Talk:Bujinkan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Martial arts Portal
This page is part of the Wikipedia Martial arts Project.

Please use these guidelines and suggestions to help improve this article
if you think something is missing, please help us improve them!

You may also wish to read the project's Notability guide.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art add yourself!

Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_martial_art

[edit] "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)

[edit] "Koryu Derived Martial Art" & "Arts taught"

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)

[edit] 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)

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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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

[edit] Links to individual dojos

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)

[edit] Taihenjutsu

Added as third element of unarmed skills.

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

[edit] 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!

[edit] added pictures

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

[edit] External links cleanup

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)

[edit] Links to dōjō directories cleanup

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

[edit] Last Accessed ?

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

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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))

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)