Talk:Gosho-ha Hyōhō Niten Ichi-ryū

Page move

This page should be moved to the correctly romanized version of the ryu's name, per WP:MOS-JP. I don't know if "Gosho" contains any double-vowels, but the second part should be "Hyōhō Niten Ichi-ryū". Obviously, if someone could supply the kanji for the name that would be helpful, as well. Bradford44 04:44, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

References

Many references of impartial and recognized publications added. Removed tags in the beginning. If have any suggestion of section needing reference, specify directly --NitenBr 23:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

May I ask who you are? Are you by any chance Sidartha Rezende?Fred26 04:13, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

This article is biased and not neutral

The information found in this article regarding the succession of the Hyoho Niten Ichi-ryu and current status seems to be based solely on the information provided by the Gosho-ha (-ha meaning branch) itself and Jorge Kishikawa who is a member of the same group. The references are highly POV in favour of Gosho-ha and disregards the main tradition of HNIR. The information in this article claims that the Gosho-ha and the mainline (Hyoho.com, mains school of HNIR has been "reunited" under the Gosho-ha leadership thus circumventing the 11th soke of the main tradition, Iwami Toshio Gensho. In other words there is a succession dispute, or at least in Gosho-ha's opinion there is. They claim to be teaching the "one true Niten Ichi-ryu" and that the mainlines later sokes are not teaching the "true" system. The main HNIR tradition does not recognise the Gosho-ha's claims and Iwami Toshio Gensho is the officially designated the 11th Soke of the system.

So we have two traditions that are at each others throats. This article is heavily biased and purposly designed to match the Point of View that the Gosho-ha has on the succession of the Hyoho Niten Ichi-ryu. This is not acceptable for an encyclopedia article that adheres to a Neutral Point of View. What the article should say is that Gosho-ha CLAIMS to be "true preserver of the HNIR", not that it IS. (There is a difference). Any information about the "reunification" of the main school and Gosho-ha is considered to be part of this POV opinion as the main school is NOT recognising these claims. The article should state that "Yoshimoti Kiyoshi has been proclaimed by the Gosho-ha to be the leader of a reunited HNIR but is not recognised by the main school" (and so on in the same fashion for any other similar claims.) The main school do not recognise Yoshimoti Kiyoshi as the 12th sucessor, nor do they recognise the "reunification" regardless of what Gosho-ha states. I have not checked out the individual articles for Gosho or Yoshimoti, but I'm guessing it is as POV as this article and will also require attention if that is the case.

The NPOV-tag will remain until the issues are resolved and not before. Fred26 06:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

My name is Wenzel Bohm. I am student of Sensei Jorge Kishikawa, and followed him in SHUGYO in 2002, when I had trainings with Imai Soke and Kiyonaga Sensei on USA, Oita.

I think there are some misunderstandings. Yoshimoti Sensei is the 12th successor after Kiyonaga Fumiya sensei, not Iwami Toshio.

Kiynoga sensei was son of the 9th soke, Kiyonaga Tadanao. In 2003 Imai Soke decided to have three 11th generation successors, Mr. Kin, from Taiwan, Kiyonaga Fumiya from Oita and Iwami Toshio.

Kiyonaga sensei died in 2004. The majority of the members of the ryu decided to continue under Gosho sensei, the teacher of Imai Soke. That was when the Gosho Ha was formed.

In may 2007, the Oita Kendo Association and the Kiyonaga family asked Gosho sensei to continue the Seito line under Kiyonaga Sensei in Oita. The Kiyonaga family posthumously recognized Yoshimoti Kiyoshi (son and successor of Gosho Sensei in Gosho ha Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu) as the successor of Kiyonaga Sensei.

That is a legit action and was not the first time it happened. When the 9th Soke died, in 1976, there were no successor. After eight months the same Kiyonaga family posthumously recognized Imai Massayuke as successor of Kiyonaga Tadanao.

I made some alterations yesterday in the text to be more neutral. Please check. If you have any suggestion, please tell me.

The Niten Ichi Ryu article should be corrected, because it refers only to Iwami Toshio. It should mention the two other successor as well, I think.

--NitenBr 16:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Mr Bohm,

Imai Soke named three shihans (as you have named above) and chose one of them to be the successor of Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu. I suggest you do a little research into these three shihans and find out why they were selected. Neither the Kiyonaga family of the Oita Kendo Federation have any say in the matter. The choice was Imai Soke's and no-one else. Imai Soke was the 10th head and he chose the 11th head. This gentleman's name is Iwami Toshio Gensho. BigScottUK 09:45, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

As Scott said. Which means Gosho-ha disputes and denies the appointed sole leadership of Iwami Toshio Gensho as they believe, (as you said), that there were three official successor to Imai Soke instead of just one. The Iwami Toshio leadership is recognised by the entities Scott mentioned: The Nihon Kobudo Kyokai (NKK) and the Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai (NKS). The Gosho-ha's claim to leadership is based on the permission given by the family of Kiyonaga, (as you said yourself), and the assumption that there were three official sokes of HNIR after Imai.

In other words nothing has changed. This above is still a POV opinion from the Gosho-ha, there is still a successor-dispute. There is still a noticable lack of neutral of solid, reliable, verifiable facts in the Gosho-ha article. An entry will be added to the main HNIR article regarding the above situation, and the Gosho-ha successor claims and will be treated accordingly.

Fred26 10:12, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Mr Scott

The fact that the students of Mr. Iwami Toshio don't recognize the two other successors was a surprise for me and for the masters in Japan. Are you going against what Imai Soke decided?

I am aware of the reasons why Imai Soke decided have three successors. I don't think that it is a appropriate subject to be discussed on the internet.

I think you misunderstood the point regarding the restabilishment of the Seito line. The Kiyonaga family and the Oita Kendo federation asked Shihan Gosho Motoharu to continue the seito line under Kiyonaga Fumiya in this year. Not when Imai Soke was passing the 11th succession.

Just to remember you, it was the Kiyonaga family who chose Imai Soke as 10th successor, because Kiyonaga soke died without leaving a successor. Please don't say that the "Neither the Kiyonaga family of the Oita Kendo Federation have any say in the matter".

--NitenBr 14:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Mr Fred26

It seems now to me that you are right and that there is, after all, a dispute. Apparently the group of Iwami Toshio don't recognize the other successors.

I don't see how this dispute can be resolved.

I will work in this article to try to make it as neutral and encyclopedic as possible. I checked the main Niten Ichi Ryu article but didn't saw the mention about the other successors.

--NitenBr 14:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Mr Bohm,

To address your individual points:

There weren't three successors chosen. There was one successor. The three you mention were awarded menkyo kaiden and Iwami Toshio was chosen as successor. The other two are recorded in the ryu's history, but were not successors.

Why do you not wish to discuss the three 'successors' on the internet?

I don't think you understand - HNIR is not a family ryuha - succession has always been from teacher to student, not by birthright. The Kiyonaga family may have chosen Imai Soke to be 10th Soke, but it was IMAI SOKE who was required to choose the 11th Soke, not the family of a previous Soke. Imai Soke chose his successor and it can be read about here if you wish.

The seito line (Iwami Soke) is established and recognised by the Nihon Kobudo Kyokai and doesn't need re-establishing.

BigScottUK 22:33, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

soultion

Would the simple way to solve this be to have a section that states that the linage is contested, and note what has been said by both sides. the article should follow the mainstream view but note disputes --Nate1481( ^t/_c) 11:22, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Nate - I will enquire with hombu. However, the lineage IS contested by Gosho-ha, but neither Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu (Iwami Soke) nor the foremost authority on koryu in Japan (Nihon Kobudo Kyokai) see it that way. HNIR holds considerable proof of its succession - does Gosho-ha? BigScottUK 19:34, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Scott, concearning Nihon Kobudo Kyokai, their position is that each ryu can have one representative IN the association. In no moment Nihon Kobudo Kyokai contested the authenticity of the two other successors. There are other cases of ryu with more than one representative, only one is associated with NKK. But that doesn't mean that the other successors are "fraud".

As for recogination, the koryu community, in Japan, recognize support Yoshimoti Sensei as 12th successor. In may he represented the Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu at Kyoto Taikai, one of the most important embu of Japan. Some days ago represented the ryu in the 6th Miyamoto Iori Kendo Taikai, in Kokura. The Kendo Nippon made an article with Gosho Sensei and Yoshimoti Sensei a few days ago.

Nobody is contesting that Iwami Toshio is an recognized successor of the 10th Soke, Imai Massayuke. The Japanese specialized media, the koryu community and great majority of the ryu members in Japan that practiced with Imai Soke accept that there are other successors as legit as him, with exception of some students of Mr. Iwami. And in the case of the the ryu member's, most decided to continue with Gosho Sensei and Yoshimoti Sensei.

I agree with Nate1481, a note should be added in the succession section of the Gosho Ha Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu AND in the main HNIR article with both what is said by both sides. This is the most unpartial solution.

--NitenBr 20:49, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Lineage Recognition

The Nihon Kobudo Kyokai (NKK) and the Nihon Kobudo Shinkokai (NKS) recognise only two lines of Hyoho Niten Ichiryu:

1- Hyoho Niten Ichiryu (兵法二天一流) as headed by Iwami Toshio Gensho, the 11th Soke of the Ryu. This the seito (true) line.

2- Noda-ha Niten Ichiryu (野田派二天一流) as headed by Inoue Mitsuyoshi, the 18th Soke/head of the Ryu.

Nippon Budokan Site (Nihon Kobudo Kyokai): http://www.nipponbudokan.or.jp/shinkou/html_1/index9.html

Under the heading of kenjutsu (剣術) there are two NIR Ryuha listed:

兵法二天一流剣術（福岡）- Hyoho Niten Ichiryu

野田派二天一流剣術（熊本）- Noda-ha Niten Ichiryu

No other lines are recognised as legitimate by the budo historians of the NKK or NKS.

Notes:

I am unsure of Inoue-sensei's title within Noda-ha. I have listed him as Soke/head nevertheless.

BigScottUK 08:37, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for my absence

I've been trying to enjoy the summer as much as I can, and wiki-stuff is a bit time-demanding. Anyways, to get back to the topic. This is also the reason why I neglected my promise to include a notice in the main HNIR-notice (apologies).

Mr. Bohm, I'm not the foremost expert on HNIR, but to restate what Scott said: HNIR is not hereditary. Imai was chosen to become the 10th headmaster, and Imai himself chose Iwami as his successor. If Iwami Toshio were to name this Yoshimoti his successor then all this would be a different matter. That would be Iwami Toshios decision, not the family of a former headmaster.

To attempt to summon up this conflict.

The official stance of the main HNIR under Iwami Toshio is that Imai was the sole and legal representative, being chosen by Kiyonaga to lead and manage the HNIR tradition.

The official stance of the Gosho-ha is that the 3 shihans that Imai chose were all legal successors to the HNIR tradition and thus we have the current legality dispute. This is the problem in a nutshell.

I'm gonna be blunt Mr. Böhm. It has NOT helped the Gosho-ha's case, or the Niten Institute case, that representatives, (unofficial or otherwise), have behaved themselves in a very inaproperiate manner and have misrepresented themselves and their tradition on online martial arts communities (though wikipedia is the exception in my opinion). In one such instance, Kishikawa was proclaimed to be the sole representative of HNIR in South America. Gosho-ha wasnt mentioned but rather the main school which was then under Imai Soke. The exact quote was "Kishikawa sensei has a writen authorization from Imai Massayuki soke, the 10th headmaster from Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, to teach and representate this ryu in Brazil." This was challenged by ryu's western representative: Menkyo Kaiden Hyakutake , who is fully licensed senior member of the ryu and was a direct and close student of Imai soke. When Colin stated his objections to this "written authorization", the Insitute representative denied Hyakutake's credentials. The institute guys said they phoned Imai soke personally (this was 5 years ago when he was still alive). I think, Mr. Böhm, you know very well who this Institute representative is. After 5 years the same representative returned to the same online community, this time on a higher horse heralding the banner of Gosho-ha and launched new attacks.

So Mr. Böhm, I mean no disrespect towards you personally since you seem to be levelheaded in my opinion, but both the Gosho-ha, and the Institute you represent, have a long way towards establishing credibility in my eyes. For instance, you keep mentioning that the majority of the main HNIR members in Japan have left the Iwami group and gone to Gosho-ha. This is something I'm very skeptical of, and I'm sure Scott can give his two cents there too. Fred26 06:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Mr Fred26

I know how this wiki related stuff are time demanding, so I will try not to take much time too.

Again, I think you summarized perfectly the conflict.

There is a new information that should put some light in the dispute. Yesterday I was informed that the legal action moved by Mr. Iwami Toshio agains the Usa Shinto Srhine for the possesion of the Bokuto of Musashi Sensei was denied.

In 2003, when Imai Soke decided to have 3 successors, he passed the property of the jiso ennan no bokuto to the Usa Shinto Shrine. The terms of donation says that any of the three successors (Kiyonaga Fumiya, Iwami Toshio and Mr. Kin), or their recognized successors, should have access to the artifact for use in events or ceremonies, but should return it to the shrine in a maximum period of 15 days.

Last year, Mr. Iwami made a legal action asking for the sole possession of the Bokuto. It was decided now that the property of the bokuto will remain with the Usa Shrine and that the three recognized successors (Yoshimoti Sensei in place of Kiyonaga sensei) will continue to have access in the same terms.

I think that it is highly relevant to the discussion here. The bokuto have been the major symbol for the Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu succession, passed thought the generations. The possession of this important relic was, traditionally, the proof of the succession. Imai Soke decided that all the three should have access to it, thus recognizing them as successors. Now the Japanese justice decided to keep that way and not recognize Mr. Iwami as the single holder of the relic.

As for what you mentioned, about the episodes happened early this year and 5 years ago, I really think that this is not the right place or occasion to discuss that. I'd like to keep the personal thinks out of the discussion. But, I can tell you, for sure, that the statement above mentioned is true. Imai soke did gave to sensei a letter saying authorizing to teach and represent the ryu in South America. And in may that year the person you cited as western representative was called in the presence of Imai Soke, Kiyonaga Fumiya, Iwami Toshio, Kishikawa sensei to apologize and "make peace". I can guarantee that it happened because I was there. Imai soke said to all on that occasion that Kishikawa sensei was authorized by him to teach and represent the ryu in South America.

About the post made early this year, I have read the pages mentioned and disagree with you that our representative posture was wrong. He was responding to attacks made to Gosho sensei and Kishikawa Sensei. But, as I said, I think that personal feelings should be left out of this discussion. If you want to know my personal position about it, fell free to send me a PM (webmaster (at) nitenichiryu . jp).

I am sorry that you are skeptical about what I said, that that most of the ryu's members in Japan decided not to follow Mr. Iwami group's and chose to continue with Gosho Sensei, but, again, I can only say what I saw. I was in Japan in two occasions. In 2002 and 2005. Almost all the sempai I knew in Usa in 2002 were with Gosho sensei. Some decided not to practice anymore, but none I knew was with Iwami's group (except for Mr. Colin). And there were also some members from Kokura with Gosho sensei. For example Mr. Colin's sempai, a gentleman called Mr. Miyamoto and other gentleman who was responsible for the "accounting" of Mr. Iwami's dojo.

Mr. Fred26 (sorry, I don't know your real name), I really would like that this discussions were over. We are not saying that Mr. Iwami is not a recognized successor of Imai Soke, but that Imai Soke also left two other successors and we legit follow one of them. I hope that everyone understand that and that, in the future, both sides learn to respect and live in peace with each other.

--NitenBr 15:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

There are only two lines of the Hyoho Niten Ichiryu that are clearly recognized by The main Kobudo organizations, Nippon Budokan and Monbusho (Japanese Education Authority) They are the oficial Seito line and Noda Ha Niten Ichiryu.

The main point that should be taken into consideration is that the ryu is not generated by hereditory means. The present living leader designates a new one. This "could" be a relative. There is perhaps a misconception as in the past family members of the head have become the next leader.

A small number of the ryu under Imai Soke did leave to practice on their own. One of them receiving Menkyo Kaiden from Soke. This was NOT after his death. The person who had receive menkyo kaiden died leaving them "leaderless" They then formed the Gosho group.

The mainstay of the ryu continues to practice in Japan, Canada, Philippines, UK, Finland, France, and other countries.

Nihongo

Added Nihongo tag and kanji in the first paragraph. --NitenBr 11:15, 18 October 2007 (UTC)