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

I figured as much. It's just that the first image that came to mind was the guys who cinch their pants down below their butt cheeks and spend more time failing at being a "Playa" than doing anything productive with their lives. Gotta love guys who can't figure out pants and a belt walking around with firearms.

 

Awesome. Honest people with a backbone = WIN! :bow1:

Not saying that people who go about things as RP said necessarily lack either. In that culture, the method certainly fits and would also be seen in a positive light.

 

Another outsider's perspective:

As a martial arts student and instructor, I purchase books and videos for mainly 2 reasons: (1) as a reference to an art that I do, whether it is to help review kata or drills or for new ideas on basic drills and activities or (2) to get an idea/overview of another art (especially if I have a chance to do a seminar in that art).

As such, I have a basic expectation that the material presented is accurate and correct. People can't really learn a whole art from videos but they can use them as references that help actual instruction (I am thinking of people who may have to travel great distances to train - these references are invaluable).

The whole notion that people might produce reference manuals and books with intended errors in them in mind-boggling. If they fear that people will get the books and videos and learn the art, instead of doing putting in intentional errors, they should focus on quality control in ranking and testing.

I guess I am the sort who would never sign on to study ninjutsu/taijutsu... I don't think I would be able to trust any of the reference materials out there (from any group), I also disagree with the ranking system of awarding rank based on potential or in the hopes that they will one day live up to that rank, and I find the internal bickering very off-putting (and those statements should be telling coming from a Hapkido guy - I used to think we were the worst as far as infighting/lineage arguments/rank jumping/split-off groups/etc, but we are amateurs compared to the stuff I read in this forum).

I would rather see accurate references, accurate material taught in class, and rank progression based on a combination of skill (most important)/fair testing/time in grade. It's OK to keep some material from the general public and that's easy to do - only teach it to your inner circle and people you can trust.

 

Is that right? http://www.bytwerk.com/gpa/falsenaziquotations.htm

 

RP posted

Theres a fine line between commiting suicide for atonement and commiting suicide for fear of retribution. But the ones that occur to my mind are

David Christopher Kelly, David Le Cruse, Robert Maxwell.

try putting in scandal suicide into google and see what comes up.

right so you have made a statement, and when asked for source you cant provide one

its not. sure there are times when we lie, like the white lie, but in the whole we don't like liars. Hense why children get in trouble for lying by their parents and teachers, hennse why we have laws of slander and libel, and how liars tend to get a bad rap.

Even the ten commandments says

You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.

In fact most religions say that lying is wrong

and in fact there are many stories in the English language that warn against lying including the boy who shouted wolf.

I'm not even going to go into the rest because for the most part we are agreeing, and in some places your contradicting yourself.

in fact your chasing your tale going around in circles.

And when I say "Tale" I mean tale. its a play on words.

 

As for people committing suicide over scandal "Tonights news" the death of Sean Hoare over the phone hacking scandal. I wonder if this was a suicide because of the scandal. if so it kind of suggests the RPs claim that only Japanese that commit suicide as an atonement for scandal may be just one more case that proves RP incorrect.

 

Did I say that only Japanese commit suicide? Really? You found a few examples of it in the West, congratulations. Have you researched suicide in Japan on the number of high profile people who have committed it after a scandal, ie politicians or business presidents? Didn't think so. Your research methods really do not show the mark of someone with the education you claim. Nor does your misuse of logic.

 

Again, what is a martial art supposed to deliver? Kind of funny to hear some demand to be taught the secrets of ninpo/karate/taichi/whatever when many students are often nothing more than overweight hobbyists with their own agenda(beyond learning to their best ability).

 

As outsiders might have access to books and videos, and since they might use what they see against you, strategically it would fit into a ninja mindset to purposefully put wrong information out. Of course I am not suggesting that there are people doing that but it wouldn't be un-ninjalike to do so.

Well, your ideas about ranking are really irrelevant to this thread, though you do make good points on an ideal system. The bickering is another issue, and something you will find whenever there are people. The accurate info can only be gotten from a teacher who has it, so in lieu of training under such an individual, what is left? Books and videos, attending seminars, etc. Since that is not the traditional nor an ideal way to learn any martial art, the results are going to also be less than ideal.

 

Da Lurker's got it right about why I was so ****ed, esp. if combat was the actual test. I could only imagine a CPR instructor purposely teaching a class incorrectly, changing the number of compressions, or perhaps a nursing instructor purposely teaching students improper handling of sharps, or maybe an anesthetist who purposely taught her students the wrong mixture to use on patients. But those aren't what we're talking about. They're just diversions from the greater topic at hand.

Agreed, entirely--the points you make are sound. And I've cooled down, believe it or not. And I absolutely know that, whatever criticism you may offer me, you would not do so personally, which is why I "thanked" you on this very same post I'm quoting. My apologies for your feeling that was TMI; however, I'm perfectly used to seeing it simply as a teaching tool/example, as my wife gives seminars for students within the State System of Education as part of the Department of Movement Studies and Lifetime Fitness in conjunction with Abnormal Psychology. That is, it's nothing hundreds upon hundreds of university students haven't heard in much more, um, excruciatingly graphic detail (and me, too; it actually sometimes makes me uncomfortable to hear them) as part of the series on identifying predatory behavior. But, again, my apologies if you were taken aback. It was not my intention.

On a lighter note...

Snakeyes, eh? I know I'm not actually "purchasing" anything, and, despite my rant, I assure you, yeah, I do "get" martial arts, working, stealing, taking, clawing your way to obtain knowledge (or, as with the case of tiger claw gungfu, being clawed j/k). And, I'm sure you understand from previous posts, I have been hard at work, and getting the results I've been looking for...sometimes even when I've had my buttocks handed to me...despite my reservations.

About the exchange of money: My first instructor, when he finally came from from UMich/Schoolcraft College, told me that he'd asked all our mutual friends (including me) to train--he simply wanted an uke to train with between driving (yes, driving, from Pennsylvania to Michigan) back to Otto and Al's for instruction. That was my first impression of what you're talking about (or that I believe you're referencing): you want something badly enough, you'll do anything to get it. In his case, it was driving eighteen hours from PA to MI, especially whenever Doron was going to be visiting Otto.

Yet, no one he asked to train with him, joined him, except me. His reasoning: because he offered to train with them for free. I paraphrase his reply when I asked why he thought they didn't want to train, as they were far, FAR more athletic, big, buff, whatever you want to call it than me: "For some reason, the exchange of money sometimes seems to give things value to people; with training, since I offered to train with them for 'free', they perceived it as having little to no value."

Thus, yes, blood, sweat, tears, and plenty of girlfriends who looked at me funny, and a sense of loyalty and love for my best friend and what he was giving me: a treasure, something he held dear to his heart, which he knew others held dear to their hearts--like any knowledge roughly gained and fought for--which he passed on to me, and which encouraged me to go on and keep training, no matter what happened in my life.

And yes, I've struggled, at times mightily, to make it "work" for me, to grasp what I could, and see more clearly what it was I was learning. I remember a cheesy anecdote Rob (my friend) told me, that I'm sure everyone's heard about this being not the art of winning, or invisibility, or anything like that, but rather to think it as simply being the art of being human. He once mentioned how, after he'd attended a training session Doron had at Otto's barn/farm, that he'd been shown "this is the way people often do 'x', but Doron showed us how that really should be done like 'y'."

He mentioned that throughout his training up in Michigan, he was told by Doron that the difference between what he may have originally seen, and what he was then being shown, was that the techniques Doron was instilling in the students were another, different layer of a kind of "layers within layers" approach. I know Rob assumed, and I totally assumed what he was referring to was simply henka, but maybe...

Fyi, Rob wasn't just a college student; he was a Loadmaster with the USAF, and attended Schoolcraft part-time during his eight years stationed in Michigan, minus the time he was in Saudi during Gulf War I.

Anyway, I always thought that, when I training in Bujinkan, I wasn't being lied to, per what Doron told Rob (and Otto and Al and I guess everyone else up there in Michigan at the time). In fact, I was always under the impression, based on the training I'd initially had, that what Rob had been shown, at least during those seminars, was the full-on "real deal" with no obfuscation or things "left out until a later date."

I'm not one who'll blindly follow without questioning...except sometimes it takes being "blind" to learn intuitively. Sometimes, maybe you actually have to just turn off your logical mind and just...follow those who've gone before. Maybe you have to trust that the people from whom you're learning mean the best for you. If you need proof they mean well for you, then by some definitions maybe you do not trust. And, thinking along those lines...

...Maybe the idea behind showing the "wrong" way of doing it, and this might seem strange considering my last rant, is actually a teaching tool. What if during training, the student who does a technique does it, and in some way, is able to perceive and ask, "This just doesn't feel right." What if those "mistakes" are purposefully there, like tiny errors put into a handout for my comp classes, just to see whether or not a student has seen them (example: an extra space in a technical writing class syllabus after the sentence and before the period, like this . The sort of tiny, extremely hard to notice error that could cost you the interview if it's on a resume.) and gets it. And then takes the next step, and points it out, or works it out.

If you just logically use your analytical mind, you might not see something that intuitively you should "feel" is "just plain wrong." But, until you reach a certain level of understanding, until you actually "get" it, it stays. And when you do...and you have the "guts" to perhaps point it out, or note it, or modify and adjust it to see if the way your body now moves "makes" it work...it works, completely. And that's the moment your instructor just...knows you've incorporated it into your subconscious movement. You're "in". Then again, that's just some wacky thought I had while sitting in front of a keyboard after doing "Insanity" and cooling down.

-------------
Anyway, on an entirely unrelated note, I'm in 100% agreement with reality please regarding liars. Certain children lie all the time, and because they're "cute", they not only get a "pass", they sometimes get to blame others for their misdeeds, and watch the person they blamed get punished. Liars are often not punished, they're rewarded by parents whose attitude is, "My kid can do no wrong."

Well, that's all I have. Calmed, candles flickering, glass of orange juice in hand, no rant tonight. "Insanity" (cardio program) has me too mellow to rant.

Cheers,
. . *

*get it?

 

**Note: my intent is not to address the original topic, but rather the fear that somehow dangerously bad techniques are being taught in place of real, life saving knowledge.**

My perspective on this is a little odd. I've been around long enough to know that there are many "correct" versions of every technique. And real training will out the real techniques vs. the crap.

The issue here isn't that the techniques are being substituted with techniques that *don't work.* The techniques being, ahem, modified, are modified with regard to special details that are characteristic of a particular ryu. Trade secrets, if you will. The things that are left out or altered do not affect the effectiveness of the techniques, in my (if I may say, significant) budo experience.

And really, if a technique was altered in such a way as to be ineffective... you should figure that out right quick in training! If not, your training methods need to be reexamined. The fundamental principles of the techniques of our arts cannot be hidden in real training. They are right out in the open for anyone with eyes to see and the dedication to pursue.

So don't worry, your skill will be real, even if you never learn that the "correct" version of kokuu uses an upward shuto vs. a downward one. The skill is not found in the specific techniques, but in the quality of your application of taijutsu.

(Also, please understand I'm known as a super technical guy who spends a lot of time working on very exact movements.)

 

This is kind of my point about stealing the techniques. If you have "gotten" your teacher's movement, no matter what is written in any book or video, you will know if you have the transmission or not because it shows in your movement. It is very clear then for people who know what to look for/feel for, who has gotten the technique and who has crap.

On the koku, come again? Why would it be an upward shuto? Methinks more along the line of a kama cut. I would classify it as more horizontal if anything(as the main force comes from shifting back towards his arm), though if you think of the kamae you start of from, your arm is either high or in doko(if you bring it forward to use in the first jodan uke, then it would go from your chin height to temple height so still not upwards), and the direction of the attack, how do you get upward? Hopefully you were just joking?:jawdrop:

 

I agree with your break down of the mechanics of the technique. It is sensible and will cause the kata to function as well as anything else, in my opinion. What I am referring to is the listed target for the shuto. IIRC, it is specifically listed as hoshi, which is the underside of the elbow (roughly). In order to hit that, you'd pretty much have to shuto at a slight rising angle. I don't have my documentation to check as a reference right now, so feel free to dismiss my recollection. Your access to the scroll is no doubt better than mine.

Does it really matter to making the kata work? I don't believe it does. That's my point. But of course you never miss the chance to argue over something, do you?

 

(%)$"&%$)& MAP ate my reply again. :bang:Oh well, time to rewrite it.

Wasn't trying to be argumentative, just what you said sounded odd and after referencing the old standby purple book(Togakure Ryu Ninpo Taijutsu), I found the technique shown on p. 216. The pictures show more of what appears to be a horizontal strike, as I mentioned, not a rising shuto like you posit. However, it is unclear as there is only a before showing the jodan uke, then one picture as the shuto has landed so there could be some ambiguity there. The text though states, "捕りは右起転拳で、受け星の下打ち折り。”　

Basically, the tori uses a right kitenken to strike the opponents hoshi no ****a kyusho. So the question becomes where is the kyusho 星の下? On page 101, we get our answer, sort of. There is a drawing of the left arm　and right arm showing the different pressure points. However, on the left arm, 星(hoshi) is shown as the armpit and crook of the elbow on the left arm but "星下" is shown as the crook of the elbow on the right.　　Page 102 says "星" is "脇下" or beneath the armpit, and p. 103 shows "星沢" as "肘関節凹の処" or at the hollow of the elbow joint. Unarmed Fighting Techniques of the Samurai has a picture on p. 91 showing "星下" as "kasei" at the inner fold of the elbow.

On p. 49 of the same book, it describes the technique Koku as, "...immediately strike down with a shuto to the hoshi on the opponent's attacking arm." Note, it doesn't say strike up. The Japanese explanation on p. 215 says, "忽ち右手刀にて敵の右手の星の下を打ち折る。” or basically strike the opponent's hoshi no ****a with a right shuto.

Nowhere do we get a suggestion that an upwards shuto is being called for. However, I can ask my teacher if it makes you feel better.

Since this thread is about deception, the question becomes does it matter as tnchijin2 asks? In the greater scheme of things, not really. However the purists out there and those who are concerned about preserving the art might say "H-ll yes!" Just in this short investigation, we have found what appear to be mistakes and changes in the two books that are kind of the layman's densho to the art. We can see how people would be confused, even if the mistakes weren't left in on purpose.

I have learned that the beginning jodan uke is the important part, as this sets up the counter strike. The feeling is similar to ku no kata and you are trying to catch the attack, or better yet, lead it into emptiness as your shuto hits it like a bunt in baseball. Like I said, the kitenken(shuto if you prefer) is like a kama strike. Now the question becomes, what is the right way to do it? Is it like tenchijin2 says, an upward strike, or something else? Personally, the way my teacher has taught us the technique makes sense, you might get an extra treat(ie the opponent putting ura onikudaki on himself), and you are protected from a potential rear hand strike(as you end up in jumonji after the shuto). As you are shifting back towards the attack, a more horizontal or downward strike makes more sense. If you messed up the timing and were still shifting/backpedaling back when the punch reached you and you had to shuto from there, I could see a potential for a more vertical strike, but it would be weaker and I wouldn't think it makes sense for the orthodox form.

I guess that I am being nitpicky though so I will just shutup now.

 

IIRC correctly the densho states to strike from below into Hoshi. Going from memory, I believe i've seen a copy of the densho which said 下から星を打ち折る。 Would you translate the last part as breaking his arm by striking into Hoshi?

 

If that was what it said, yep. Could be a misinterpretation of 星の下, which is the kyusho(apparently). I am going to talk with my teacher. Do you have the Japanese, if so you can PM it if you don't want to put it on the public thread. Here is one version:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke6PFO1uypg"]‪Soke Masaaki Hatsumi - Koku‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

 

I've also always understood Koku to be a horizontal, or slightly downward strike towards the elbow, upwards doesn't seem to make much sense in regards to the effect you're after, amongst other things. But to why I'm here...

With regards to the idea of suicide as a result of scandal, I don't think that Garth is quite getting the nuance there. Yes, there is suicide due to scandal in both Eastern and Western societies, however the reasons are rather different. Here's something I posted on another thread that deals with some of this idea:

In other words, if a scandal is brought about in the West, then suicide is a personal way of escaping from the situation, and is to do with your personal standing (either stopping it sliding further down, or not being able to cope with it being lowered in this way). In Japan, though, suicide as a result of scandal is more a way of accepting responsibility for it, even in times when the person is not actually responsible in any personal way, and in that way making amends for the scandal, so as to help restore the reputation of those associated (the group), or limit the further damage to them.

I believe that is what RP is getting at when he talks about suicide for atonement in the East, but not in the West. And in that he is definately correct.

 

RP

If you are paying to train with someone in an art, then the person training you should be delivering that art. The martial art isn't supposed to deliver anything, but the instructor is.

I think the same applies if teaching for free, if you don't like someone to the point you are going to let them think they are training correctly, they are actually not, why not ask them to leave? I would.

I wouldn't willingly deceive someone, in any circumstance, I don't see how you could argue the case for this, it's not a martial arts thing, but an integrity issue as I see it

 

Reality please posted

Wait a minute it was you that posted

The question is, have you done the research, for you to post the claim.

Why is it RP that you make a claim, and when someone shows some cases which show your claim may not be correct, its them that have to provide the evidence to back the evidence that counter your claim.

Again and again on this forum you have made claims, never providing sources, never backing claims up with evidence, just asking the other party that questions your claim to provide the evidence.

when asked for claims you post

And then after posting that there is research that proves your point I ask for the source and you post...

This is your problem RP, you post your points based on assumption only which you fail to back up with sources and evidence. And then you have the audacity to post in relation to me...

:bang:

Garth