Jump to content

Talk:Bujinkan/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

"Bujinkan: main entry"

The legitimacy of the Bujinkan is not in question. Someone should start wiki entries for the Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai and the Nihon Kobu organizations and other martial arts are not judged based on their membership into these organizations. Presenting the Bujinkans membership status into these organizations has nothing to do with the art, or the organization, or it's legitimacy. If you want this information to be present, add it to the history section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.180.126 (talk) 01:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

"Koryu Derived Martial Art" & "Arts taught"

NOTE: 8 of the 9 ryu are easily checkable. There is the only 1 single ryu that is in question. Togakure Ryu is only dated back (for certain in terms of scrolls) to the late 1800s by toda. Toda wrote rank certificates for Takamatsu. Other documents were (claimed to be) destroyed in the war (same time the kuki documents were destroyed). There has been recent research effort to better date the ryu. In the future more should be known about it. Note also that the Gyokko Ryu is well known as being from the iga region of Japan. Jacob.D.Biamonte (talk) 00:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

In the side box which presents all the basic data about Bujinkan it states Bujinkan is "koryu-derived". I think this wording makes a statement that 9 ryuhas Bujinkan is founded on are "koryu", but they are not: neither Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai (Society for the Promotion of the Japanese Classical Martial Arts) nor Nihon Kobudo Kyokai (Japanese Classical Martial Arts Association) has verified any of Bujinkan's schools to be koryu. If the article states Bujinkan ryuha's are koryu, there should be some NPOV reference for that. Then there's also another point: what does that "koryu derived" mean anyway? It is quite basic that Japanese martial arts are classified either "koryu" (traditional martial art) or "gendai budo" (modern martial art). There really isn't something in-between. Judo is called gendai budo even though it has strong roots in koryu. Same goes with Aikido, for instance. I'm removing that koryu-derived and replacing it with "modern". Finerion 22:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Also in the same box the "Arts taught" section is shady. Individual ryuha's of Bujinkan aren't arts in the same sense that similar box is used in other martial arts pages, such as Kashima-Shinryu. The section should be rewritten to match with style it has been used on other Wikipedia-pages. Finerion 22:15, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Disputed: "rank in the Bujinkan is handed out faster than in most other arts"

Due to the disputed nature of the statement, lack of verifiability, and violation of neutral point of view policy, deleted "Although ranks can never be compared between different martial arts, it can safely be said that rank in the Bujinkan in general is handed out faster than in most other arts." Paleorthid 18:51, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Distilled: Paleorthid 23:28, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Well, I know a few 10th dans in Bujinkan... they are young men around 40 or so. In aikido, you will need at least 30 years of training to reach 6th dan... the person who said it loud on a seminar, "it is relatively easy to achieve rank in Bujinkan", is a 10th dan. On a Swedish dojo home page there is a diary from a training journey to Japan, where one chap leaves as shodan (1st dan) and comes back home as yondan (4th), a speed of promotion unheard of in any other budo art I know of. Together with a Bujinkan 8th dan, I wrote an FAQ for a Swedish martial arts forum where one of the paragraphs covered the incidence of high ranks in Bujinkan.
I think the statement is well well-founded, and I put it back. Habj 17:10, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I won't dispute that highly visible incidents of rapid advancement occur for select dan-ranked individuals in the Bujinkan. I dispute that, on the basis of these occasional incidents, or based on the degree to which members of the Bujnkan choose to speculate on its meaning, that it is necessary to conclude that these incidents happen in general. It is an important distinction. Otherwise, you have a very solid article here. Please keep up the good work. Paleorthid 04:14, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
If I'm not mistaken, you must travel to hombu dojo to be advanced in the dan grades, in which case it would make sense for someone who is unable to travel to study for several dan tests prior to going. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.212.158.84 (talk) 20:11, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, in some of the weapon-based gendai budo (iaido, kendo, kyudo) people reach shodan rather quickly while in some karate and aikido styles a shodan is expected to take some ten years... rank is relative between styles. In Bujinkan, it is also relative within the style.

This observation of the extreme high ranks should IMO be explained, because this is one of the things that make many budo folks suspicious about the Bujinkan. Had I not known about it, I would have serious doubts about joining a dojo where the main teacher got his fifth dan in as many years as it took me to reach shodan in aikido. I can not see him as extreme in any way! Getting a dan rank every time you go to Japan and train also is pretty normal. No "three years between nidan and sandan" rule here.

Maybe it can be separated into two parts: one discussing the extreme high ranks and one that discusses the relativity of the grading system. The Bujinkan view on rank is so different from what people in general think of rank, probably that should be explained. I let this rest for a while now. Habj 08:54, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Please address the actual problem with the disputed statement: disputed claims require a source to be cited. As you are aware, Wikipedia:Verifiability policy is clear on this. If your statement is well-founded, as you have said it is, simply cite the most authoritative supporting source.
“For an encyclopedia, sources should be unimpeachable. An encyclopedia is not primary source material. Its authors do not conduct interviews nor perform original research. Hence, anything we include should have been covered in the records, reportage, research, or studies of others. In many, if not most, cases there should be several corroborating sources available should someone wish to consult them. Sources should be unimpeachable relative to the claims made; outlandish claims beg strong sources.”
“Sometimes a particular statement can only be verified at a place of dubious reliability, such as a weblog or a tabloid newspaper. If the statement is relatively unimportant, then just remove it - don't waste words on statements of limited interest and dubious truth. However, if you must keep it, then attribute it to the source in question.”
From: Wikipedia:Verifiability under the heading “Dubious”
Paleorthid 16:19, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
“Verifiability is one problem with articles on obscure subjects. If an article covers a subject which has never been written about in published sources, or which has only been written about in sources of doubtful credibility, it is difficult to verify the information. To do so would require original research, and it has been agreed that Wikipedia is not a place to publish original research.”
From: Wikipedia:Verifiability under the heading “Obscure topics”
Paleorthid 16:52, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
If you come across a statement which seems or is inaccurate, please do the following:
  • correct it right away if you can. Please take the time to properly verify it. Please also add to the article any sources you used to verify the information in it: see cite your sources.
  • if the neutrality of the statement is in question, please look at Wikipedia:NPOV dispute
  • insert {{dubious}} after the relevant sentence or paragraph
  • insert a "Disputed" section in the talk page to describe the problem
From: Wikipedia:Disputed_statement
Paleorthid 17:04, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
This discussion is irrelevant and ridiculous! The speed at which a person obtains his ranking is determined by the speed at which that person learns and effectively masters the required techniques, tactics, and knowledge for that particular Dan degree. Any martial arts organization that claims that you must be a "certain age" to receive a certain Dan degree is stupid and discriminating against people based on their younger age. Achieving promotion to a particular Dan degree should ideally be based on "personal" achievement and NOT on "Senority" or how long you have been in the organization, or how old you are! Do we deny young geniuses like Sho Yano the right to attend medical school despite the fact that he was only 12 years old when he was accepted into medical school, due to the indisputable fact that this kid was smart enough to accomplish the required work and learn the required knowledge in order to gain acceptance into medical school. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.51.199.173 (talk) 23:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Godan

" godan (a rank that often takes a lifetime to achieve in other arts)"

I don't see why this parenthetical statement is relevant or even of interest. Paleorthid 20:34, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Compromise regarding ranks?

This is an interesting lesson in how to handle this kind of matters in Wikipedia, and I am grateful for all pointers to standards of all kinds. As my changes concerns both issues raised above, I don't know which heading to put it under and so I make a new one.

When you get asked to verify the statement that the sun goes up in the East, you get kind of miffled and want to reply - but please see for yourself! I feel the same way regarding ranks in the Bujinkan. I do not think there is a written source for the practise of green belts for men and red for women either - but it is common knowledge among anyone who has been in contact with the Bujinkan, as well as the multitude of exceptions. Many of martial arts articles here on Wikipedia contains loads of "facts" that might be true in a specific school, or style, or country. Indeed this is the problem with the "generally wellknown facts" - they might not apply to general situaions, but only in local environments.

I have changed the text concerning both comments above, and hope it is OK to remove the "disputed" tag. If not, please put it back (although the sentence that it labelled is gone). The point of mentioning the high ranks/high ranking rate in Bujinkan is that the art in itself, or specific dojos/teachers, are often seen as suspicious by other budo people because of the ridiculously high ranks. I removed the sentence about ranking speed in general, and chose to instead focus on the extreme high ranks. I have not yet heard anyone disputing this, but those who want a source can take a look at the teacher list in Swedish Shidoshi-kai http://www.bujinkan.nu/shidoshi-kai/ which lists 2 12th dans, one 9th dan and no less than 7 8th dans. This in an art that first came to Sweden in 1975. That these are an extreme abundance of high ranks is obvious to anyone who has been exposed to any kind of gendai budo. Let us compare with aikido, which has at least five times more practitioners (I am conservative here, as I am not sure about the numbers) and came to the country a decade earlier, where we have one 7th dan in Iwama Ryu, and 6th dan Aikikai - of which one is the same person that holds the 7th in Iwama Ryu.

If the current version can not be accepted by standard Wikipedia policy, then please remove what you see fit! I will keep that in mind when it comes to handling other martial arts articles. I can sacrifice this fact, if it gives me a tool to take care of some of the martial arts articles out there loaded with disputable "facts". Habj 09:52, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Progress to improvement much appreciated. I truly was hoping that there was something written by someone on this subject. Besides martial arts forum denizens trading jibes. Looks like this Wikipedia article is it. I can accept that, for now. I have heard that dan-rank inflation is bad in Spain also, I just don't see it where I'm at in Washington State, USA or BC, Canada. But then, around here, no-one really talks about their rank. Nominal rank is such a de-emphasised element in the Bujinkan I see through my knothole, that it makes me uncomfortable to see the subject of comparative rank get so much ink in your article. At some point someone needs to attempt to shed light as to _why_ the situation you described is what it is. Without it, what you wrote looks no different then someone venting their spleen. It's not wiki yet. Surely a quote from Soke is available? My copy of "Understand? Good. Play!" ISBN: 0971084955 is not available to me at this time, otherwise I would dig into it. What you wrote makes me want to know more.
Paleorthid 17:12, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I did find this in the public domain-
If someone trains with someone solely due to their rank and they don’t have the natural perception to see the validity of that rank, then they will never truly understand the art. Their vision is too easily clouded by falsehood, and these are the people who attain eight dans in eight years....The nature of the art is to weed out those who are incapable of the enlightenment it offers.
source- January 1996 issue of Ura & Omote
Paleorthid 21:50, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I agree that ranks are not considered important in the Bujinkan and not much talked about. The crash comes when the Bujinkan system is viewed with "normal" budo eyes. "Rank inflation" is not an issue in the Bujinkan. Soke gives rank for whatever reason he wishes. It is when people with the notion that high rank fast implies bad budo meets the Bujinkan, that trouble occurrs. The Bujinkan system is simply different from anything else.

Btw, I do wish you had not removed the earlier part of the discussion here. Only by searching out your first remark in the history, I could see that you were probably thinking about kyu ranks while I was primarily thinking about higher ranks. Kyu ranks are IMO of very little importance in the big picture. Habj 11:40, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

May I point out that there are considered to be 15 dan grades in the Bujinkan, as opposed to 10 for most Budo? Whilst it is true that 11-15th dan are merely further subdivisions of 10th dan, it does add some relativity to the debate. Furthermore, one must be 3rd dan to be a teaching assistant (shidoshi-ho) and 5th to a full teacher (shidoshi), whereas most arts allow one to open one's own dojo at the achievement of 1st dan.
Sasuke Sarutobi 15:32, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
On shidoshi-ho, can you cite a source? There are a number of nidan and shodan who have claimed the title shidoshi-ho, and have proven their connections to and the support of their shidoshi. Stslavik 19:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


eh... i wont bore all you people with long chats about the ranks because it hurt my eye to get this far... so i will simplify it sence i did my home work... from what i read and from what i learned fist hand... the rank system is as follows: White belt,No Kyu (pronounced as "Q")... then Green belt,9th Kyu to 1st Kyu... and then their is the first Black belt,Shodan... after first their is a list of diffrent dans each allowing the person to learn even more dagerous ninjutsu... their is also a "Patch" system that i learned about but i have yeat seen nor heard of it other than one sorce so i am not going by it... for better info check these links below... http://www.tacticalselfdefense.com/BujHomepage.htm http://www.budosites.com/hmbd/index.cfm? http://www.ninjutsu.com/home.shtml and my dojo's site http://www.freewebs.com/btsdcrestview/

i hope this helps and i hope that you guys will make it right... enjoy

zVc

Should we have links to individual dojos? This list could be incredibly long. IMHO it would be better to only link to hombu dojo and sites of general importance. Habj 10:00, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Agree with this, remains relevant. Wikipedia is not a repository of links. Links to individual dojos is inconsistent with wikipedia without specific encyclopedic material tied to it. The external links section should also be reorganized accordingly and should include a link to hombu dojo and sites of general importance. Sources should be referenced. -- Paleorthid 20:29, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Taihenjutsu

Added as third element of unarmed skills.

sources: [1] [2] Paleorthid 06:36, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Added weapons and other items (pictures needed plz)

I added several weapons to the list, namely bisento, kyoketsu shoge, bo and senban shuriken, kusari-fundo, kusarigama, yari and kamayari, jutte, and the kunai

also added a category for kyahan but can someone do shuko, ashuko, a teko plz?

of these pictures are needed for:

kamayari, jutte, kusarifundo, kyoketsu shoge, bisento, senban and bo shuriken.

If anyone can help it would be apprecited to have photos for these. also please put a real picture of senban shuriken up before the ninjers put a non-authentic picture up!

added pictures

added pictures of kusari, shoge, kamayari, bisento, jutte and bo-shuriken from net

The external links section is turning into a link farm. Following up on my comment of April 29, 2006, here are my proposed changes to remove link spam (and clean out a one dead link --- Paleorthid 18:13, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Couldn't agree more RichMac (Talk) 16:55, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

The following links were removed because they were links to individual dojo, and constitute link spam. -- Paleorthid 18:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Last Accessed ?

What are all the Last Accessed dates for the External Links? why are they here? --Storkk 18:51, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Factual Accuracy - About This and Other Pages

I think the elephant in the room is whether or not Bujinkan is a fabricated art. I understand that we need to be NPOV, but sometimes it's hard to know what to do with pages talking about people as "considered to be the last combat ninja." (Toshitsugu_Takamatsu) Yes, it's in theory perfectly reasonable language - it is their opinion, and again in theory they're entitled to their opinion as much as the mainstream is - but from a "common sense" standpoint it's just odd. I might draw a comparison with some crackpot physics theories: I think it's accepted in Wikipedia to reflect that it runs counter to the mainstream.

I've had some contact with Bujinkan people, and frankly, I'm skeptical. Their bizarre belts, curious 15-dan ranking system, and apparent disconnection from the rest of the budo world make me wonder. Obviously, it's not the place of an encyclopedia to judge the merits of a martial art, but it's getting awkward treating them too neutrally. Does -anyone- have some information about this school that doesn't come from them? --GenkiNeko 21:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Sure. Remember that the belt system was created by Jigoro_Kano in the 1930s[3], and was an arbitrary system itself. The Bujinkan itself is fabricated, in the sense that it is a combination of classical "schools" under a single federation, much like was done with the Chin Woo Athletic Association. The 15-dan ranking system was to expand the system to better accomodate the teachings of Tenchijin (the divisions of heaven, earth, and man) that are prevalent throughout the Bujinkan. Most arts calling themselves "budo" have sport connotations, now: they compete in tournaments for prizes and fun. The Bujinkan does not compete, but instead stresses each move as a final move in order to survive. The disconnect largely stems from not wanting to be confused for sport, and to maintain the purity as a warrior tradition (See any of a number of published sources by Masaaki Hatsumi who is recognized as a legitimate source himself).Stslavik 19:56, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
It would be nice to have some perspectives that -don't- come from him, however. I confess that I'm watching myself carefully here; I don't want to let my personal POV that Bujinkan is extremely sketchy color my suggestions as to how it may be encyclopedically described. But there is a certain confluence: it's hard to improve an article when it all comes from this single source. Maybe I'm applying a double standard, but Bujinkan and its founder seem quite eccentric. Does anything about the facts tell me that he's any crazier than Ueshiba-sensei making aikido from a bunch of koryu? No, not necessarily. But my spider-sense has been tingling ever since a friend showed me one of their official videos titled, "HOME BLACK BELT NINJA COURSE". --GenkiNeko 17:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
There is a sourced link that there is no maximum dan in judo in the article, it seems to have been assumed that since there are 10 kyu grades & above 9th dan is v. rare that there are only 10. --Nate 08:54, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


though I have only started Bujinkan not long ago I at lest have first had learning. the reason their is only 3 belts is to simplify it, there are ranks in between the belts: 9 kyus and 15 dans… as Stslavik stated the Bujinkan dose not host tournaments, due to its dangerous moves.

Bujinkan or Ninjutsu is not a fabricated martial art, though many want to claim it not a martial art due to its “Formless Technique” and lack of competition. The fact is many Military and Law Enforcements groups are taught Bujinkan over many other martial arts because of their adaptable hand-to-hand combat and diverse use of weapons.

In all Bujinkan is a honorable martial art used and trained by many all over the world. Though many not know about it. I myself wouldn’t change to another martial art for anything…

zVc 6/3/07

The fabrication charges have alot less to do with the practices of the Bujinkan and more to do with their dubious history. See http://web.archive.org/web/20030202135534/http://koryu.com/library/ninjutsu.html for one example.(RookZERO 01:08, 14 August 2007 (UTC))

Please see below; "Reference by someone other than Bujinkan" for hopefully a little more validity of Bujinkan.

Warrior essence 04:52, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Merge Dakentaijutsu here

I suggest that the article Dakentaijutsu be merged into this one. The article is short, and does say much that isn't here, and this article could use a discussion of the components into which the description of dakentaijutsu could fit. --Bejnar 20:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Reference by someone other than Bujinkan

Does references from the Kuki Family count? Kuki Shinden Happō Bikenjutsu is supposedly Kukishin-ryū. This should be proved by http://www.shinjin.co.jp/kuki/hyoho/mystic2_e.htm. There is reference that takamatsu was around the kuki family transcribing several scrolls at that time and could have learned the family martial arts. I will have to do more research on this site

also listed on http://www.shinjin.co.jp/kuki/hyoho/mystic_e.htm are the documents that the kuki family has. There are several scrolls written by Takamatsu. many regarding martial arts and shugendo.

Myself, I would conclude from these scrolls that he transcribed for the kuki family, that he acquired the kukishin-ryu. Since Masaaki Hatsumi was Takamatsu's student, I also would think that Masaaki Hatsumi would be able to acquire this martial arts.

Warrior essence 19:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


This page mentioned here in the reference is called "The Secret Documents of the Kukis"

Warrior essence 20:18, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

http://www.shinjin.co.jp/kuki/hyoho/history07_e.htm confirms takamtsu learning kukishin-ryu

Warrior essence 20:23, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


http://www.shinjin.co.jp/kuki/hyoho/history07_e.htm states that takamatsu was a teacher of Kukishin Ryu under the family of kuki.

Warrior essence 21:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Masaaki Hatsumi's Legitimacy (or lack thereof)

It has become quite aparant that the claims of Masaaki Hatsumi being directly related to authentic Ninja History are unproven in Japan. He has never been able to prove his claims. The Koryu <http://www.koryu.com/library/ninjutsu.html> states that Masaaki Hatsumi and the Bujinkan are not historic practitioners of Ninjutsu. The Koryu states it has seen the documents in question and that there is no proof that Masaaki Hatsumi has any Ninjutsu lineage. The Iga Ninja Museum in Japan <http://iganinja.jp/en/faq/index.html> states under its FAQ section that there is only one legitimate person that has inherited authentic Ninjutsu (Jinichi Kawakami), and it's not Masaaki Hatsumi. Masaaki Hatsumi and his claims are not even mentioned and it is obvious they don't consider them relevant. Much of the confusion seems to stem from the belief that Masaaki Hatsumi's teacher, Toshitsugu Takamatsu, was recognized in Japan as having authentic Ninjutsu roots. This simply is not true. Toshitsugu Takamatsu tried to prove he was connected to Ninjutsu but failed in proving this. Evidence of this unproven lineage can be seen by the Koryu and Iga Ninja Museum's unwillingnes to validate Toshitsugu Takamatsu's claims. If Toshitsuge Takamatsu claims were never proven in Japan, how can Masaaki Hatsumi claim to be teaching authentic Ninjutsu? Why do people keep insisting that his lineage is verified? It obviously is not. I think that the Bujinkan, Genbukan, and all other schools stemming from Masaaki Hatsumi should be listed under the "unverified origins section" of the Ninjutsu schools page. There is no proof whatsoever that any of these schools have direct ties to original Ninjutsu. Keita52 (talk) 17:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

So, to sum it up; the Koryu and the Iga-Ryu Ninja Museum in Japan have both denounced Masaaki Hatsumi's claim to authentic Ninjutsu. Masaaki Hatsumi has never had his claim verified in Japan. Toshitsugu Takamatsu tried but failed to have his claim to authentic Ninjutsu verified in Japan. Wal852 (talk) 21:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

As stated in "Rekishi Dokuhon" (History Magazine, 08/1960) Masaaki Hatsumi said he was Ueno Takashi's student at age 24, and until age 29 only sometimes wrote letters to Toshitsugu Takamatsu who was then Ueno Takashi's teacher. <Rekishi Dokuhon (History Magazine) 08/1960> Following this in the "Bugeicyo(11/1963)" Hatsumi states he only trains with Takamatsu once every three months on weekends. <Bugeicyo 11/1963> The "Bugeicyo (11/1963)" editor states that Masaaki Hatsumi's ideas and lineage are only his ideas and have no proof to support them <Bugeicyo 11/1963> In the more recent "Shinobino Sengokushi"(Heisei 08/2004) Hatsumi states he trained with Toshitsugu Takamatsu for 15years and became master of 9systems at age 27. <Shinobino Sengokushi> 08/2004> Toshitsugu Takamatsu died in 1972. This would make the year Masaaki Hatsumi started training with Toshitsugu Takamatsu 1957(and his dates and age don't match at all). This completely contradicts Masaaki Hatsumi's statements from the "Rekishi Dokuhon 08/1960" and the "Bugeicyo 11/1963." Furthermore, in the "Bugeicyo 11/1963" Hatsumi stated he only went to see Takamatsu once every three months for training by train only on the weekend (2days, leaving Friday night and getting home by Monday morning).......this would be impossible at this time (1963) because Toshitsugu Takamatsu was a restaurant owner who lived in Nara and Masaaki Hatsumi lived in Chiba....during that time there was no train that could cover the distance from Chiba to Nara in the time-frame stated.(Hota743 (talk) 05:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)).

In Japan Masaaki Hatsumi has been ignored by real Japanese scholars. His claims are known to be false and no one in Japan takes his claims seriously. This is why he has a 99%foreign student base. Anyone interested in the validity of his statements should do research by contacting these establishments:

  • Nagano City Board of Education (Nagano is where Togakushi (Togakure) village is located). Ask them if there is proof to Masaaki Hatsumi's claim to Ninjutsu heritage and lineage.
  • Noda-City Board of Education (Masaaki Hatsumi's hometown). Ask them if there is proof to Masaaki Hatsumi's claim to Ninjutsu heritage and lineage.
  • Iga-Ninja Museum (Iga Ninja Museum is the only "Public" Ninja Museum in Japan. Half the establishment is set up for tourism but the other half is actually a "Public Museum." They must be held accountable for their information. Other "so-called" Ninja museums in Japan are "Private" establishments that aren't held accountable to anyone.......such as the Togakushi (Togakure) museum that has ties to Masaaki Hatsumi). Ask the Iga-Ninja Museum if there is proof to Masaaki Hatsumi's claim to Ninjutsu heritage and lineage.

Don't be surprised if they don't recognize Masaaki Hatsumi's name. Few Japanese do. (Hota743 (talk) 05:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC))

WRONG, the personal opinions of User Hota743 are INCORRECT, the User Hota743 should realize that Dr. Hatsumi is well recognized and well respected in Japan! So much so that he has recieved an Imperial Culture Award from the Imperial Family of Japan and has been on many Japanese Television shows. Just watch the following for confirmation:


1.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=csMCFHyKW5g&feature=related (Japanese Documentary about Bujinkan & Hatsumi)
2.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=F7A-EJ_trFg (Japanese TV Interview with Dr. Hatsumi)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 11:53, 26 July 2008 (UTC)


It seems that Hatsumi has blown the amount of time he spent with Takamatsu way out of proportion. That is irrelevant anyway, because Takamatsu was never known to be related to Ninjutsu. He tried but his claims were rejected. The supposed "Ninjutsu" stemming from Takamatsu and Hatsumi is based soley on "their" words. In Japan they aren't believed. Their is absolutely no evidence to support their claims.(Hpsft1 (talk) 18:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hpsft1 (talk • contribs)


It would seem that this discussion stems from the notion that expert sources, the academic historians so often referenced, have stated that Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi's claims have been proven false. In point of fact, every so-called historical expert cited has only given their respective opinion.

They are statements of opinion by so-called Japanese historians. However, none of these are statements of fact. As a result, none of the opinions either referenced or alleged can be used to support a factual position, either pro or con.

To date, I have yet to see any reference to an authentic academic historical analysis of the issue; all of the the so-called expert opinions (appeals to authority) I have read are from sources who are biased, having various conflicts of interest from an academic and ethical perspective.

Tangentially, perhaps one of the most salient points regarding the issue of historical verification is simply that history and the historical method are not considered empirical academic disciplines - history simply isn't a quantifiable science. In fact, it is still a matter of debate whether the historical method is a valid epistemology.

As a result, even if Dr. Hatsumi's scrolls are classified as primary or secondary sources, the whole process isn't empirical, quantifiable science and there is still the unanswered question regarding the validity of the historical method as an epistemology.

It is very important to note here that while a subject may not be historically verifiable via the historical method, that does not mean that it isn't factual. A good example of this is the Tlingit language. The Tlingit people do not have a system of writing - their language is only spoken and there are only approximately 400 fluent speakers currently. Moreover, much of the nuance and variation in the Tlingit language is known to have existed by the tribal elders, but is no longer spoken. The lineage is broken and documentation doesn't exist,so, do we take their word for it? Their entire culture is based on oral tradition, yet it isn't verifiable using the historical method. Did they simply make it up? According to the criteria employed by the historical method Tlingit Traditions may not have existed, invalidating an entire aboriginal cultures values.

Logically speaking, either Toshitsugu Takamatsu and/or Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi are the successive Soke of the Ryuha they claim in accordance with the supporting scrolls or it is all a work of fiction as some have alleged. As evidence, those that officially acknowledge the efficacy of Dr. Hatsumi's teachings are international in scope and include those with a serious professional interest and expertise in their respective professions, such as: the NSA, FBI, various law enforcement agencies, military commando units, intelligence agencies, etc. On the other hand, those that allege fraud appear to be individuals or organizations with a conflict of interest.

Moreover, with so many government agencies in the international world acknowledging that what Dr. Hatsumi teaches is effective and valuable to them means that it actually works the way one would expect it to according to the claimed lineage.

So, either Toshitsugu Takamatsu and/or Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi are the successive Soke of the Ryuha they claim or they are martial art geniuses to have fabricated not one, but nine ryuha, complete with histories, techniques, stories, etc. - and they actually work as if they had been battlefield tested.

Applying Occam's razor to this dichotomy, which is the simplest solution given the verifiable evidence?

What we do know currently is that Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi's teachings are effective and internationally endorsed by various governments and military organizations which utilize them professionally. The same cannot be said for those alleging fraud.--AnIndomitableForce (talk) 22:13, 21 August 2008 (UTC)


Unfortunately, this is an encyclopedia which relies upon verifiable, *published* sources, and there isn't a single actual legitimate source for many of your claims. You end by saying that "we know" that "Hatsumi's teachings are effective and internationally endorsed by various governments and military organizations which utilize them professionally" - but I content that we don't "know" any such thing. Fortunately, if what you say is true, it should be very easy to provide an accurate list of which governments and military organizations officially endorse the Bujinkan and use it "professionally," along with official documentation from the appropriate governing bodies. If you could provide those, that would be great. --Jikaku (talk) 00:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

In Japan, Masaki Hatsumi carries an imperial seal. use of In-Ikhan Ninpo Ryu with Soke Masaki Hatsumi is like Americans using the Compartmentalized rules of Top Secret with Oliver North and Operation Yellow Fruit or The iran Contra Scandals. He recognized with in the Imperial Branch, and has several events or situations related to his art. Many official US Government Agencies as well as the Japanese equals have used him in official capacities as a ninpo instructor, including DOD, DIA, CIA, NSA, Navel SEALS, Marine Force Recon, Delta Detachments. When you deal with Japanese intelligence agencies and The Imperial branch, Masaki Hatsumi's claims actually are given some credit.-- I myself not only studies with Masaki Hatsumi for 20 plus years, every single day for hours on end growing up, but later as i worked in the intelligence industry, I had the opprotunity to investigate a lot of things. Being one of the few Americans invited by the Imperial family to Hiro Hita's funeral. I saw a lot of the fellow students i had grown up with also providing security at the funeral, in a very official manner. Getting to talk a little with the imperial family, with the help of Masaki Hatsumi, I was able to learn that they lend credit to Masaki Hatsumi's claims.208.54.14.72 (talk) 07:21, 23 August 2008 (UTC)



I'd just like to add this The fourth edition of the Bugei Ryuha Daijiten accept the Bujinkan ryuha in it's entirely and the BRD is one of the best sources for information out there, so saying there is no verified published source is wrong.

The Kakutogi no Rekishi printed in 1843 list's several of the Bujinkan ryuha as being very effective, please note that this text was printed before Takamatsu's birth, so unless Takamatsu alongside creating the bujinkan ryuha which has been endorsed and utilized internationally by various governments and military organisations was also able to time travel and thus go back in time and somehow create the groundwork for his fake school before his birth there is no way he could have fabricated the ryuha in question.

Third the document Togakure Ryu Ninjutsu Hidensho, w states that Daisuke Nishina founded togakure ryu 800 years For several decades this was the only source claiming this, however recently Daisuke Nishina's existence and other details about him provided by the Togakure ryu Ninjutsu Hidensho was proven by Koyama Rantaro an independent 3rd party researcher who is unaffiliated to Bujinkan. How the Togakure ryu Ninjutsu Hidensho is able to provide this kind of accurate historical information if it is fake is beyond me.

Also the Zen Nippon Todo renmei have validated the authenticity of the Bujinkan which further lend's it much credence.

Plus it is incorrect to say that the Japanese regard Masaaki Hatsumi as a fraud, the Japanese Cultural Agency or the bunkacho has declared him to be a living national treasure of Japan for his extensive contribution to martial arts and a majority of his student are Japanese this would hardly be the case if they thought him to be a fraud

We should also take into note as why Takamatsu would create fake ryuha complete with documentation, a history of character and all the requisite trappings assuming first that he was somehow able to time travel and possessed clairvoyant abilties, first of all he was the undeniable heir of two very famous schools of martial arts the Kuki ryu and Gyoko ryu, and was a very famous martial artist at that time (respected and well known throughout China and Japan and a close personal friend of Jigaro Kano) second he never attempted to make money or obtain fame, he lived a simple life, ended up an ordained priest, when he died his neighbours were astonished to hear that the kind old man who passed away was in fact a very very famous martial artist and were surprised at the number of visitors and condolences pouring in. Does this sound like some kind of lying publicity seeking greedy fraud?

Also several people have cited the Iga museum as calling hatsumi a fraud, Well the Director of the Iga museum is a man known as Jinichi Kawakami who also claims to possess the only authentic ninjutsu lineage and is the head of the Banke Shinobinoden, however there is much less evidence in his support(as far as i can tell, only his word) than the bujinkan and it pretty much render's what it has to say about the bujinkans authenticity as a moot point since he isn't exactly what you'd call an unbiased source now is he?

It should also be considered that Masaaki Hatsumi publicly displays his scrolls once a year, anyone who wishes to come and see them is made welcome, however he does not permit them to be taken out of his sight, Those researchers who have actually gone there and seen the scrolls have found them to be authentic(Zen Nippon Todo Renmei), the Koryu societies require all claimants to come forward provide their information and documentation to the their board for a unspecified but usually long period of time for testing. Since Hatsumi has refused to let the scrolls out of his sight what the Koryu societies say is based on guesswork at best.

So in conclusion it can be said that the Bujinkan is 100% authentic, the only way for it being fake would be a bizarre convoluted conspiracy theory involving Takamatsu possessing psychic powers and the ability to time travel and him using his magical abilities to create the ryuha in question and provide them with documentation,but we don't even have a motive it would also include the involvement of a large number of researchers authors,writer's and historians over the course of over a century and a half who have been part of a mass conspiracy to protect the bujinkan for unknown reasons.--Kalona Constantine (talk) 17:12, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

'Ninja' organization

Dose anyone actually think that the Bujinkan should be described as a 'ninja' organisation as it seems to be one person from various IPs making the changes and they are being revered by everyone else. --Nate1481(t/c) 07:55, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

It definitely is not a legit "authentic" Ninja organization. The Iga-Ryu Ninja Museum in Mie, Japan, which studies and analyzes ancient Ninjutsu documents, straight up denies the Bujinkan's and Masaaki Hatsumi's claims to authentic Ninjutsu. <http://iganinja.jp/en/faq/index.html>
Masaaki Hatsumi is an actor. This video that shows him is how he is really viewed in Japan. The video shows him acting in a show with power ranger type actors, and uses the name Togakure Ryu Ninpo Bujinkan Ninjutsu in the video. He graduated from college with a degree in theatre. <http://youtube.com/watch?v=7xXAQuJ5Hao> Taishiro487 (talk) 21:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
The Bujinkan is indisputably, and without question whatsoever, a Ninja organization! Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi and his students Richard Van Donk and Stephen K. Hayes are all trained Ninjas that were taught by Hatsumi sensei himself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 12:16, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
I am disputing it. It is also disputed that what Hatsumi can be considered to be ninjutsu, as some sources state that ninjutsu disappeared. The Bujinka's view is not incontrovertible fact. You may wish to read some of wikipedia's core policies to get better idea of how to edit the article. --Nate1481(t/c) 12:41, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
I must disagree with your opinion. The Bujinkan under Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi is without question and indisputably a Ninja organization focusing on teaching the traditions, combat Taijutsu, and unconventional warfare tactics of the Ninja. Please look at the following videos for confirmation:

1.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I
2.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y

Please make sure to watch all the above videos before trying to revert, because after viewing these videos you will have all the proof and evidence you need that the Bujinkan, under Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi, IS a NINJA organization.

That and organisation teaches ninjutsu (authentic or synthesised) dose not make them a ninja organisation, it makes it an organisation that teaches ninjutsu. Do they participate in assassinations and espionage? If not then they are not an organisation of ninja. The above video's are not proof of anything, linage scrolls that can be carbon-dated, or other wise verified would be proof of authenticity, and evidence of members participating in assassinations and espionage coudl support the asertation that is is an organistion of ninja. You may wish to read about reliable sources. --Nate1481(t/c) 10:29, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


I dispute your opinion! It is NOT a requirement for a Ninja to actually carry out a real-life asassination or work as a spy, despite the fact that the Bujinkan trains their students in all aspects of killing, efficient assassination, and espionage. What IS a requirement, is that the Ninja organization must train and teach their students the techniques and strategies of assassination, espionage, and efficient killing in general. And for this reason, the students of the Bujinkan, and the Bujinkan organization itself fulfill all so-called "requirements" to be referred to as a Ninja organization. Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi's senior Ninjutsu students are all extremely well trained in all skills of the Ninja (i.e. combat, unconventional warfare, espionage, assassination) to the point that if they so desire, and choose to, they can work as private contractors for private military companies or bodyguards. As a matter of indisputably fact, the former student of Masaaki Hatsumi and American Ninja Stephen K. Hayes, who is now grandmaster of To-Shin Do, was hired to work as a bodyguard or Executive Protection specialist to protect His Holiness, The Dalai Lama of Tibet. The videos by the way provide incontrovertible evidence that the Bujinkan is recognized by the majority of the entire world as the last, and primary, legitimate source of true Ninjutsu skills. In conclusion, there should be no more trivial discussion about this matter, as it is widely recognized that the Bujinkan IS a Ninja organization. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 10:40, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Could you provide sources for any of those? especially the exceptional claim of someone being the Dalai Lama's body guard, Wikipedia is about verifiable facts. My opinon is based on the article describing ninja and the simple belief that just because you have practised swimming by laying on an ironing board dosen't mean you won't drown if you fall in a river. Also an it's about defanitions, is the defanition of an organisation what I teacehs or waht it dose? Several editors have agreed that it is not a ninja organisation but you are teh only pone who argues is it.--Nate1481(t/c) 11:21, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes, sources are provided as follows, and please look at the video report from CBS news as it provides additional proof and support that the Bujinkan IS a Ninja organization:

1.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n

2.) www.skhquest.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 11:48, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


I am providing additional sources of information pertaining to the Ninja Stephen K. Hayes and his employment as Bodyguard to His Holiness, The Dalai Lama, please read the following article:

http://www.creationenginedesign.com/scrnshot29.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 12:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I think you're putting this on the wrong article talk page - this is Bujinkan, not SKH

BTW - if you actually READ the article you're trying to edit over there (SKH) you'd realize that his role as Bodu Guard to the Dalai Lama is ALREADY mentioned and referenced. Jikaku (talk) 12:59, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

To User Jikaku: Please provide evidence showing that the Bujinkan is NOT a Ninja organization! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.179.120 (talk) 13:32, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

To User Jikaku or anyone who disputes the legitimacy of the Bujinkan as a Ninja organization! Please watch the following videos for indisputable proof as these videos were produced by reliable sources such as CBS news and the BBC:

1.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n
2.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y


Yes, that's definite proof that the Bujinkan CLAIMS to be a "Ninja" organization - but making a claim and proving it aren't the same thing, and as most scholars in Japan and abroad agree, Bujinkan is *not* a "Ninja" organization. --Jikaku (talk) 13:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
No, that's your personal opinion! These video links come from reliable and reputable sources such as the British Broadcasting Company (BBC) and CBS News, all of which support the legitimate fact that the Bujinkan IS a Ninja organization! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.179.120 (talk) 14:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Um, no. Like I said, this isn't my "personal opinion" - it's the well researched and scholarly opinion of ALL MA scholars and EA Historian both in Japan and around the world. There is not a single scholar or historian that accepts the Bujinkan as a "Ninja" organization. Sorry. --Jikaku (talk) 14:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Unacceptable, please provide links to those "MA scholars and EA Historian both in Japan and around the world" for a thorough analysis. Your statement "There is not a single scholar or historain that accepts the Bujinkan as a "Ninja" organization" requires legitimate proof from reliable sources, and as yet, you have NOT provided any sources of information whatsoever! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.179.120 (talk) 14:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Asking to an absence is a logical fallacy, the burden of proof is on the person who wants to include the information, you may also find this relevent. --Nate1481(t/c) 14:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Unacceptable? Do you even read the pages you comment on? First, read what Nate1481 has written, and visit the link he's provided, and read that. Carefully (note, I've fixed his link). Then, scroll up just a bit and read the entry on Hatsumi - pay attention to the sections detailing Hatsumi, for example:

"It has become quite aparant that the claims of Masaaki Hatsumi being directly related to authentic Ninja History are unproven in Japan. He has never been able to prove his claims. The Koryu <http://www.koryu.com/library/ninjutsu.html> states that Masaaki Hatsumi and the Bujinkan are not historic practitioners of Ninjutsu. The Koryu states it has seen the documents in question and that there is no proof that Masaaki Hatsumi has any Ninjutsu lineage."

and

"The Iga Ninja Museum in Japan <http://iganinja.jp/en/faq/index.html> states under its FAQ section that there is only one legitimate person that has inherited authentic Ninjutsu (Jinichi Kawakami), and it's not Masaaki Hatsumi."

and

"So, to sum it up; the Koryu and the Iga-Ryu Ninja Museum in Japan have both denounced Masaaki Hatsumi's claim to authentic Ninjutsu."

Absolutely Wrong! If Masaaki Hatsumi is highly respected in Japan, for proof and solid evidence, just take a look at the following video of a Japanese interview with Masaaki Hatsumi that was done FOR the Japanese (NOT Westerners!) public!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=F7A-EJ_trFg

and

"In Japan Masaaki Hatsumi has been ignored by real Japanese scholars. His claims are known to be false and no one in Japan takes his claims seriously. This is why he has a 99%foreign student base."

I mean seriously - is there ANYONE that takes Hatsumi seriously *outside* of his student/cash base? --Jikaku (talk) 14:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Nonsense, if Masaaki Hatsumi is ignored by real Japanese scholars as you claim then why was Masaaki Hatsumi given an award by the Imperial Family of Japan, which is a very rare and prestigious award given to anyone. Do you honestly think that the historical scholars of the Imperial Family of Japan do not have the competency and accurate knowledge of the true legitimacy of Masaaki Hatsumi. The Imperial scholars of the Royal Family most definitely did the research first before the award was given to him, not to mention the fact every United States President since Ronald Reagan has given honorary citations and numerous awards to Masaaki Hatsumi. This also includes the FBI and numerous law enforcement SWAT Team agencies and special forces units including the British SAS. Are you telling us that the FBI, Imperial Japanese scholars, and the United States government does not have the competency to establish the fact that Masaaki Hatsumi is legitimate, and that their own respective historical scholars made a mistake? Are you suggesting that CBS News, and the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) are so incompetent that their own historical scholars can't independently determine who is and who is NOT a legitimate source of Ninjutsu?? The fact is quite simply that all of the above organizations have independently researched Masaaki Hatsumi's background and determined, again independently, that he is a legitimate source of the Ninja lineage! And don't be foolish enough to tell me that the FBI is so incompetent that they can't be relied upon and that we only can trust the "real Japanese scholars!" The FBI ARE the professionals in INVESTIGATING people's backgrounds! And as for your claim that "In Japan Masaak Hatsumi has been ignored by real Japanese scholars," that is also FALSE, as you can see Hatsumi sensei is highly respected in Japan, so much so that he was given an award for his service by the Emperor of Japan. This is confirmed by all the reports on the news media and internet! And it is not true that 99% of his students are foreigners, but what is true is that alot of foreigners, both civilians, SWAT officers, and special forces commandos travel to Japan to train with him. Because this was original intention of Hatsumi sensei to expand the Bujinkan beyond Japan which is why they are more famous than the smaller COMPETING dojo run by the people at Iga Ninja Museum. And that is perhaps one of the reasons why the people at the Iga Ninja Museum are attacking Masaaki Hatsumi's legitimacy, because they don't have as many students training with them and they feel out-competed by the Bujinkan! It's called human envy!!!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.179.120 (talk) 15:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

*Masaaki Hatsumi has never been acknowledged by the Imperial family as being connected to an authentic, verifiable, Ninjutsu lineage. That never happend. He was given an award for spreading Japanese culture. That is fitting because he has brought many foreign tourists to Japan. That award has nothing to do with Ninjutsu. The Japanese government never verified or even looked into his claims. His claims have never been proven in Japan. This award has been twisted by many people and they misunderstand it. The Imperial family never stated his lineage was verified and authentic. He just got it for bringing many tourists into the country. His claims are not verified by any "real" historical groups in Japan. It's the exact opposite. They deny his claims.*Flxp821 (talk) 02:24, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

The User Flxp821 is absolutely WRONG! Do you really think that the Imperial Family of Japan would be so foolish as to give an award without first conducting a thorough background check and investigation in order to determine the legitimacy of Dr. Hatsumi's Ninja lineage? The Imperial Family of Japan knows very well what Dr. Hatsumi does and who he is, a modern day Ninja, and that is why they gave him the award! For his contribution in spreading the art and martial tactics of Ninjutsu, the way of the Ninja to the international public. Your personal opinions that "The Japanese government never verified or even looked into his claims" is without any academic merit or scholarly foundation, and simply based on your own personal opinions about Dr. Hatsumi. Please take a look at the following article and watch the Japanese videos for more information supporting the legitimacy of Dr. Hatsumi's Ninja lineage:

~~YOU are absoulutely wrong! Masaaki Hatsumi was awarded the "International Culture Award" which is given for "Cultural Exchange." It says it right on his website <http://www.winjutsu.com/emperor-award.htm> You are twisting it and manipulating it ASSUMING that because he he got an award (doesn't matter what award to you obviously) that they did research into his Ninjutsu claims and back them. False. The award doesn't state his Ninjutsu is Authentic. It says nothing about the authenticity of his Ninjutsu. He got the award for boosting tourism to Japan! It's just a general award that has nothing to do with the historical accuracy of Ninjutsu. Mov398 (talk) 15:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

~~People often say since he is "associated" with Ninjutsu that makes this award back his claims. That is totally false. Sure, he is known to teach martial arts.........he claims to teach various kinds from variuos sources........but the award never, ever said anything about Ninjutsu! It's a myth! He is acknowledged to teach martial arts but his Ninjutsu claims have never been studied or proven! This award proves absolutely nothing!Mov398 (talk) 16:05, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

User Mov398 is WRONG! But, Thank you to Mov398 for finding the article about Dr. Hatsumi getting the Cultural award from a member of the Imperial Family, I was looking for that article! Thank you for your support!!! I will quote the article, it states:

"Bujinkan Founder Honored by Japanese Government

Masaaki Hatsumi, founder and grandmaster of the Bujinkan Dojo, has been awarded the International Culture Award by the Japanese government. The award, the highest honor given for cultural exchange, was presented to Dr. Hatsumi by a member of the Imperial Household on November 22, 1999."

It just shows undeniably that the Japanese Government, including the Imperial Family (which IS a part of the Japanese Government), knew very well the outstanding contribution that Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi made in spreading the art of Ninjutsu, which is an integral part of Japanese culture, around the world! If the Imperial Family of Japan did not respect Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi, they would not have present the award to him themselves, they would have had a lower ranking member of the government give it to him. But clearly, the above article link, states that "a member of the Imperial Household" presented the award to Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi!

1.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=csMCFHyKW5g&feature=related (Japanese Documentary about Bujinkan & Hatsumi)
2.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=F7A-EJ_trFg (Japanese TV Interview with Dr. Hatsumi)
3.) http://www.tokyo.to/stories/ninja/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 11:26, 26 July 2008 (UTC)


I think you're confused - nothing of what you've written above goes to establish the historic and scholarly status of the Bujinkan as a "Ninja Organization." --Jikaku (talk) 15:59, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Actually, nothing of what you said establishes that the Bujinkan is NOT a Ninja Organization, which in fact, it IS a Ninja organization. Please view the following links for confirmation as it appears you did not take the time to watch the videos:

1.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n
2.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.179.120 (talk) 16:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Did you read Burden of proof? you want to say it is you prove it, until then the assumption needs to be it's not. --Nate1481(t/c) 16:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
To Nate1481, did you yourself read Burden of proof? Can you prove that the Bujinkan is NOT a legitimate Ninja organization? Can you prove that Masaaki Hatsumi is NOT of true Ninja lineage? I am not editing here to participate in a stupid "edit war," I don't care about that. But what I do care about is that correct accurate information must presented here on Wikipedia, and it is indisputable after viewing these videos that the Bujinkan is a Ninja organization. If you disagree with that, then please provide proof that the Bujinkan is NOT a Ninja organization.

Please watch these videos fully for confirmation on the legitimacy of the Bujinkan Ninja organization:


1.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n
2.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.179.120 (talk) 16:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

--==##==--

To cut this short: I am in the Bujinkan since the end of the eighties. None of the well respected members considers himself a "ninja". Those who *DO* call themselves that are money and power mongers who only use the name to satisfy their greed. The ninja got officially cancelled in the late 19th century. We train "Ninjutsu" but that does *NOT* make us "Ninja". Kennin (talk) 13:02, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

NOT True, Stephen K. Hayes, a former senior student of Masaaki Hatsumi, as well as Hatsumi himself, refer to themselves numerous times as Ninja. Just watch the video links above for proof, in particular the CBS News report!

I am providing a Japanese interview conducted on Masaaki Hatsumi for the Japanese Public, as Hatsumi Sensei is extremely well respected as Ninja Grandmaster in Japan, as well as a person of true Ninja lineage! Please watch the following interview and take notice that the Japanese TV hostess even states that "He (refering to Hatsumi) is the 43rd master of the Togakure School and a ninja in the modern era."

Watch this video for confirmation and undeniable proof that Masaaki Hatsumi calls himself a Ninja!

1.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=F7A-EJ_trFg (Japanese TV Interview with Dr. Hatsumi)

He thinks he is a ninja, this is noted in the compromise version, this dose not mean anyone else does, or that he is. --Nate1481(t/c) 14:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Of the same level as youtube video's(that are potentially in breach of copyright)? Look as I have said if you want to include it it us up to you to prove it and what you have linked does not meet WP:Reliable Sources, try reading the policy and you will see why people are disagreeing. --Nate1481(t/c) 14:22, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Wrong, you are and a few others are the ONLY people claiming that Masaaki Hatsumi is NOT a Ninja and that his Bujinkan is not a Ninja organization. Please stop being ridiculous, there is no breach, whatsoever, of copyright issues in providing links only, and not videos directly on Wikipedia. Hundreds if not thousands of various different Wikipedia articles on various different subjects contain numerous links to youtube.com and other sources such the BBC and History Channel. Anyone can provide links here! It appears as if you are trying to distract the public by changing the subject of this Discussion, of which the primary focus is simply, Can you or Can you NOT present any evidence against the Bujinkan being a Ninja organization??

If you pay close attention to the NBC News report, it refers to Dr. Hatsumi specifically as "Ninja Master." And the BBC documentaries also refer to him as a Ninja. And if you look at the Japanese TV interview, even the Japanese Hostess states:

"He (refering to Hatsumi) is the 43rd master of the Togakure School and a ninja in the modern era." Watch this video for confirmation and undeniable proof that Masaaki Hatsumi calls himself a Ninja!

1.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=F7A-EJ_trFg (Japanese TV Interview with Dr. Hatsumi)

You and a few of your friends are the only people claiming that Dr. Hatsumi is not a Ninja, despite all of the evidence I have presented from reliable and reputable sources. But you have NOT provided any evidence showing that Dr. Hatsumi is NOT a Ninja and that the Bujinkan is NOT a Ninja organization. You want to make that claim but you have NO evidence whatsoever to support what you say. There can no compromise unless you present your evidence against Dr. Hatsumi and the Bujinkan and place it here on the Discussion page for all people to see. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 10:17, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes Hatsumi self identifies as a ninja, that is in the current version. What the BBC and others reported is that he says he is a ninja, not that these claims have been externally reviewed. If he actually was a ninja, why was he letting people interview him revealing his identity? It also links into the fact that various sources say that 'real' ninja disapeared over a hundred years ago. Personly I thinkthe History Channel cannot be regarded as a WP:RS for this topic, as they do not seem that good at fact checking: Example.
Look, Youtube videos will not convince anyone here, sources produced by the Bujinkan or their affiliates will not as they can only prove what has already be conceded, that the Bujinkan state they are ninjas. Please provide a source from an external organisation or individual who have studied Japanse history and the Bujinkan and agree that the term 'ninja' is an acurate descripion, then you may change minds. --Nate1481(t/c) 10:58, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
No, Dr. Hatsumi does not "self-identify," both CBS News and the BBC, as well as the History Channel, most definitely would have done a background check and thorough investigation into Dr. Hatsumi's claim as well as his Bujinkan organization. They would not have done a news report or documentary about him without doing some prior investigation to confirm the truth: That "Dr. Hatsumi is a modern Ninja" and that the Bujinkan is a Ninja organization training modern Ninjas!

Your personal opinion "'real' ninja disapeared over a hundred years ago" has no evidence supporting it! While I respect your personal opinion we must see facts and evidence! You state your personal opinion that the "Bujinkan is not a Ninja organisation" and that "Hatsumi is not a modern ninja," but you have not provided any proof or evidence on the Discussion page showing this! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 11:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Most importantly, the evidence we have provided come from independent reputable sources such as the BBC and CBS News and History Channel. Out of these three NOT one is in any way affiliated or associated with the Bujinkan Ninja Organization or Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi, Ph.D.!! And that is also a FACT!

Please take a few minutes to watch the video evidence which comes from neutral, independent, reputable, and well respected sources such as the BBC and CBS News.

1.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=F7A-EJ_trFg (Japanese TV Interview with Dr. Hatsumi)
2.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n (CBS News Report about Bujinkan)
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I (History Channel Documentary)
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo (BBC Documentary)
5.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y (BBC Documentary)

And in response to User Nate1481's personal opinion: "If he actually was a ninja, why was he letting people interview him revealing his identity?" Well, first of all, Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi and Stephen K. Hayes are NOT involved in assassination or top secret Black Operations or Special Operations as some of the other Ninjas. Which is why they don't mind the publicity. Numerous U.S. Navy SEALS like Frank Cucci and other Special Forces and SWAT Team Officers have written books and done TV interviews to publicize themselves! And why you ask? The answer is simply because they are either NOT involved, or no longer involved in any kind of covert killing, espionage, or Black Operation/Special Operation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 12:02, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

You have missed the point again. Did you read my link? No? It shows just how bad fact checking can be on 'general interest' (i.e. no one will sue us) topics, the links are fine for establishing notability, but tha is not in debate, what is, is that you want in the article to state that "The Bujinkan (武神館) is an international Ninja organization" You have so far shown that members say they are ninja, which, as they would be the one's to complain is all the BBC or CBS or anyone else is likely to check, for an entertainment peice. It is not an in deapth investigative report, in the case of CBS is is a space filler on a slow news day. They also do not state that the organisation are 'ninja organisation', just because an organisations members state they are ninjas, just as the Police Federation members are Police officers but that dose not make them a police force.
The point is that the sources do not support the information you want to include. Oh and as for a link here is a Ninjutsu school who think that:
"Most people who train in Ninjutsu, would not describe themselves as Ninja - and regard the term largely as an anachronism. This is because Ninja implies not only a body of skills, but also a profession, and complex historical and political context which made being a Ninja a necessity - or at least a practicality - in Medieval Japan."
Which sums up the points we have been trying to make all along. --Nate1481(t/c) 12:18, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
No, that is your personal opinion that the CBS News report is a so-called "space-filler!" The BBC, CBS News, and the History Channel all would have done extensive research on the background of Dr. Hatsumi!. Now I watched the link you provided, and as professional Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) Fighter myself I understand why some people claim the Bujinkan is a scam. Why, because the techniques in the Bujinkan, like Aikido techniques, are quite difficult to master and most students, in particular, the disgruntled youtube poster of video would most likely prefer a martial art that offers fast results! And MMA offers the practitioner student the ease of techniques that are relatively easier to learn. But the efficiency of the Ninja techniques, if employed by a Ninja Master, is more effective and energy efficient than MMA! Much like Aikido techniques when they are effectively applied by an Aikido master! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 12:47, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

And just to provide additional evidence supporting my points, the United States Marine Corp have integrated some of the Ninja techniques from the Bujinkan into their curriculum to teach American Soldiers of the United States Marine Corp! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 12:52, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Am I going to have to record me typing as a video for you to pay any attention to it? You only seem to respont to them not the link or the quote, or are you ignoring them because you can't argue against them? --Nate1481(t/c) 13:00, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


Please don't distract people from the core issues! I provided evidence from reputable sources such as CBS News, the BBC, and History Channel. You have NOT yet provided to this Discussion any legitimate evidence from reputable sources! What you provided is simply just some disgruntled individual's youtube opinion, please provide evidence from reputable sources like CNN or CBS News or BBC or History Channel? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 13:43, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Please watch the video evidence to confirm that the Bujinkan IS a Ninja Organization and that Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi IS a Ninja Master!


1.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=F7A-EJ_trFg (Japanese TV Interview with Dr. Hatsumi)
2.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n (CBS News Report about Bujinkan)
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I (History Channel Documentary)
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo (BBC Documentary)
5.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y (BBC Documentary —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 13:49, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


THIS IS ALL SO STUPID. FIRST OF ALL. NINJA IN JAPANESE MEANS SPY. THE C.I.A IN AMERICA OR THE O.S.S IN GREAT BRITAN ARE NINJA GROUPS. PERIOD. THE WHOLE MEANING OF THE WORD NINJA MEANS SPY. THE KANJI USED ACTUALLY MEANS SHINOBI WHICH TRANSLATES TO PERSEVERE OR TO ENDURE. THE LOWER ART IS CALLED NINJUTSU WHICH REALLY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH NINJA EXCEPT THE LETTERS OF NINJ. NIN CAN MEAN MAN JUST LIKE SAN OR JIN OR EVEN JA, OR IT CAN MEAN BODY LIKE TAI. JUTSU IS PHYSICAL EXERCISE OR MOVEMENT. NINJUTSU IS BODY MOVEMENT OR TAIJUTSU. USE USE TAIJUTSU MORE LIKE THE ACTUAL THING AND NINJUTSU AS A PARTICULAR APPLICATION OF AN ART FORM OF...

NEXT THERE IS FAR MORE PROOF THAT MASAKI HATSUMI IS CONSIDERED A NINJA MASTER THAN THERE IS PROOF THAT HE IS NOT. MOST CLAIMS DISPUTING MASAKI HATSUMI AS NOT BEING CONSIDERED A NINJA MASTER OR PART OF THE NINJA HISTORICAL LINEAGE, ARE JUST PEOPLE SAYING NO HE IS NOT. THE FEW VAILD STATEMENTS ABOUT HIM NOT BEING A NINJA MASTER COME FROM COMPETING ENTITIES, WHO BENEFIT FROM DISCLAIMING HIM. FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME HE HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED IN JAPAN AS BEING A MARTIAL ARTS MASTER AND FOR BEING A NINJA MASTER. IN THE 1980'S HE GAVE DEMONSTRATION AFTER DEMONSTRATION AT MARTIAL ARTS EVENTS AND WAS PUBLIC RECOGNIZED FOR SUCH AND RECOGNIZED FOR HIS ART OF NINPO. OF COURSE MOST NON JAPANESE PEOPLE DISPUTING HERE WOULD NEVER KNOW THIS NOT BEING IN JAPAN ITSELF.

NEXT NINPO IS A MIXED MARTIAL ARTS. PERIOD. THE CORE BELIF SYSTEM GOVERNING THE STYLE IS STUDY EVERYTHING. TAKE WHAT WORKS FOR YOU AND THROW THE REST AWAY. THEY DO NOT TEACH RIDGE FORMS KNOWN AS KATA, THEY TEACH ADAPTABLE POSTURES KNOWN AS KAMAE. THEY FOCUSE MORE ON THINKING BEHIND THE MOVEMENT. TRUST ME I HAVE EARNED AN 9TH DEGREE BLACK IN AIKDO. AS WELL AS EARNED ADVANCED DEGREES IN AKIBUDO, KENDO, KENPO, NORTHERN XIAOLIN, CHOY LI FUT, HUNG GAR, WU SHU RU, TAI CHI CHUNG AS WELL AS TAI CHI YING YANG, REI KAI, SHODAN, SHORIN JI, JUJUTSU, JITAJUTSU, JUI JITSU, YOGA, CAPOEIRA, KALARIPPAYATTU, LLAMA LLMA, DOP DOP AND BOXING. ALL OF WHICH I SAW IN NINPO. IASLO STUDIES NINPO UNDER MASAKI HATSUMI MORE THAN 20 YEARS AGO. AND BEFORE HAYES WAS STUDYING IT, AS WELL AS STUDIES IT UNDER FRANK W DUX AND SENZO TANAKA. BUT THATS ANOTHER DEBATE ALTOGETHER.

THE ARGUEMENT ABOUT STEFAN K HAYES, RELATES TO THIS AREA SINCE THE DALI LLAMA OF TIBET CHOOSE HIM AS A BODY GUARD BECAUSE THE DALI LLAMA VIEWED MASAKI HATSUMI AS A NINJA MASTER AND STEFAN HAYES AS HIS STUDEN AND ALLOWED TO USE AND TEACH TOGEI KURE RYU/BUJINKAN NINPO.

NINJUTSU IS THE LOWER ART AND NINPO IS THE HIGHER ART.

MASAKI HATSUMI IS WIDELY KNOWN IN JAPAN, KOBE CITY AS WEALL AS NADO AND TOKYO. HE IS IN THE PHONE BOOK AS IS HIS SCHOOL. AND HE IS OFFICIALLY RECONISED BY THE IMPERIAL FAMILY. I KNOW I HAVE LIVED AND TRAVEL BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN AMERICAN AND JAPAN FOR ALMOST 50 YEARS NOW.

IN-IKHAN NINPO RYU. SHIDOSHI208.54.14.112 (talk) 08:19, 23 August 2008 (UTC)


wuh-huh?!? Please, this is an encyclopedia requiring scholarly and verifiable sources - 80's fantasy stuff doesn't count. --Jikaku (talk) 14:48, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

trolled at wikipedia, shame on you. Anyhow, isn't this spam link? all the "references" I mean. About the claims of ninja organisation, well If I create a religioun and call myself a god, will my wikipedia article be "Peter calls himself god" or "Peter is god"? Even if I'm indeed god, if the rest of world think I'm not, I can only claim it. From my point of view bujinkan is much of a ninja as I as a guy who trains shooting an assassin. The defenition is not common. So please mantain the more common defenition, ninja is an defunct class of soldiers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.108.3.196 (talk) 17:21, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

RfC: on defanition type of organisation

There has been a disagreement on whether the Bujinkan is a ninja organisation or an organisation that teaches ninjutsu and the different between these. Specifically this relates to the description in the lead section Nate1481 12:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

The bunjikan is an org that teaches "ninjistu." They are not ninjas RogueNinjatalk 15:33, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm not an expert but I have discussed the art with junior and senior students of this group. I don't think there are "ninjas" as such anymore--it was an occupation?--but do believe that the Bujinkan teaches (remnants of) the martial aspects of ninjutsu. Is it a ninja organization? That doesn't seem like a fair description. Indeed, my impression is that they play down the 'ninjutsu' part except when selling Maasaki Hatsumi's books etc., which play it up. As to it teaching "unconventional warfare"--eh, not so much anymore. The Bujinkan is a martial arts organization that teaches elements of ninjutsu and other martial arts. JJL (talk) 15:45, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
On the contrary, the Bujinkan still teaches the unconventional warfare tactics such as construction of gunpowder weapons, blinding powders, stealth movement, concealment and camouflage, disguise and deception tactics, and many other skills that qualify their high ranking members to be called modern day Ninjas!
I disagree, Ninja is anyone who has been trained in the art of Ninjutsu to point of sufficient competency. There were warriors in the past, and there are modern day warriors now. Some weapons have improved, but the techniques of the Ninja are still used and further improved upon by modern day Ninjas, some of which are actually working as Special Forces or SWAT Team operators. Again please watch the following videos for proof of the Bujinkan Ninja Organization's legitimacy:

1.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n
2.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.179.120 (talk) 16:00, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

There are Special Forces soldiers who also train in TKD, BJJ, and Karate too, so I don't see the point there. I also disagree with your new definition of "Ninja" (anyone who trains in the historical art...). I can study military history and strategy all I want, but that doesn't make me a General. --Jikaku (talk) 16:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Wrong again, Special Forces soldiers and SWAT officers seek out Masaaki Hatsumi because the techniques taught in Bujinkan are extremely efficient from a tactical standpoint, more so, than TKD, BJJ, and Karate. Because while these martial arts styles are good, the Bujinkan Ninja incorporates all aspects of hand to hand combat, assassinaion, efficient killing, unconventional warfare (i.e. construction of booby traps, gunpowder weapons, blinding powders, stealth camouflage etc.). As I mentioned before, the Ninja must have "been trained in the art of Ninjutsu to point of sufficient competency," so a person who aspires to become a Ninja must first prove to his superiors and master that he/she has competently mastered the skills and tactics required during formal testing.
Can you provide any evidence that they seek him out, or that he is competent? I seem to recall that the Bujinkan avoid sparring, a classic method of testing compliance. --Nate1481(t/c) 16:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
There are more SF and SWAT officers that train in Krav Maga, Keysi, and BJJ than "seek out" Hatsumi. Look, we all understand that you've invested a lot of time and money into the Bujinkan, and so feel personally attacked when its LARP-ish side is exposed - but this isn't the place for it, it's an academic encyclopedia --Jikaku (talk) 16:27, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
I never said anything about which style of martial arts trains "more" Special Forces and SWAT officers, I only said "Special Forces soldiers and SWAT officers seek out Masaaki Hatsumi..." which IS true. The FBI Hostage Rescue Team and numerous law enforcement SWAT Teams have given Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi, Ph.D honorary citations. Actually I never said I invested "a lot of time and money into the Bujinkan" which is absolutely false! I edit here because the information must be accurate, because like you said "it's an academic encyclopedia!" So if your questioning the legitimacy of either the Bujinkan or Masaaki Hatsumi, then please provide evidence proving your point rather than engaging in personal attacks against me which is rather childish and immature, not to mention unprofessional! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.179.120 (talk) 16:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay, you're just getting silly now. What's next? Jesus himself came down from heaven and awarded Hatsumi an official "Ninja Badge" and vowed that anyone who gainsays him is going to hell?

Is there anyone here other than this one anonymous user who can't even figure out how to sign his own posts that thinks this is an issue? --Jikaku (talk) 16:40, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Again this Jikaku is engaging in personal attacks against me rather than providing the evidence against the Bujinkan being a Ninja organization, because you know that the information I gave to you is correct and indisputable. There's nothing "silly" about mentioning the awards and honorary citations that have been given to Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi Ph.D. But rather these awards and honorary citations simply provide additional justification to proving Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi's legitimacy in his Ninja lineage. Again this is the last time I politely ask you, please refrain from personal attacks against me and if you disagree with the evidence and proof I have provided supporting the legitimacy of the Bujinkan Ninja organization, then you must provide proof and evidence that it is NOT. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.179.120 (talk) 17:00, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

And please watch these videos for indisputable confirmation that the Bujinkan IS a Ninja organization:

1.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n
2.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.179.120 (talk) 17:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Clueless. I watched your video clips - in fact, I caught these *entertainment* shows when they aired, too. Are they entertaining and fun to watch? Sure. Do they verify that the Bujinkan is a "Ninja Organization?" No, not at all, even a tiny little bit. The rest of your claims are also useless in this regard. --Jikaku (talk) 17:18, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

On the contrary, I have provided numerous videos from legitimate and reliable sources such as CBS News and the British Broadcasting Corporation proving that the Bujinkan is indeed a Ninja organization. The user Jikaku claims that it is NOT, but the user Jikaku has repeated either refused or is unable to provide any evidence showing that the Bujinkan is NOT a Ninja organization.
I intend to insult no one with this statement, but it seems to me that it's a fairly trivial, and semantic, difference. What you are really arguing about is the definition of the word "ninja." But there are two questions in there as that relates to an article about the Bujinkan. One, who is allowed to call themself a ninja? Two, does Bujinkan want to call themselves ninjas? The answer to the first question is inherently POV until someone has a sourced definition, and is only relevant to the extent that the lead should say either "Bujinkan is a ninja organization," or "Bujinkan presents itself as a ninja organization." This, of course, begs the second question: what how does Bujinkan hold itself out, ninja-wise? If you were a black belt in the Bujinkan system, would you think of yourself as a ninja, or just a plain old martial artist who practices ninjutsu? To paraphrase an author I've read (but I can't remember who), "why anyone would want to be a sub-human assassin is beyond me..." Bradford44 (talk) 17:37, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes, the answer to your question is that a shodan (black belt) in the Bujinkan does indeed refer to himself as a Ninja! As a matter of fact supporting the above statement, even the CBS news report refers to Masaaki Hatsumi as a Ninja Master! A title which Dr. Hatsumi takes pride in. The same could be said for American Ninja Stephen K. Hayes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 20:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
I think the real question here is, if I practice Karate long enough, will I be considered an Okinawan farmer? If I really work hard at my Ju-Jitsu, am I a samurai? I agree with Bradford on this one - and if the kids in the Bujinkan really want to dress in black and play neo-"ninja" that's cool... but this is supposed to be a scholarly encyclopedia. --Jikaku (talk) 17:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Actually, if you practice Karate long enough, you would be considered a Karateka! If you train in Jujitsu, Iaido, Kenjutsu, and study Bushido while living a life of honor, maybe you could become a Samurai. It is because of the fact that Wikipedia is a scholarly encyclopedia that we need to present the Bujinkan as it really is, a Ninja organization, undeniable! Again for those people who are still doubt please watch the CBS News report and BBC Documentaries (NOT "entertainment" shows) for confirmation:


1.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n
2.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y

Documentaries? Are you kidding me? Human Weapon? Um, No. And as far as "undeniable!" - I don't think that word means what you think it means, because I gotta tell ya, *everyone* here and abroad (Excepting of course, members of the Bujinkan itself) are denying it. Even Hatsumi changed the name of the art to *remove* the ninja/ninjutsu terms. This has gone so far beyond silly that I now suspect you're just having us all on, and we've been the victim of a giant troll. --Jikaku (talk) 18:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Did you watch the CBS News Report?? Or the BBC Documentary?? And what's wrong with the research conducted by the historical staff of Human Weapon? Must I remind you that Human Weapon is produced by the History Channel, and they have a professional staff of historians who check up on the history and background of each martial art that the two hosts investigate and train in!! Dr. Hatsumi changed the name of his art during the 1980's when, due to the Hollywood "Ninja Mania" movies, the Ninja was being associated in a negative way. But you still have NOT provided any evidence contradicting Masaaki Hatsumi's Ninja legitimacy or the Bujinkan's legitimacy as a Ninja organization. Please provide proof instead of using lame personal attacks such as "I now suspect you're just having us all on, and we've been the victim of a giant troll!" That is NOT scholarly and very unprofessional conduct! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 18:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

What is fact is a fact, but title of a Ninja is not necessarily bad, if that is the case then why would anyone take pride in calling themselves " a Navy SEAL, or SWAT Team officer" as they, like the Bujinkan Ninja, are all fully trained professionals capable of assassinations and stealth efficient killing of other human beings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.179.120 (talk)

Because Navy SEALs and SWAT Team officers were not historically drawn from a social caste that was so far below all of the others that they were not only considered non-human, but also below the other non-humans (eta)... and you're missing the point. I was mostly trying to be funny and lighten the mood around here. Bradford44 (talk) 17:58, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your input Bradord44! Please view the following videos for confirmation that the Bujinkan is indeed, and without question, a Ninja organization, undeniable:


1.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n
2.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 19:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Youtube videos of a TV show are not evidence. RogueNinjatalk 01:24, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Wrong! The documentaries created by the History Channel and the British Broadcasting Corporation, as well as CBS News, are all reputable and highly respected sources of evidence in the video format. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 05:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Says who? You've got a fluff human interest piece from CBS and a couple of segements from some entertainment shows (they are NOT documentaries, nor do they claim to be) - no real journalism here. It's "undeniable!" --Jikaku (talk) 06:39, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
The majority of people all understand that CBS News and the BBC are reputable sources of NEWS and information, and they're not necessarily "some entertainment shows" as you stated above. Please stick with the facts!

Okay - so far we have one single person insisting on "Ninja Organization" and completely ignoring all evidence provided to the contrary (I predict a response from him to this comment denying any such evidence, as though the rest of this overly long page simply loaded with it doesn't really exist) - while all other editors weigh in with "NOT ninja organization." At what point do we decide enough's enough and be done with this? I don't see anyone changing anyone's mind here. His youtube "evidence" (it's UNDENIABLE!!!) isn't going to get any better, neither does he show signs of being open to differing opinion... --Jikaku (talk) 06:45, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

This Wikipedia page is NOT about me "being open to differing opinion..." as you stated above, it is about facts based on solid evidence PROVING, once and for all, that Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi IS a Ninja, and that the Bujinkan IS a Ninja Organization. Stick with facts, there is no place here for personal opinions! I don't care if you get 500 of your friends to back you up, we still need solid facts based on provable evidence, and you have NOT provided any evidence to the contrary! Again, I'm a neutral minded person who supports ONLY the facts, so if you disagree with the Bujinkan being a Ninja organization, then present your evidence here on the discussion page for all people to see! Your statement above that I am "denying any such evidence" is ridiculous! You are the one who is denying the indisputable evidence which I have repeatedly asked you to take a look at but you insist on simply establishing your personal opinions about this matter. And any reader who reads this discussion would independently realize that you have NOT presented proof of your personal opinion that the Bujinkan is NOT a Ninja organization! Again, I'm politely asking you to please present the evidence discrediting Dr. Hatsumi or the Bujinkan if you have any, otherwise please refrain from unnecessary and irrational arguments that have no logic supporting them! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 11:36, 26 July 2008 (UTC)


To User Jikaku, why do you have such a grudge against the Bujinkan being a Ninja organization. Masaaki Hatsumi trains people to become Ninjas, so it is a Ninja organization. If Itzhak Perlman founded an organization to teach young violinists to perfect their classical music skills, would it not be referred to as a violinist organization? But you are missing the point, all of the evidence I have presented comes from reputable sources such as the History Channel, the British Broadcasting Corporation, and CBS News. All the evidence proves that the Bujinkan IS, undeniably, a Ninja organization! If you would just take a few minutes to watch the CBS News report about the Bujinkan, they even refer to Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi as Ninja Master, further supporting the legitimacy of the Bujinkan Ninja organization! And your personal statement that "all other editors weigh in with "NOT ninja organization"" is completely without academic support or foundation. Wikipedia should be based on evidence, and if you contradict that the Bujinkan is a Ninja organization, then provide the proof! Otherwise, please refrain from uncivilized personal attacks and unprofessional conduct. Please present proof to support your claim! The User Jikaku has NOT present any evidence proving that the Bujinkan is NOT a Ninja organization! And please watch the videos to confirm in your mind that the Bujinkan IS a Ninja Organization!

1.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n
2.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 10:06, 26 July 2008 (UTC)


To provide further evidence supporting the legitimacy of the Bujinkan as true Ninja organization and disprove the personal opinion of User Jikaku who had previously stated that "In Japan Masaaki Hatsumi has been ignored by real Japanese scholars. His claims are known to be false and no one in Japan takes his claims seriously. This is why he has a 99%foreign student base." I am providing a Japanese interview conducted on Masaaki Hatsumi for the Japanese Public, as Hatsumi Sensei is extremely well respected as Ninja Grandmaster in Japan, as well as a person of true Ninja lineage! Please watch the following interview and take notice that the Japanese TV hostess even states that "He (refering to Hatsumi) is the 43rd master of the Togakure School and a ninja in the modern era." This statement shows that even in a culturally conservative post WWII society, the Japanese public officially recognize Dr. Hatsumi as being a legitimate heir to the Togakure School as well as being a modern day Ninja, which sufficiently disproves some previous editor's statements, including the personal opinion of User RogueNinja about the Bujinkan that "They are not ninjas." But indeed they are, undeniably, modern day Ninjas! Please watch the videos below for confirmation!

1.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=csMCFHyKW5g&feature=related (Japanese Documentary about Bujinkan & Hatsumi)
2.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=F7A-EJ_trFg (Japanese TV Interview with Dr. Hatsumi)
3.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n (CBS News Report about Bujinkan)
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I (History Channel Documentary)
5.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo (BBC Documentary)
6.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y (BBC Documentary)

Why don't we compromise and rewrite the lead to state something along the lines of "the Bujinkan holds itself out to be a ninja organization." Stating that the Bujinkan is a ninja organization invites ridicule upon the subject matter by a casual reader of the article. Bradford44 (talk) 15:21, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
I think that's a good idea, though haven't they gone back-and-forth on that? My impression has been that the Bujinkan has tried to de-emphasize ninjutsu except when it's seeking publicity. Certainly looking at Maasaki Hatsumi's books' titles, it seems quite fair to me to say that "The Bujinkan is a martial arts organization that presents itself as the last authentic heir to the tradition of the ninja" OWTTE. There's certainly room for doubt as to whether the connection is valid. JJL (talk) 15:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you both for your input, but it makes no logical sense to compromise on what is indisputable, undeniable fact, which I have provided numerous sources of reputable information backing up the unquestionable fact that Dr. Hatsumi is a modern day Ninja who is teaching younger generation students in the art of Ninjutsu in order to train the next generation of modern day Ninjas, and that the Bujinkan is indeed a Ninja organization. The critics who are opposed to the Bujinkan being a Ninja organization have provided nothing except their own personal opinions about the issue at hand. Despite the fact that I have repeatedly, and politely, requested from them that they provide evidence supporting their personal claims! I have utilized logic, reason, and solid evidence to support the facts but my critics, in particular User Jikaku, have resorted to uncivilized and unprofessional personal attacks against me rather than attempting to prove their personal claims with solid evidence as I have! The critics claim that the "Bujinkan is not a Ninja organization," but it is quite evident if you read the discussion they have not provided any evidence showing that the "Bujinkan is not a Ninja organization." Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that is based on FACTS and not personal opinions, so it doesn't matter if there are 500 or 1000 friends of the critics who have gotten together because they are "friends" and are aligned against me, what matters is that the true facts be placed here on Wikipedia. And I have provided the proof which shows, undeniably, that the Bujinkan IS a Ninja organization, and my critics have provided NO evidence supporting their personal opinions! If you have any more reservations about this matter, please take a few minutes to watch the following video evidence:

1.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=F7A-EJ_trFg (Japanese TV Interview with Dr. Hatsumi)
2.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n (CBS News Report about Bujinkan)
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I (History Channel Documentary)
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo (BBC Documentary)
5.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y (BBC Documentary)


I don't think the list of youtube videos has been posted to this page enough times yet. I'm sure we can get this guy to paste them in at least three more times if we really try. C'mon folks, no cutting corners here!--Jikaku (talk) 15:44, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


How about, instead of:

The Bujinkan (武神館) is an international organisation that describes itself as a ninja organisation.

we go with:

The Bujinkan (武神館) is a self-described ninja organisation.

It removed the redundant/double "organization" - worth changing? --Jikaku (talk) 18:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I don't think they promote the 'ninja' aspect of themselves so strongly that it's fair to categorize them first and foremost as a ninja org. The problem is and remains that they downplay the ninja aspects some of the time but play them up to sell books and be in documentaries/news stories. It's a fundamentally schizophrenic approach. JJL (talk) 18:28, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that should be based on FACTS, and not what a group of people want it to be! The UNDENIABLE fact is quite simply that the Bujinkan is a Ninja organization, indisputable. We have presented to you evidence completely supporting our statements. But the opposing critics have NOT provided any evidence against the Bujinkan or Dr. Hatsumi whatsoever, but instead attempt to distract the public by puttng their personal opinions here on Wikipedia! With a few legitimate exceptions, there can be no personal opinions on Wikipedia, ONLY facts! If you want to compromise you must first present your legitimate evidence against the Bujinkan and Hatsumi. Let us see if you can find a CBS News or BBC News report that saids "Masaaki Hatsumi is NOT a Ninja!" Because you know very well that we are correct in our statement that the Bujinkan IS a Ninja organization and Dr. Hatsumi is a Ninja. Further confirmation supporting our statements can be seen in the Japanese TV interview in which the Japanese TV hostess, UNDENIABLY, states: "He (refering to Hatsumi) is the 43rd master of the Togakure School and a ninja in the modern era."

Showing additionally, Dr. Hatsumi is recognized IN Japan as a legitimate Ninja Master. It seems as if this page is being edited either by uninformed non-ninjutsu practitioners who have no understanding of the Ninja or that it is being edited by some rival factions who want to compete with and downgrade the legitimacy of the Bujinkan by attacking Dr. Hatsumi! Please look at the evidence for INDISPUTABLE confirmation showing that Dr. Hatsumi is internationally recognized as a Ninja Master:


1.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=F7A-EJ_trFg (Japanese TV Interview with Dr. Hatsumi)
2.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n (CBS News Report about Bujinkan) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 10:32, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't know the facts of this case, but there is pretty obviously an edit war going on here. Why doesn't everyone refrain from editing these claims until the RfC has reached a conclusion? Soaringgoldeneagle (talk) 10:54, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

To Soaringgoldeneagle, Thank you for your input! But what you must realize is that I'm not engaging in any kind of "edit war," I don't care about that! What is happening is that two or three users are repeatedly trying to impose their own personal opinions here on this article without presenting any evidence supporting their personal opinions against the Bujinkan or Dr. Hatsumi. Wikipedia should be based on FACTS and it is quite established, undeniably, that the international community and News Media recognizes that Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi is a modern day Ninja Master and that the Bujinkan is a Ninja organization!
Erm...that's what I call an edit war. Both "sides" are making repeated changes to the article to support their POV. My point is that, regardless of which is right, both sides should stop editing until the RfC is over, then either accept the concencus or go to a higher level of dispute resolution. There's no point in childish, tit-for-tat revert warring. Soaringgoldeneagle (talk) 16:21, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Please take a few minutes to watch the video evidence which comes from neutral, independent, reputable, and well respected sources such as the BBC and CBS News.

1.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=F7A-EJ_trFg (Japanese TV Interview with Dr. Hatsumi)
2.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n (CBS News Report about Bujinkan)
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I (History Channel Documentary)
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo (BBC Documentary)
5.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y (BBC Documentary)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 11:31, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

YES!!!! We have our "three more times" for the pasting of the youtube links! I knew we could do it! Now, if we want to be over-achievers, I say we shoot for two more full youtube link lists, and another three uses of "undeniable!" (with extra points if all caps or more than one exclamation point is used).

Seriously though - it's clear that there's editor consensus with the exception of one individual who has no interest in learning how wikipedia actually works, making any meaningful contribution to the articles - he just wants to enforce his own personal opinion - an opinion that even the Bujinkan doesn't seem to push. Since we're all in agreement, let's just fix the article, and if talk can't deal with it and reverts it again - we either follow through with blocking him, or lock the page. Otherwise this is going to go on forever as a meaningless back-and-forth. --Jikaku (talk) 15:30, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

The news media regurgitates all sorts of legends about the martial arts. I cringe every time I listen to the lead-in on Fight Quest or Human Weapon or Deadly Arts. I learn that karateka defeated armed samurai with their bare hands, or that kung fu was founded by Bodhidarma, and that every week's art is the deadliest on the planet. Secondary sources of an academic nature would be much preferable. JJL (talk) 15:58, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
I am in complete agreement with JJL. Bradford44 (talk) 17:20, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

No, there is no editor consensus! You have not provided any proof backing up your claims! I can have you blocked as well if you want to play immature childish games instead of resolving this issue in a civilized manner with scholarly reason and logic! I have been polite and attempted to reason with proof only to suffer repeated personal attacks by the uncivilized User Jikaku who refuses to reason and come to a suitable compromise! Majority means nothing on Wikipedia, only FACTS matter!! So if you got some good propositions, you present them in a civilised manner with evidence and then a final decision can only be made if the compromise is respectable and does NOT disrespect or discredit the Bujinkan or Dr. Hatsumi!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 07:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I am proposing "The Bujinkan is an international organization that trains their students in the martial art and unconventional warfare tactics of the Ninja" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 07:51, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I made similar points ot JJL & Bradford above, also found a Bujinkan school who dispute the description of the buj as a ninja org.:

No, those are the personal opinions of that Bujinkan dojo owner who opened a school after receiving a license from Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi. If you want to get the full picture, you need to go directly to the source, which is the main school of Dr. Masaaki Hatsumi!
"Most people who train in Ninjutsu, would not describe themselves as Ninja - and regard the term largely as an anachronism. This is because Ninja implies not only a body of skills, but also a profession, and complex historical and political context which made being a Ninja a necessity - or at least a practicality - in Medieval Japan."
Which sums up the points we have been trying to make all along. --Nate1481(t/c) 09:03, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
No those are your own personal opinions about what you think Bujinkan practitioners refer to themselves! Like I said before, please present evidence from a reputable source like BBC, CBS News, or History Channel. The sckobudo site reflects the opinions of those people who are in charge of that competing organization, they are NOT neutral like BBC, CBS News or History Channel. If you would take a few minutes to watch the CBS News report you can confirm that they refer to Dr. Hatsumi as Ninja Master and if you read the numerous ninja books written by Stephen K. Hayes he also refers to himself numerous times as a Ninja! And if you watch the BBC documentary it refers to Dr. Hatsumi as "Ninja Royalty".

Watch for confirmation about

1.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=F7A-EJ_trFg (Japanese TV Interview with Dr. Hatsumi)
2.) http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4242971n (CBS News Report about Bujinkan)
3.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=XxdLH0ax64I (History Channel Documentary)
4.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=lyvmhNFwjuo (BBC Documentary)
5.) http://youtube.com/watch?v=LC0rwG5rR8Y (BBC Documentary)</br

We will stay with the following compromise:

"The Bujinkan is an international organzation that trains their students in the martial art and unconventional warfare tactics of the Ninja" And this is FACT! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.232.150.91 (talk) 09:47, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

"In Japanese history, a ninja (忍者 ,ninja?) is a warrior specially trained in a variety of unorthodox arts of war. These include assassination, illusion, espionage, and various martial arts." That is the definition of Ninja straight from a wikipedia page. Link: [4] here you go guys. BigBoss_Alpha —Preceding unsigned comment added by BigBoss Alpha (talk • contribs) 11:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Protection

I've protected this indefinitely per a request at WP:RFPP. Do not hestiate to contact me or relist it once all contentions have been ironed out. Cheers. WilliamH (talk) 12:40, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Regarding one of the messages on my talk page, a comment is "repeatedly reverted to a non-agreed upon version". That sounds like an edit war to me... WilliamH (talk) 11:28, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I think Nate1481 and I both would welcome an admin review of the edits, as well as the exchanges on the talk page. All edits made by either of us, as well as other editors have only been in an effort to improve the article - whereas all edits by 140.232.150.91 have been to ram through a personal agenda. I note that this has happened with him on other articles as well, and even resulted in a temporary ban on his IP. He has shown nothing but an unwillingness to compromise (his idea of compromise - we must all accept his changes as "UNDENIABLE FACT!"), and a complete disregard for wikipedia itself. He's put forth no effort to set up an account, or even sign his comments, though people have asked himto and shown him how numerous times. Learning how to positively contribute to and be a part of wikipedia is something he's not interested in - he merely wants to use wikipedia to advance his own personal opinion and shout down anyone who disagrees. --Jikaku (talk) 15:19, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

RE: Protection

I re-wrote the first paragraph of this article on the 27th August 2007.

It was originally:

The Bujinkan (Warrior Spirit Training Hall or House of the Divine Warrior), or more properly the Bujinkan Dōjō (武神館道場) is a martial arts organization. It is headed and operated by 'Masaaki Hatsumi (初見良昭 Hatsumi Masaaki), the current sōke. The headquarters (hombu dojo) of Bujinkan, the Bujinden, is in Noda just outside Tokyo.

I replaced it with:

The Bujinkan (武神館) is a martial arts organization practicing the art commonly referred to as Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu (武神館武道体術). It is headed by the Sōke Dr Masaaki Hatsumi (初見良昭). Dr Hatsumi is the recognized lineage holder of the nine ryūha (see ancestral schools) transferred to him in the middle of the 20th Century by his teacher Takamatsu Toshitsugu. The Bujinkan is specifically known for its koshijutsu, koppojustu, jutaijutsu, dakentaijutsu, and happo hikenjutsu in addition to its higher elements of ninpō and ninjutsu.

It is currently:

The Bujinkan (武神館) is an international organisation for the martial art commonly referred to as Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu (武神館武道体術). It is headed by the Sōke, or grandmaster, Masaaki Hatsumi (初見良昭). The Bujinkan is particularly known for practising koshijutsu, koppojutsu, jutaijutsu, dakentaijutsu, happo bikenjutsu and ninpo taijutsu (a.k.a. ninjutsu).

It seems to me that a consensus has been in place for over 1 year as the intro blurb has not changed much in this time. I have been a member of the Bujinkan for more than 17 years. I don't feel the comments regarding Unconventional Warfare add anything to the article. To the user who keeps adding this: "Please I am begging you, leave the article as it has been for the last year, If you feel you want to add a section on the Bujinkan and Unconventional warfare containing factual info for the reader then please do, but not in the intro section. Please ensure you reference it if you do, as Wikipedia should only contain corroborated facts as is the case with all peer reviewed journal articles"

Regarding, locking this article and only allowing two people to administer it, I feel this is a dangerous path to go down unless you can prove that you are very senior members of the Bujinkan who train frequently at the Honbu dojo, and therefore are experts regarding matters of the Bujinkan.

I look forward to your comments on this matter.

Regards,

D.

D. I'm not sure who the two administrators you mention are - I suspect you mean Nate and I, which means you don't understand the lock that's been put in place. We aren't administrators, or administering the site. We can't edit it any more that you can at the moment. I appreciate your comments, however I think that by insisting on only long-standing Bujinkan member editors for this article you're probably looking at a violation of Wikipedia's COI policy - Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest --Jikaku (talk) 12:11, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I am not suggesting only senior members of Bujinkan can edit it. You are correct, I don't understand the lock. Is it locked now forever?

D. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.28.92.5 (talk) 13:22, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Not forever, but until a consensus is formed on what the page should say. Jikaku is right that it can only be edited by administrators, there are a few hundred of these though.
Jikaku, I don't think he was suggesting that it should be done, but that if it was that is how. --Nate1481(t/c) 14:16, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi - I'm the admin who locked this article. It won't be protected forever, just until we reach a point where it won't be reverted back and forth. Also, let me just say I have nothing to do with Bujinkan - you might say I'm just the janitor who locks the doors if they need locking. I've glanced through past discussions and I get the impression that the tide is against the IP's "Unconventional Warfare" edits. I also note that said purporter of such material has been blocked for POV pushing. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but that's how I understand it. Would anyone care to elaborate, or correct me if necessary? Cheers. WilliamH (talk) 16:07, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


I propose we leave it as it is now, and if someone who knows about and wants to add a section on the historical warfare aspects within the Bujinkan (i.e., from the Amatsu Tatara etc) or special forces training etc, then they can either start a new section, or a new wikipedia page.

What do people think about this?

D. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.28.92.5 (talk) 11:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm happy with the intro the way it stands, it explains facts without going into the claims and disputes. --Nate1481 13:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
It's certainly acceptable as is. The third sentence is a bit detailed for an English-language encyclopedia's intro. paragraph but isn't objectionable in content.
The lede is the only place that "Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu" is mentioned (other than in the info. box). Otherwise the phrase "Bujinkan organization" seems to be used in its place. It'd be nice if the article explained the distinction (if any) between these terms. JJL (talk) 19:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
"Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu" is the name of the art studied, as opposed to the organisation teaching it. I think ninjustu or Taijutu has been used further on as short hand, a comment to that in the lead would be a good idea. On re-reading For the over detailed part I think that this should be moved from the lead, I like the phrase "the Bujinkan teaches what the is internally describe as to as [Ninjutsu]]" as acurate, but I'm not sure it would be considred neutral, we could put that the authenitcity is qeseitned as an explinaiton for the phrasing using hte koryu.com source but agian this could be POV, I would apreciat ohter opions on it--Nate1481 14:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Alright, I've unprotected it, per what appears to be a rough agreement here. If an edit war flares up again, please consider the importance of articulating one's contentions here on the talk page. Cheers. WilliamH (talk) 16:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Historical Accounts against Bujinkan

Dr. Karl Friday is a well-respected Japanese Historian. He states, "It's worth noting, in this context, that in the third edition of the Bugei ryuha daijiten, Watatani Kiyoshi stated that Takamatsu (who was, BTW, a personal friend of his) had created his "ninpo" ryuha and teachings from "ninja-gokko" ("childhood ninja games")..." (Source: (Friday, Karl Dr. "Re: Ninja and Ninjato" on the Japanese Sword Art Mailing List. May 19th, 1999.) Also, take a look at the webpage this information is on <http://www.mardb.com/ninjutsu/ninjutsu-and-koryu-bujutsu.html> It shows many problems with the lineage of Toshitsugu Takamatsu and Masaaki Hatsumi.

Most people in Japan that study this stuff seem to already know that Toshitsugu Takamatsu and Masaaki Hatsumi are not connected to "authentic Ninjutsu." In the above document it states Toshitsugu made up his Ninjutsu from childhood games he played. Thus, since Toshitsugu Takamatsu was Masaaki Hatsumi's teacher, Masaaki Hatsumi and the Bujinkan fall under this category. Aruku85 (talk) 22:48, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

However it's also worth noting that the fourth edition of the bugei ryuha daijiten the BRD accepted the ninpo ryuha completely.

Introduction

Various IPs are reverting to a version of the introduction that also removes several other edits. In my view that version is primarily promotional rather then informative, does anyone else have a view? --Nate1481 08:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Admin here, will be keeping an eye on it again. WilliamH (talk) 10:13, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I'm not saying I'm completely correct or that the current is the best possible version, it's just frustrating when you make additional edits and they are reverted as a whole by someone who just seems intent to push there POV. I should have tried creating the discussion sooner. --Nate1481 11:01, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Referring to the changes discussed here as "POV vandalism" can't be helpful. JJL (talk) 23:49, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

New lead suggestion

Archive 1

One thing that might help is moving this article to be at Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu and redirecting this page about the org. to the page about the art. I think it'd be easier to write about the art first and the org. that governs it secondarily. For now I'll suggest the following:

The Bujinkan (武神館) is an international martial arts organization based in Japan and headed by Masaaki Hatsumi. It is best known for its claimed historical association with ninjutsu. The system taught by this group, called Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu, consists of nine separate martial arts traditions.

Maybe following that with a sentence about how a variety of weapons are taught in addition to empty hand work is reasonable, but that tends to invite accretion as people add other things that are also part of the art. JJL (talk) 17:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

This could work, as it would provide clear differentiation. It also leaves the ability to note that other orgs teach versions of the art (most have split form the Buj @ some point). --Nate1481 08:01, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I think saying "It is best known for its claimed historical association with ninjutsu." is a political hot potato, and will carry on/create more warring. Also the bujinkan does not contain 9 seperate martial arts, it consists of 9 seperate martial lineages which now form one single art called Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu. So maybe this sentence should be removed completely. Also, what is wrong with the sentence: "The school is known for practising koshijutsu, koppojutsu, jutaijutsu, dakentaijutsu, happo bikenjutsu and ninpo taijutsu (a.k.a. ninjutsu)." These are the key historical forms practised within the Bujinkan, but are not seperate martial arts. Having them in the list provides upfront links to these wiki pages.

FYI The art and the governance are one and the same. This is a school that follows the system of one grandmaster who is the art and responsible for its governance. There are no officially recognised international bodies, so the Bujinkan does not follow the western model that is common for many arts. Thus it would be difficult to seperate out governance and detail about the art.

FYI2 my only agenda is to make this paragraph as accurate and concise as possible.

D —Preceding unsigned comment added by D99 (talk • contribs) 13:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

There's no winning on the ninjutsu thing. If the lede says it's truly teaching ninjutsu, that'll be edited quickly by someone; if it says it isn't (or says nothing about it), well, that's the current situation. I don't have a better solution than weasel-wording it but am open-minded. My use of "nine separate martial arts traditions" is meant to mean about the same thing as your "9 separate martial lineages". I think the long list of very specific subsystems is inappropriate for the lede of a general-purpose encyclopedia; it's too much detail too fast. Someone on WP looking this up wants to know what it is first. Well, that's what I think. Even if someone definitively showed there was no connection to the historical ninjas, the claimed association would still be there. The claim is certainly disputed and that has to be acknowledged for the practical reason of article stability. JJL (talk) 14:18, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

How about this:

Move the page to Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu as proposed by JJL, and then make the starting blurb say this:

Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu (武神館武道体術) is a Japanese martial art founded in the 20th century by Masaaki Hatsumi. This martial system consists of nine traditional martial schools (Ryūha) inherited by Masaaki Hatsumi from his teacher Toshitsugu Takamatsu, a man thought to be one of the last living ninja.

Or something similar??

D —Preceding unsigned comment added by D99 (talk • contribs) 15:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Works for me. I do think putting the main page at BBT makes sense! JJL (talk) 17:30, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
It would be nice to hear from the person who added the "unconventional warfare tactics of the Ninja" aspects to the introduction; what do you think about this change in emphasis?
D. D99 (talk) 09:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
In principle I like it, but I think another sentence with something along the lines of, "the authenticity of these claims is a matter of debate.[insert refs for both sides here]" which is fair in that it give the Bujinkan version preference (as it is an article on there art) & states the contention which can be gone into in detail in the article.
As to in put from the IP user(s), I have posted a note about this disscussion on the talk page of every IP who has added it that I could find, so it is unlikely that are unaware of the discussion. --Nate1481 09:32, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
The comment on the authenticity of the claims is essential for the article but I'm less sure that a stronger statement is needed in the lede. I used "claimed" and D999 uses "thought". Perhaps his version could be tweaked to ", who claimed to be one of the last living ninjas." I'm of the opinion that the the lede should be light. We could also append a "though this is disputed (see below)" to it? JJL (talk) 13:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
I can see the point of restricting detail and adding "though this is disputed" would work for me, I prefer 'claimed' to 'thought' and with the qualifier I'm happy. --Nate1481 09:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

My only problem with using "claimed" is it has negative connotations, and will likely be perceived by some as an attack, so could potentially lead to more warring. I think using “thought” is more neutral and not as strong as saying something like “he was one of the last living ninja”.

FYI there is a book called “Takamatsu Toshitsugu - The Last Shinobi” (shinobi is the old Japanese reading of the kanji for ninja. This is a biography of Takamatsu and Fujita Seiko – “the last Kōga-ninja”), although this does not necessary legitimise the comment. Whether people accept it or not, Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu does contain ninpo in it’s densho so members of the Bujinkan will always want to see this in the blurb. So I included the comment “a man thought to be one of the last living ninja” to keep these people happy. We could remove it all together if it is going to be too political, but I think in the future people will want to add comments like this.

D —Preceding unsigned comment added by D99 (talk • contribs) 09:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

How about attributing it to him "Toshitsugu Takamatsu stated he was" as this is then simple fact. --Nate1481 11:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't know if he ever said this, (but then I don't know if Fujita Seiko said that either), so it could be misleading to phrase it that way. D99 (talk) 11:29, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Can we attribute it to someone? As that gets into verifiability etc. --Nate1481 11:29, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


Here are some links to substantiate the comment that Takamatsu Toshitsugu is thought to be one of the last living ninja (I appreciate they are not as solid as a publication in Science or Nature, but I suppose that is the problem with trying to substantiate claims for subjects like this):

Book called Takamatsu-Toshitsugu-The-Last-Shinobi: http://www.amazon.com/Takamatsu-Toshitsugu-The-Last-Shinobi/dp/B000KM74DO

DVD Rip of Masaaki Hatsumi's documentary about his teacher Takamatsu Toshitsugu: http://www.veoh.com/videos/v1498574bKz2WXjx

Here are some other links containing this comment:

http://www.magokoro-dojo.org/takamatsu.htm

http://www.geocities.com/mrdsouza/takamatsu.html

http://www.usadojo.com/biographies/toshitsugu-takamatsu.htm

How about this (concluding with a few references to substantiate the comment that Takamatsu is considered to be one of the last living Ninja):

Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu (武神館武道体術) is a Japanese martial art founded in the 20th century by Masaaki Hatsumi. This martial system consists of nine traditional martial schools (Ryūha) inherited by Masaaki Hatsumi from his teacher Toshitsugu Takamatsu, a man considered to be one of the last living ninja. (References).

--D (talk) 19:37, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

The problem with using the word 'considered' is that it requires a who, i.e. who considers him to be this. putting "...considered by the Bujinkan organisation to be...." could work --Nate1481 10:11, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

note Unprotected for 1 day & the IP is back to its reverting, I have posted the link to this discussion on there talk page. --Nate1481 09:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Jan 09

To the IP who keep changing the introduction, please note that the version I have reverted to is largely unchanged from the version discussed here please could you explain why you feel it should be altered? --Nate1481 12:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

April 09

With this still running is it worth requesting a long term semi-protection? --Nate1481 12:55, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Probably. They don't appear to be interested in actually discussing the issue anytime soon. --Onorem♠Dil 13:04, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the answer is probably Yes. JJL (talk) 13:36, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Requested here --Nate1481 14:37, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Protection removed and 12 hours later day later [5] request again? I get the feeling the IP editor will never compromise. --Nate1481 12:19, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Protection (II)

I have protected this article due to a significant amount of edit warring. The edit warring can be prevented by semi-protection, but that is not an implication that the IP editor is right or wrong or an endorsement of either position. Edit warring is harmful to articles whether right or wrong, and as a community we have a policy that disagreements get sorted out by discussion either here, or via other forms of dispute resolution. Please use those rather than edit warring -- both "sides".

Thanks. FT2 (Talk | email) 21:54, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

The difficulty here is that the IP editor before the previous protection did not seem interested in anyone else's views or options largely posting the same vidio links repeatedly while say in that everything else was just opinon. During and after the protection they have refused to even disscuss on this talk page and as the individual (as it appears to be one person or group from various IPs it is difficult to even engage them on their talk page. My first thoughts are towards and RfC and obtain a concensus there on if the current, the IPs or a derived version of either would be the best going forward. I have tired to notify the user(s) of this discussion. --Nate1481 11:25, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


I think semi-protection would be something useful to try. What do people think?

D. —Preceding unsigned comment added by D99 (talk • contribs) 10:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

It couldn't hurt, but the fundamental problem seems to be people talking past one another. One side maintains that BBT is associated with ninjutsu, which, in people's minds, it is; the other side claims that that perception may be inaccurate, which also has merit. So, it's correct that BBT is associated with ninjutsu and it's correct that that association may be false. Right now we're going back-and-forth between a version that literally puts ninjutsu last (and parenthetically) and one that puts it twice in the first sentence, capitalized and bolded. If we don't get a new compromise it'll be back to back-and-forth after the protection ends. JJL (talk) 13:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Its a fair point, could you have a go at rewording it? I think my opinions would probably come thought in any version I write. --Nate1481 13:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

This is how it reads at the moment:

The Bujinkan (武神館) is a martial arts organisation originating in Japan and headed by Masaaki Hatsumi, its Sōke (grandmaster). Bujinkan is a colloquially used abbreviation of the full name of the system, which is Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu. The school is known for practising such arts as koshijutsu, koppojutsu, jutaijutsu, dakentaijutsu, happo bikenjutsu and ninpo taijutsu (a.k.a. ninjutsu).

I would only make a simple alteration to:

The Bujinkan (武神館) is a martial arts organisation originating in Japan and headed by Masaaki Hatsumi, its Sōke (grandmaster). "The Bujinkan" is a colloquially used abbreviation of the full name of the system, which is Bujinkan Budō Taijutsu. The school is known for practising koshijutsu, koppojutsu, jutaijutsu, dakentaijutsu, happo bikenjutsu and ninpo taijutsu (a.k.a. ninjutsu).

My reasoning:

  • The key techniques and other bits & bobs taught within the Bujinkan, generally fall under one of the following classes: koshijutsu, koppojutsu, jutaijutsu, dakentaijutsu, happo bikenjutsu and ninpo taijutsu (a.k.a. ninjutsu).
  • I think this forms a very concise, fact based intro, covering all aspects of Bujinkan training. Any further detail and elaboration is covered in the succeeding sections. The term ninjutsu/ninpo in this intro covers all "ninja" related aspects.

D. —Preceding unsigned comment added by D99 (talk • contribs) 14:41, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

More above--Nate1481 08:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Grading

I removed the sentence 'Furthermore, unlike other martial arts, the color has no relation to the actual kyu-level the practitioner holds.' As far as I am aware, wherever coloured belts are used for kyu grades, they represent an actual rank. The correspondence between colour and rank varies between dojos which use this format, as it is not something dictated or even suggested by the Bujinkan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by British (talk • contribs) 10:59, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey...are you people sure it's a Ninja organization as stated in the 1st paragraph? It just sounds a bit odd, I thought its some sort of cultural organization. Haven't so called Ninja's and it's organizations not been abolished since the 1800s?

Northwolf56 (talk) 15:32, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bujinkan/Archive_1&oldid=1088452694"