ninjitsu basic moves?

[Chapel]

Originally Posted by Draven

Techniques Chapel, they're called techniques!!! lol

Sorry, that was 5 months ago. I'm a changed man since then.

[47MartialMan]

Originally Posted by kangaroo

what are some basic or none basic moves in this fighting style,and how do you perform them?confused:

Dont be seen-like this thread....

[Rob-C-C]

Hi Lads,
I dont wish to interrupt or appear rude, I have studied Bujinkan Budo Taijutstu since 1989, We have nine schools within our system, one of which is "Tagaki Yoshin ryu Jutaijutsu" which, apart from grappling, locks, chokes, throws, breakfalls, rolls, etc, stresses the importance of "Taking" or stealing the opponents balance, from beyond his awareness, (His blind side) in order to achieve maximum effect by minimum effort,(Oh!, and Practice), sos for sounding geeky, but it is so absorbing, even now I have a real fire in my soul, every time we train, even the Kihon Happo, (Basic Eight)ish?, its a buzz coz you do it different every time, and then add a hanbo, or a dash of mindstealing (distraction dudes). I`ll shut up now then.

Cheers Rob

[47MartialMan]

Hi Rob-thanks for the post-it wasnt rude

[John Takeshi]

People are always looking for moves.

But Ninjas only have one move: "Kill." Everything they do is lethal. Chops. Punches. Sword strikes. They're all lethal.

Don't trust the books. Theyr'e not very reliable, and cannot disseminate information on how to kill.

Killing is learned by killing, and nothing else.

[47MartialMan]

Originally Posted by John Takeshi

People are always looking for moves.

But Ninjas only have one move: "Kill." Everything they do is lethal. Chops. Punches. Sword strikes. They're all lethal.

Don't trust the books. Theyr'e not very reliable, and cannot disseminate information on how to kill.

Killing is learned by killing, and nothing else.

Strangely, I almost have to agree with you here. It would seem that has one purpose.

So, it is a wonder how could it ever be accepted as a martial art lacking morals and virtues of others.

[Draven]

Originally Posted by 47MartialMan

Strangely, I almost have to agree with you here. It would seem that has one purpose.

So, it is a wonder how could it ever be accepted as a martial art lacking morals and virtues of others.

Well I can't answer for, John, but I did study ninjitsu and it was explained to me as this. Ninjitsu, some schools anyway, were orginated by peasants and conscripted soldiers. Others by yamabushi, mountain warrior mystics and still some by samurai schools. The samurai schools were hardset on the killing, nuinjitsu was a military art. No different from bujitsu, jujitsu, kenjitsu etc.

The peasant and yamabushi clans were too small to be a military force, so the idea was strike were it counted. Which is the assassin stuff and avoiding an attack otherwise.

But, you do realize almost all martial arts are just about fighting/killing, the -do concept of budo is only about 100 years old.

[47MartialMan]

Originally Posted by Draven

Well I can't answer for, John, but I did study ninjitsu and it was explained to me as this. Ninjitsu, some schools anyway, were orginated by peasants and conscripted soldiers. Others by yamabushi, mountain warrior mystics and still some by samurai schools. The samurai schools were hardset on the killing, nuinjitsu was a military art. No different from bujitsu, jujitsu, kenjitsu etc.

The peasant and yamabushi clans were too small to be a military force, so the idea was strike were it counted. Which is the assassin stuff and avoiding an attack otherwise.

But, you do realize almost all martial arts are just about fighting/killing, the -do concept of budo is only about 100 years old.

Yeah, I was hoping someone would respond in this fashin.

Indeed, just about every martial art is about fighting/killing, hence the martial of it.

So, ninjutsu has it place.

Kinda makes you wonder why Buddhist would study?

[Draven]

In a nut shell, ninjitsu is avoid first and fight last, when you there is no honor in violence so honorible combat doesn't exist. If honorable combat is a myth then anything goes and do what it takes to win.

[47MartialMan]

Originally Posted by Draven

In a nut shell, ninjitsu is avoid first and fight last, when you there is no honor in violence so honorible combat doesn't exist. If honorable combat is a myth then anything goes and do what it takes to win.

Nijitsu wasnt about honor, fair, avoid, fight last......

[John Takeshi]

Originally Posted by 47MartialMan

Nijitsu wasnt about honor, fair, avoid, fight last......

It was; it was just a different cultural norm.

I know Pearl Harbor is a wretched example, because it was aimed at a US target. But look at the way the kamikazis were treated---almost like royalty/martyrs. They, according to the Japanese, died with honor. It should be noted that samurai codes of living, and Bushido, had a revival during WW2. It's very strange to Westerners, but not to those of us raised in that tradition.

[sirdarksol]

I don't know about the first two things (especially fighting fair), but it was most definitely about avoidance and fighting last. Ninjas were spies. Most of the time, their job was much more effective if they caused their damage politically/socially. If they got into a fight with every guard they encountered, the entire castle/town would know that a ninja was in the area, and would take steps to prevent the spread of propaganda.
When they did assassinate, they preferred not to fight at all (again, I don't really see this as fighting fair, but I don't see it as uncalled for, either, given the era), but rather end their opponent's life without even an outcry.

[Unkotare]

Originally Posted by John Takeshi

I know Pearl Harbor is a wretched example, because it was aimed at a US target. But look at the way the kamikazis were treated---almost like royalty/martyrs.

Um, there were no kamikaze used in the attack on Pearl Harbor.

[Unkotare]

Originally Posted by John Takeshi

People are always looking for moves.

But Ninjas only had one move: "Kill." Everything they did was lethal.

Um, ninja were widely used for espionage, which would not necessarily involve killing.

[Draven]

Originally Posted by 47MartialMan

Nijitsu wasnt about honor, fair, avoid, fight last......

In some ways you 100% bujitsu systems of ninjitsu were about "covert ops" not open "overt warfare" so they were considered dishonorable. Same way the British concidered our forefathers hiding behind trees when they fired as dishonorable. But for example, Hanzo Hatori was both ninja spy chief and samurai lord.

On the flip side, the yamabushi were against violence in all forms but found the only way to survive was to fight back. To them everyone you harmed or killed was a black mark on your karma. So sending 1000 warriors to battle on the "honorable field" of battle was a greater black mark then sending one to kill a general or noble lord. To the yamabushi, they were the honorable ones.

More so, to the peasant ninja clans who were just trying to survive, it was never about honor or dishonor but just staying alive. A farmer conscripted to be an Ashigaru (foot soldier) was in all honestly better off conscripted as a "shinobi scout."

Personally I like the idea of their being more honor in a controlled strike at an enemy target. Something to consider...