Surprised not to be in the land of the permabanned but there isn't really much else to say so I'll keep it short. Sad that Dean now seems to be among the list of the moved on…
In another thread, a person claiming to be looking at ninjutsu from an objective standpoint went on to drop in his own words a "nuke" on the Bujinkan, in the guise of an old e-budo post by one Roger Conant from years ago. As an objective outsider, one might have expected this poster to then go on to post any of the many refutations of said article, but instead he then went back to Bullshido to gloat about his actions here on MAP. Claiming civility and objectivity while showing behavior quite the opposite is not the best way to go about being considered a scholar of any particular field. Be that as it may, there were a few things that did need addressing, so I will do so here.
1) There is almost no scholarly research of ninjutsu in English. This is a fact, if you do not like it, please show otherwise. Kacem's book and an old one by Stephen Turnbull, both fraught with their own problems come the closest. Antony Cummins has been publishing a lot of "translations" of old ninjutsu texts recently, but he neither has the academic, cultural, or language skills to be considered a scholar or true researcher, and he is busy burning his bridges in Iga just like he did with the Bujinkan and Genbukan. Probably won't be long before the whole Natori fiasco goes South too. I forgot to mention another couple of translations of the Shoninki that can be found but there you go. This is pretty much what is available.
2) There are also very few scholars in Japan(Japanese people we're talking about now) who have researched ninjutsu, none who really claim to be experts and have published on it's entire history and breadth. Some historians, novelists, amateur researchers, and martial artists have published books on various aspects of ninjutsu and then there are are pop fiction accounts, novels, and old scrolls and books from different time periods with different takes on aspects of ninjutsu.
So again, there is no consensus amongst scholars of ninjutsu that Hatsumi sensei's take on it fails to match the historic record. There are several people around Japan who are trying to cash in on ninjutsu, all whom have their own philosophy, amount of research they've done, and more importantly; agendas to pursue. Some of the more vocal detractors of Hatsumi sensei do so on the rank in the Bujinkan issue, his flamboyance, and jealousy. I have yet to hear people who have investigated the actual ryu that he is soke of make claims that they were collections of a mismatch of techniques taken from various arts and peddled together. There is some talk of a letter that Takamatsu sensei wrote to the Kuki family, but neither Togakure/Gyokko/or Koto ryu have a stylistic or philosophical connection to the Kuki arts so to claim that they were created from taking Kukishinden ryu and mixing it with some unknown Chinese styles is ludicrous.
3) Where there have been issues with content, i.e. putting kata from Asayama Ichiden Ryu and adding them in with Kuki hanbo or with taking chain techniques learned from Masaaki ryu and doing something similar, Bujinkan members who have studied these things will be the first to blow the whistle on themselves about it.
4) The scroll issue and koryu "authentication" nonsense has been telephoned(you know the game where you repeat what you heard) into utter internet fantasyland, and the reality of the situation is nothing like what gets passed around as the truth. In fact, Hatsumi sensei is in possession of so many scrolls from so many different ryu, one wonders if that is part of the politics against him. Needless to say, the current worldwide situation of the Bujinkan definitely is, as is his success and personality. So again, without looking at the ryu in-depth and researching things beyond what you may read online, you cannot reach any objective or scholarly appraisal of the situation.
5) Clearly there are some questions about the lineage, but that is not uncommon in the traditional arts. There are also issues with how the Bujinkan represents(or doesn't) the ryu ha that Hatsumi sensei is the soke of. However, until there has been actual scholarly research done and made public that investigates these things to a much more rigorous level, one cannot claim that Takamatsu sensei made everything up or that Hatsumi sensei is a fraud, all one can say is that there appear to be some discrepancies and issues with this or that aspect of the lineage and provence of the arts. That is nothing new to anybody who has spent a year or two in the Bujinkan and not an issue for many. It is definitely not some revelation worthy of "nuclear" status or something that should keep people up at night worrying.
In conclusion, if one has an in-depth relationship with the actual arts that make up the Takamatsuden, one will realize that there is no need to worry and that they are indeed true koryu arts. If one has to rely on other people's shoddy investigations, videos from youtube, and reading in martial arts rags(poor magazines) and online forums for their understanding, then they should understand that this does not constitute research, and no serious academic would even bother to listen to them after they realized their lack of credentials.
In another thread, a person claiming to be looking at ninjutsu from an objective standpoint went on to drop in his own words a "nuke" on the Bujinkan, in the guise of an old e-budo post by one Roger Conant from years ago. As an objective outsider, one might have expected this poster to then go on to post any of the many refutations of said article, but instead he then went back to Bullshido to gloat about his actions here on MAP. Claiming civility and objectivity while showing behavior quite the opposite is not the best way to go about being considered a scholar of any particular field. Be that as it may, there were a few things that did need addressing, so I will do so here.
1) There is almost no scholarly research of ninjutsu in English. This is a fact, if you do not like it, please show otherwise. Kacem's book and an old one by Stephen Turnbull, both fraught with their own problems come the closest. Antony Cummins has been publishing a lot of "translations" of old ninjutsu texts recently, but he neither has the academic, cultural, or language skills to be considered a scholar or true researcher, and he is busy burning his bridges in Iga just like he did with the Bujinkan and Genbukan. Probably won't be long before the whole Natori fiasco goes South too. I forgot to mention another couple of translations of the Shoninki that can be found but there you go. This is pretty much what is available.
2) There are also very few scholars in Japan(Japanese people we're talking about now) who have researched ninjutsu, none who really claim to be experts and have published on it's entire history and breadth. Some historians, novelists, amateur researchers, and martial artists have published books on various aspects of ninjutsu and then there are are pop fiction accounts, novels, and old scrolls and books from different time periods with different takes on aspects of ninjutsu.
So again, there is no consensus amongst scholars of ninjutsu that Hatsumi sensei's take on it fails to match the historic record. There are several people around Japan who are trying to cash in on ninjutsu, all whom have their own philosophy, amount of research they've done, and more importantly; agendas to pursue. Some of the more vocal detractors of Hatsumi sensei do so on the rank in the Bujinkan issue, his flamboyance, and jealousy. I have yet to hear people who have investigated the actual ryu that he is soke of make claims that they were collections of a mismatch of techniques taken from various arts and peddled together. There is some talk of a letter that Takamatsu sensei wrote to the Kuki family, but neither Togakure/Gyokko/or Koto ryu have a stylistic or philosophical connection to the Kuki arts so to claim that they were created from taking Kukishinden ryu and mixing it with some unknown Chinese styles is ludicrous.
3) Where there have been issues with content, i.e. putting kata from Asayama Ichiden Ryu and adding them in with Kuki hanbo or with taking chain techniques learned from Masaaki ryu and doing something similar, Bujinkan members who have studied these things will be the first to blow the whistle on themselves about it.
4) The scroll issue and koryu "authentication" nonsense has been telephoned(you know the game where you repeat what you heard) into utter internet fantasyland, and the reality of the situation is nothing like what gets passed around as the truth. In fact, Hatsumi sensei is in possession of so many scrolls from so many different ryu, one wonders if that is part of the politics against him. Needless to say, the current worldwide situation of the Bujinkan definitely is, as is his success and personality. So again, without looking at the ryu in-depth and researching things beyond what you may read online, you cannot reach any objective or scholarly appraisal of the situation.
5) Clearly there are some questions about the lineage, but that is not uncommon in the traditional arts. There are also issues with how the Bujinkan represents(or doesn't) the ryu ha that Hatsumi sensei is the soke of. However, until there has been actual scholarly research done and made public that investigates these things to a much more rigorous level, one cannot claim that Takamatsu sensei made everything up or that Hatsumi sensei is a fraud, all one can say is that there appear to be some discrepancies and issues with this or that aspect of the lineage and provence of the arts. That is nothing new to anybody who has spent a year or two in the Bujinkan and not an issue for many. It is definitely not some revelation worthy of "nuclear" status or something that should keep people up at night worrying.
In conclusion, if one has an in-depth relationship with the actual arts that make up the Takamatsuden, one will realize that there is no need to worry and that they are indeed true koryu arts. If one has to rely on other people's shoddy investigations, videos from youtube, and reading in martial arts rags(poor magazines) and online forums for their understanding, then they should understand that this does not constitute research, and no serious academic would even bother to listen to them after they realized their lack of credentials.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire