses don't seem to be aware of this, as their website implies that only two of the ryhua (Kukishinden Ryu and Takagi Yoshin Ryu) are genuine.
What is commonly taught as Ninjutsu, in Japan and elsewhere, is a fairly recent collection of unarmed and weapons arts two of which
are independent koryu.
I'm going to weigh in on this tentatively and with questions. I'm going to present thing as I seem them. I reserve the right to be dead wrong.
Originally Posted by Fitz
I want to be clear that I'm not taking a side and I dont really feel like I have a dog in this fight. But something isnt right here and nobody here or on e-budo seems able to clear it up. At a certain point its all speculation anyhow. So lets play with some speculative questions.
The Allegation is that either Hatsumi or (probably Takamatsu) just made up Togakure Ryu. My question is:
If... Takamatsu made it up and IF Hatsumi perpetuated the fraud (which is what some people claim is at the heart of the Hatsumi-Tenamura split)... Why?
Both men were incredibily talented martial artists in their own right (Hatsumi held something like a 5th Dan in Judo before he started with Takamatsu). Takamatsu's skills are not in doubt either. Both held full mastership in 6 (or is it 8?) Ryu-ha that are certified. Thats more achievement than anybody present in this discussion could reasonably aim for in 3 lifetimes.
The thing that is missing from the discussion is why would such men, already in possession of so much knowledge and so much credibility, in a society where everything is written down and such a fraud doesnt stand a chance, commit such an act and cling to it for almost 60 years? Given their stature there was no need in the 50s to do this and given Hatsumi being Soke of all the other schools why would he push multiple times to validate something he knows to be false when he doesnt need it in the first place?
Forgive me, but on the face of it, it seems like a reckless act by men who know better in order to achieve very little gain.
I have theories, but I'll let other people sound off first.
Is that the reason for the Hatsumi/Tanemura split? If that is the case, it seems odd that Tanemura would still teach Togakure Ryu and Ninpo. If that really was why he split, wouldn't he have disavowed the whole Togakure Ryu totally? Instead, he went and got a second menkyo kaiden from Yoshio Fukumoto (another Takamatsu student) ... also in Togakure Ryu.
Originally Posted by Antifa
Anyway, I like your questions.
There's also this recent thread on kutaki. Basically, some history researcher claims to have uncovered some allegations that Takamatsu was teaching fake karate back in the 1920s.
the only two people who know for sure are Hatsumi and Tanemura. They are first cousins. They went in the back room at Hatsumi's mothers funeral. Nobody heard what was said (or if they did they aint talking and if somebody talked now they shouldnt be belived). They havent spoken since.
Originally Posted by shmuel
Here is an interview with Tanemura from around the time of the founding of the Genbukan. Some of the factors related to his decision to branch out on his own are covered.
In the article that's linked above, it say's that Tanamura spent 25 years training with Hatsumi and Takamatsu, which is totally incorrect. As far as I can remember unless someone wants to correct me, Tanamura only ever trained with Takamatsu once, when Hatsumi brought him (he was then Hatsumi's student) to train with his teacher! Why do people think Tanamura was Takamatsu's student when he clearly was not?(if I go to another Dojo and train for the day, does that make me that instructors student...NO) I'll stand corrected if this can be proven otherwise, but you must supply hard facts, not opinions!
i am curious as to what year Tanemura claims he started studying under takamatsu...
and what the year was Hatsumi became soke. and why if Tanemura is a real student of Takamtsu did he fall under hatsumi in the bujinkan for so long.
like i said in another post, there are alot of questions w/ Tanemura, if you watch the panther productions videos he flat out lies about how he learned martial arts.
there are too many questions with him...that's why i train bujinkan.
and i like the post asking WHY takamatsu and hatsumi would make this up.
secondly, with the claim to Togakure ryu...why would tanemura except it and teach it?
somebody else posted a few posts before this (i should have quoted it) that someone else claims to know Togakure ryu and learned it from someone else other than hatsumi.....
so the bujinkan is not the only org. that recognizes togakure ryu, plus what about reaserch into togakure daisuke...isnt there some history on his life outside of martail arts...but actual history, that would be really good supporting fact for this.
after reading Tanemura's article on here....from what i have learned in the bujinkan, (part of it) Tanemura split becuase he either disagreed w/ hatsumi /did not understand what he was teaching.
it seems to be similar to Manaka's way of teaching...sticking only to the techniques...
and tanemura's reasponses kinda fit into this.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO