Is it right to deceive people? or charge people for false information?

Well Mr. Roley,

On the contrary, there seems to be firm ground for me to stand after all.
Care to address this or will you avoid it all together?

It is so strange how people believe no one else remembers all the things that has happened in the X-kans.

 

No names, no proof, and no details. It would be nice to know the context of what was supposably being distorted.

Your comment, "not the foreigners, but SOME foreigners. namely seminar payers who hasn't done some homework" seems to indicate that if someone came on a forum and asked for some secrets that they were sent running off in the wrong direction. Yeah, people trying to get easy answers on the internet without actually putting in the time to get decent instruction, those types deserve a bit of screwing with IMO.

After all, JWillis is saying that Hatsumi said to folks there were no kata in the Bujinkan. We know that Hayes said there was no kata, but nothing to indicate that Hatsumi ever said so.

 

In addition to what Reality Please stated about how it was more likely Hayes' lack of ability that caused the confusion, take a look at some of the books in Japanese such as Ninpo Zukan from 1978. You can find kata listed by name.

 

my issue here is to the OP's assertions that there is commercial "cheating"/misleading. not jwills' "kata or no kata" assertion.

TO MODS: is it a violation of TOS to post a screenshot from another forum? or should I just post the text as a quote here? advice would be welcome.

 

Reality Please posted

Were you there when this happened?

or is it hearsay?

But even so regardless, it doesnt really matter if Hayes Japanese was bad the fact that he wrote the kata "koku" in History and traditions in 1981, does seem to dispel the myth that he believed that there were no kata in Ninjutsu.

 

The unholy posted

Maybe he didnt know of the existence of this document, or he knew and didnt mention it.

as I said his comments regarding kata were more to do with the types of karate one sees in karate, not as two man techniques as seen in ninjutsu

 

I was doing TKD when Hayes came back and started writing for magazines and I lean toward this idea. At the time, if you asked 99 percent of martial artists in America what kata was, they would give the karate version.

Actually, this is a good example of hearsay,

That is Hayes' version of events, not what we can show Hatsumi actually said. If there is a problem with Hayes' Japanese causing the confusion, this might be a clue.

 

The unholy posted

thats correct it is hearsay which is why i started the sentence with the words "I have heard" and not stated it as fact.

Its when we post hearsay as facts that the problems start.

 

Page 51 of History and traditions written by Hayes

He mentions...

"The kihon kata, or fundamental practice guides, of ninjutsu unarmed fighting are the first steps towards mastery..."

Page 71

"In the unarmed techniques series known as koku (tiger sky) the opponent comes in with a right lunging punch"

Description of the kata koku follows.

And has anyone actually read what it says in "Warrior path of togakure" published in 1983.

"Because of this emphasis on spontaneous decision and creative ability, the concept of kata, prearranged patterns of movement, is not part of the jutsu combat methods of ninpo, at least not in the ordinary sense of the word kata"

 

My point exactly. "Tiger sky?!" :bang: Definitely not ordinary in any sense of the word.

 

I don't agree with this. I'm not one of the rigid, "don't discuss ninjutsu in public," people, but some information should be controlled. Obviously when the higher-ups hold this opinion, and the distinction isn't clearly drawn for what is acceptable and unacceptable public information, then the bickering about this issue starts.

We can agree that some information should not be made public, outside the realm of ninjutsu, right? There was a rogue middle-eastern scientist who set up a school to teach any nation how to manufacture their own weapons-grade uranium. He even had a call center for 24-hour technical support installed. His behavior went unchallenged for awhile, and nations like Iran and North Korea solicited his services. Now that genie is out of the bottle and it cannot ever be put back in. Eventually a terrorist will detonate a nuclear device in a populated first-world city. It's inevitable. All the experts agree. When that day happens, people will be painfully more aware of how important controlling sensitive information will be.

Now, obviously that is an extreme example. Learning ninjutsu isn't as dangerous as learning to build a weapon of mass destruction (unless Chuck Norris is doing it). But, most reasonable people would agree 'some' information should not be public. Again, where is the line though?

I paid for a security training school taught by former special forces soldiers and received a manual for correspondence education before the classwork started. There was so much information to learn that the course was divided into three massive textbooks, and before receiving any of the books I had to sign a non-disclosure agreement and be vetted. The books were distributed sequentially after a certain period of time had passed and a certain financial commitment had been met. The first textbook was the most general material. The second textbook included more "sensitive" information. Eventually, the classroom material was to include the most private information of all. It was understood that previous versions of the manuals we were learning from had been stolen and used as "how to" guides by terrorists who wanted to analyze bodyguard strategies to discern how to counter them to effectively kill their protectees. Those manuals are essentially standard reading material for terrorists because of that.

I'm sure those manuals had incorrect and incomplete information in them. Furthermore, even the classroom work wasn't the "full picture" of the industry. After paying thousands of dollars in money, being vetted, and attending a class for a month I knew I wouldn't have all the complete information on the subject because a long-term trust had not been established. I would still need to mentor under those veterans, like a trade school apprentice system, and once my character had been assessed under a broad spectrum of stressful situations, and I was determined to eventually be a viable student, then I'd be trusted enough to be let in on ever more sensitive pieces of information.

Because I have family in the security industry already, I had a more realistic expectation of how that security school was structured in advance. How the information was to be sequentially provided to potential students once their character had been evaluated over time was briefly discussed in the promotional material written by the school, but I guarantee some students are eventually outraged to learn that they spent 1000s of dollars and didn't just receive "everything" up front. There is this naive' expectation from Westerners that you pay X amount of dollars and you receive "all the information" about a subject in book or video form. I don't know any industry that works like that though.

I was told stories from my Bunjinkan teacher about how it used to be common practice for the Japanese shihan to invite other martial art sensei to their dojo, and once their guests arrived, lay down a challenge against their egos. "If you were really the head of ryu X, then you'd be able to perform secret technique Z for us right now." Indignant, the guest sensei would then show his rude hosts technique Z to prove his legitimacy, and then leave. The next couple weeks of class would be spent analyzing technique Z and formulating counters to it.

I personally watch the way other schools train and use that information to formulate a strategy on how to counter those MAs should I run across someone who has studied one. I have used that theoretical study to beat a superior martial artist without ever directly practicing against someone of that discipline before. I was fortunate that he was a specialist and predictable, and he foolishly revealed his style by assuming a stance before the fight. Had it just been raw MA talent vs. MA talent, I would have easily lost the fight. However, I had predetermined his style's weakness, had determined correctly, and I altered the parameters of the fight far outside of his comfort zone. If I'm out there using those strategies to defeat other MAs, then they're doing the same thing with taijutsu. Personally, I'm happy knowing that the average person has no idea what someone with taijutsu training does in a fight because of the wealth of bad information on the topic widely available. The fewer people who know the true information, the more effective my training remains.

 

Sounds like one of those kyojitsu-laden anecdotes.

 

I have heard of them going to different schools for awhile(like 6 months) to learn how to apply what they learned against other arts. This would be a more likely scenario...

 

With respect, if you're not getting coherent answers and people are going off on tangents, it might be in part due to the vague, generalized nature of your original post. You're talking about multiple Japanese shihan, publishing multiple books and DVDs, using a variety of different marketing methods for each product, and with many of these products no longer being published/marketed; and you're asking sweeping questions about the overall ethics of the entire process. Obviously, in some situations, protecting information is more justifiable than others.

Not very well they haven't (up to this point). I believe I'm well-aware of some of the examples you're referring to in your original post, and I've spent years in various X-kans learning about these personally. However, I'm just guessing that we're even on the same page about which specific instances you want addressed and are dissatisfied with the answers about from this thread thus far.

 

It's interesting that those who have made up their own art that they claim to be a better version of ninjutsu stick together. Those who claim to teach "modern" ninjutsu are just as guilty of deceiving people as those they claim are teaching altered or "incorrect" techniques.

 

I think the original question was fairly clear, it is right to take money for something you know to be false?

It isn't related to a specific incident, as happens within the koryu on a regular basis, people within the Kans will have seen this themselves. I'm not going to point out examples, if you're not aware of any then you've been training with your eyes closed.

In GBK Tanemura has himself said that he has changed things when published in books, the BJK discuss differences all the time - just look through this forum and you'll find plenty of examples.

This has become a discussion about whether info should be shared, which to me has never been in question, it should NOT be shared with those who haven't earned it.

My question is whether it's ok to take money for something on the basis it's correct, when you know it isn't?

If you want to keep it hidden, why not do just that?

 

no mods or admins have answered my question. hence I cannot give the screenshot of the certain "evidence"

you go to a seminar where your GM teaches, you pay, and he teaches you wrongly/allows you to learn wrong techniques?

I have nothing good to say...

 

As a new practitioner of BJK I must admit I'm not overly impressed! One of the overriding concepts o martial arts, I've always believed, is integrity and it's certainly been an important underpinning principle in everything else I've ever done. If misinformation to paying punters is common place amongst the grand masters, regardless of the outlet of said information, then frankly I'm worried they think I'm just part of a giant cash cow that they can just mislead with some fancy but ultimately useless techniques so they don't have to get a proper job...

 

Allow me to dispell some of the illusions, then.

Integrity is a major part of, particularly old traditional martial arts. However, you seem to be looking at it from the wrong direction. The integrity in terms of honesty and loyalty is looked for from the students, really. After all, if you want to learn the system, it's up to you showing that you are worth the instructor giving you their hard-earned knowledge. As a result, some systems, such as Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu don't even show you the meanings and reasons for the movements in their patterns until you've been training in them for a number of years. That way, if a student leaves early, they don't have anything real to take with them (to another system or teacher).

So integrity is a major thing, but it needs to be demonstrated by the student. It's a way of ensuring that the art is protected, the students are of a high enough quality, and so on. If the student has shown enough integrity, loyalty, and so on, there shouldn't be any real danger or risk of being given false information... after all, these "false teachings" are in public forms, such as books and DVDs, not the personal teachings directly from a teacher to a student.

 

I hear you Chris and I agree. I'm not asking for an open ticket to the complete teachings of any given art, but why not just not teach it? Keep under lock and key, as the old gong Fu masters did, teaching the most advance areas of the art only to 'inner circle' disciples?

All that being said, I appreciate that I'm simply a humble beginner and that there's perhaps alot that I'm yet to understand. Maybe it's all part of feeding into the 'mystique' of the art we're all drawn to. I just perhaps wish it was as simple as 'that's not for you, not yet'.