Author: Vikram M R

The Illusion of a Majority

Vikram M R, , , , , , , Leave a comment

“Naruto” is an awesome manga and anime series. Similarly, “Mortal Kombat” is an awesome video game franchise which has spawned series and movies. One of the most enduring memories of both Naruto and Mortal Kombat is the use of the “Kunai”. The kunai as used by characters in Naruto is not unlike a knife, a throwing knife in many instances. The kunai in the hands of the Mortal Kombat character Scorpion is more like a rope dart, with a chain replacing the rope and the kunai being the dart. In both cases, the kunai is used as a ranged weapon, which is thrown at opponents.

The above image is of a harmless replica kunai. The shape seen is iconic, from several manga, anime and video games.

The kunai is learnt as part of the Bujinkan system of martial arts. Naruto and similar characters inspire individuals to train the martial arts. Of course, no one believes the fantastical elements and abilities of the characters in these fictional worlds. But when new students realize that the kunai is indeed a real weapon that they will get to train as practitioners of the Bujinkan, there is an unmistakable glimmer of joy in their eyes!

But the kunai as trained in the Bujinkan is not a ranged weapon, it is instead a close quarter short distance weapon. As I understand it from my teacher and mentors, the forms of the kunai we currently train were adopted from those of the jutte many years ago by Sensei Masaaki Hatsumi. Further, the kunai, is a glorified little shovel, which could be used in one’s garden!

Can the kunai be thrown? Sure it can, but in as much as any weapon can be thrown. The shovel, which is the kunai, is not designed to be thrown at opponents. But as we see with training, it definitely can double up as a small weapon when in a tight spot.

The image above shows a possible representation of a real kunai. Even a bricklayers trowel could be a kunai substitute, in my opinion.

The training version of the kunai we use in the dojo looks very much like a fish. It could be made of wood and be padded to enable safe training. So, the pop culture version of the kunai, while it could exist, is not the super-weapon it is made out to be in manga and anime. That version is imaginary, an illusion.

The above image shows a training version of the kunai. It is quite different from the pop culture version of the same. Note the fish like appearance. I have heard a mentor of mine say that the word kunai, could mean a fish or death! But the more common meaning I have heard for the word kunai is “no suffering” or “hardship being nil”*.

That said, the illusion is the reality when the word “kunai” in mentioned to most people. The first image that comes to mind is the one from pop culture, not the trowel or the gardening implement! So much so, that the kunai could be associated with stories for young adults or even kids and hence training the kunai would lead to the martial art form itself being considered with scepticism! For it is fictional and not be taken seriously! This potential for illusions to overshadow reality and warp the way we as individuals and large social groups perceive ideas and process information drives the ideas expressed further in this article.

**

All of us are citizens of one country. Some have citizenship of more than one country, but no one is a “citizen of the plant Earth”. This is despite all of us knowing that the borders are artificial and we are all inhabitants of the plant, specifically one of its many ecosystems at any given point in time in our lives.

The one thing that reminds us most glaringly these days about how borders of nations are artificial is climate change. Consider El Nino; the warming of the Pacific Ocean throws the weather out of whack in different ways in several countries. Similarly, even though the carbon footprint of specific parts of the world is much larger than the rest, the effects of the same are endured by all countries of the world. A simpler way of looking at this would be wild life.

All of us have always known that animals do not respect national borders. This is sometimes remarked on wistfully when we humans have to put in the effort to secure passports and visas. These days, multiple countries work together to create wild life corridors to enhance conservation efforts and preserve genetic diversity in endangered species. The tiger or elephant corridors that are under consideration between Nepal, India and Bhutan could be examples of this.

So, it is clear that all of us are citizens of Earth. But one area where this knowledge always takes a back seat is politics, specifically that which makes the need for passports and visas paramount – identity politics.

Hindus are a majority in modern day India. They are supposed to comprise about 80% of the total population. But look at the world as a whole and Hindus are a distant third as numbers of practitioners of major religions go. Hindus are still a massive majority compared to Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs, Jews and several other religions in the world. But they are only about a half of the total practitioners of Christianity and Islam.

Even more glaring is the spread of the practitioners of the two major faiths. Practitioners of the Hindu faith are concentrated predominantly in India, with very small numbers in all other countries they live in. In comparison, practitioners of Christianity and Islam inhabit a far larger number of countries, which occupy a much larger area of the planet compared to India.

Now consider the phrase that is used fairly often. “Hindus have a minority complex”. I recently learned that this phrase is a variation of a statement made by a Sri Lankan scholar, Stanley Tambiah, who said of South Asian communities, that they are majorities with a minority complex3. This phrase is used to remind Hindus that they are a massive majority in India and should not have any worries about their culture being under threat, within India. It sometimes is used to suggest that Hindus need not “work to maintain their culture against threats from other religious minorities”. Is this statement correct? Or fair? Perhaps, or could it be an illusion?

**

I opine that there is a flaw in this concept of “minority complex” that is felt by Hindus. The flaw that I suggest in the above concept is that people who repeat it all the time (in my opinion) assume that Hindus always confine their identity to be in relation to the CURRENTLY EXTANT boundaries of the Republic of India.

As discussed above, all individuals in this day and age are global citizens. Considering the inextricably linked supply chains, financial systems and continuously fluid political relationships, what happens in one part of the world invariably affects every other. What is also true is that what happens in some parts of the world affects the rest more visibly and with greater impact than those in other parts of the world.

This is evidenced by how oil prices rise and affect all our lives every time there is potential military escalation in West Asia. Also, we all remember how wheat supplies to several countries were affected due to the war between Russia & Ukraine. This war also affected the supply of essential military hardware to India like the remaining units of the S-400 air defence systems. A conflict that potentially created a business opportunity for India is the one between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Armenia has procured a lot of military hardware from India and this has improved India’s prospects of acquiring a greater share of military exports in the world. At the same time Indian tourists visiting Azerbaijan has also increased2.

Beyond all this, all of us distinctly remember the pandemic that not only affected every aspect of our lives, but also caused supply shortages of chips in many industries, due to the crippling effect of the pandemic on supply chains. Also, the current war in Gaza has the potential to cause friendships between people to breakdown in parts of the world that have no stake in the conflict at all. If one individual posts a lot in support of Gaza and her or his friend cannot agree with the sentiment, the rift that this disagreement causes can cause harm to their relationship. This despite both individuals living faraway, in India or the USA. Considering the USA, the manner in which the protests on many university campuses is affecting the life of several individuals is another example of how we are Global Citizens, despite being citizens of one or a few more countries.

With the rise of the internet and the age of information overload, a very large number of people in this integrated world have access to news and opinions from all over the world. With this information access, it is very easy to realize, which parts of the world wield the ability to affect the other parts more strongly and not be as affected in return. This makes these specific parts of the world more powerful than some others. Also, these parts or regions of the world can easily be associated with specific countries or nations. And nations can always be associated with a majority or in most cases a dominant religion.

The key facets that affect this power of some nations are military might, cultural might, economic might and numerical (population size) might. There could be more, but these are top of the mind for me, as of now. Military, economic and technological might are mostly related to each other. Let us consider each of these.

The two nations that are unequivocally more powerful than India militarily are the USA and China. The USA is culturally a Judeo-Christian nation even though it is technically a secular country. China is actively anti-religion and also anti-culture unless it is its own (this “culture” includes the middle kingdom belief). Many other western nations and Israel though smaller in terms of the size of their military forces are far superior when it comes to the technological prowess of the military forces. These nations include Russia, France and the UK. One could include Israel in the western ambit. Of these nations, all are Christian by culture while Israel is Jewish. This is despite the fact that most of them have secular constitutions. Also, the ability of minority religions and cultures to affect the majority in these nations was very small and is only now beginning to change.

Culturally, the only nation that could be argued to be more powerful than India would be the USA. Many other nations in the Middle East, Western Europe and China and Japan could be equal to India’s cultural power, but are not necessarily superior. Here again, most of the nations that are either India’s equals or superior are all either Christian or Islamic by either religion or culture.

We could look at “culture” in different ways as well. While Indian culture is original and vast in its variety, its audience is primarily the people who already live in India or form a part of its diaspora. While Indian art and culture is appreciated in different parts of the world, and this number is increasing in the last few decades, this is not influencing the culture in other parts of the world in a significant manner, as far as I know.

However, the culture of many other countries influences the life of Indians and those of many other parts of the world as well. Considering the past of Islam and Christianity in India, it is easy to see that these religions are a strong part of the cultural export of the countries that espouse these. Both religions practice proselytization and hence, the religion itself is a cultural export. Similarly, the Marxist ideology that controls Indian academia is a western export and has influenced everything in India from Government policy to cinema.

Compare this with Indian cinema, music, spirituality, religious literature and architecture. How many societies around the world are affected by the same? As far as I know, the influence of these is very small, even if the appreciation for the same might be fairly large. Bollywood simply does not compare with religion in its ability to influence lifestyle and culture. So, while India might be equal to many other countries in cultural quality and output, it would be less influential anywhere outside the Subcontinent.

When it comes to economic might, specifically when per capita GDP is considered, several nations in the Americas, Europe, West Asia, East Asia and South East Asia are all a lot more powerful when compared with India. Most of these are again, Christian, Islamic, Jewish or Judeo-Christian by culture or religion. Consider the videos below. It is from the YouTube channel of the media outlet “The Print”. The Editor-in-Chief of The Print, Shekhar Gupta explains how Qatar, which is really tiny and has a small population exudes an influence on the world which is way above its weight. This is simply because of its economic might.

In terms of technological might the situation is similar to that of economic might, but there are fewer nations that are superior to India. In this case again, the nations that are ahead of India are mainly Christian, Jewish or Judeo-Christian.

Consider the following article from the Eurasian Time website, the link to which is see below. The article considers three rankings. One is a global ranking by US News and Media. The second is an Asian ranking by the Lowy Institute of Australia, and the last is a global military ranking of countries by Global Firepower. The links to all three rankings are seen in the notes below+. I would suggest that everyone have a look at the original data available there.

US Ranking ‘Kicks Out’ India Out Of World’s Most Powerful Countries; South Korea Scores Over Japan

The US News and Media ranking ranks India 12th in the world, below the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Japan, South Korea and of course China as countries in Asia go. Consider how much smaller in area and population compared to India the UAE and Saudi Arabia are, and yet are considered more powerful. I have to add one caveat here. In the past I have suggested that global rankings and reposts of this kind could be weapons that act over time and not distance. This is based on the motivations behind the organizations and sponsors of these rankings. A link to the article where I mention this is seen in the notes below1. That said, these reports do show how we are considered by a certain kind of external gaze. These rankings would also allow us to see what others possess in terms of resources which translate into power, and hence cannot be ignored altogether.

We now come to the size of population. It is easy to think, India has a superiority in this aspect. But when one looks at the size of the practitioners of specific religions we see a different picture. One can say that the Hindus outnumber all other religions in India as they are somewhere between 75 to 80% of the populace. But herein lie several problems.

Hinduism unlike Christianity or Islam is not a monolith. It is more an umbrella term which could be easily replaced by “Dharmic” or “Indic” religions. Hinduism is a set of all those cultural and religious practices in the Indian Subcontinent where interaction with the divine is not about fear or obedience or adherence to a book, but a transactional faith based belief system, where most individuals have specific personal relationships with their divinities. Hinduism consists of all the smaller tribal, community based practice systems. Thus, despite being large as an umbrella organization, each of the groupings that make up this super set are pretty small.

Consider the remarks made a few months ago by the heir apparent of the DMK, where he compared “Sanātana Dharma” with a host of diseases and said that it should be exterminated just like those diseases. His party further explained the statement saying they only refer to the “Brahmanical” aspects when they refer to “Sanātana Dharma”. So, they classify Sanātana Dharma as Brahmanism and suggest that Hinduism is not the same or maybe they mean, it is a small subset of Hinduism which needs to be destroyed.

For several Hindus, Hinduism and Sanātana Dharma are synonymous. In this vein, another statement in late 2022 had caused consternation. Tamil filmmaker Vetrimaaran had suggested that the great Chola king Raja Raja was not a Hindu. Raja Raja Chola was responsible for the construction of the Brihadeshwara temple in Thanjavur in Tamil Nadu. It is a place of great importance for Hindus. Raja Raja was an ardent of Lord Shiva as far as I know. There are people in the political and movie industry circles in Tamil Nadu who suggest that the people of Tamil Nadu are not Hindus but are Shaivaites or Vaishnavites. Both Shiva and Vishnu are at the heart of the Hindu faith.

So, from the little that I understand, all of this seems to suggest that there is an attempt to split Hinduism as it exists today into multiple faiths. In Karnataka, there is an attempt from time to time to call the people of the Lingayat community separate from Hinduism. When I was younger, Lingayats were an integral part of Hinduism, to the best of my knowledge.

There is also the idea of the caste census these days, considering it is election season. The idea is not wrong, if it is purely to further progressive affirmative action. But the suspicion of this proposed exercise is that it is another attempt to split Hinduism and cause its component communities to be at odds with one another. One hears often in Indian media that the idea has been to split Hindus along caste and community lines while uniting the non-Hindus, to further vote bank politics.

This is contrast to some who consider all the practitioners of the faiths that had their origin in India, including Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism as Hindus4. But there are many who choose to disagree with this, which seems to be in keeping with the attempt to split Hinduism into smaller components. And then there are the anti-religion groups like the Marxists, who will prefer the end of any religions as part of their ideology (religion? 😛 ).

Let us now get back to the total populations of each of the big 3 religions that are prevalent in or inform the cultures of each of the nations we considered earlier. Even when Hinduism is considered as a whole, the total number of practitioners of this religion is far smaller in number as compared with the practitioners of either Islam or Christianity. This holds true even if one considers just Sunni Islam or Roman Catholic Christianity. There is in Islam the concept of an “Ummah” or “Ummat”, which means all Muslims constitute a single state and existing national boundaries are irrelevant. Granted, the number of Muslims who believe in this might be small. But it is not small enough for anyone who chooses to worry about them to ignore this aspect altogether. Thus, even if superficially Hindus seem to have sufficient numerical might and this might be true to a certain extent within India, they are just another minority at a global level.

What should be obvious is that the spread of Islam and Christianity in the world is so large that their density in specific countries might be low when compared with that of Hindus (as a monolith, not its components) in India. But the actual population is considerably larger. And the area available for these populations to develop is larger still! Simply because there are more countries they inhabit, unlike Hindus, who can only depend on the area available in modern India for any development. This availability of area for development, in my opinion, is like the ability to scale up industrial capacity. It is a great boon that can be used as necessary.

Of the three religions that inform the culture of the nations that are superior to India as seen above, Judaism is not a proselytizing religion and consequently no religion or culture in India feels threatened by the Jews or their culture.

Christianity and Islam on the other hand are proselytizing religions. They actively believe in converting people of other religions and cultures into their own. They seem to have no qualms either today or in the past about the extinction of all beliefs and traditions of the religions they want folk to convert out of. This activity might not be as mainstream in India as the previous few centuries, but it has not stopped either. Even in cases where practitioners of these two faiths and general populace of the nations whose culture is informed by the same, do not actively support proselytization in other nations, they do not actively denounce this activity either. No Christian or Islamic organization or people of majority Christian and Islamic nations, as far as I know, actively call for a proactive ban on the conversion of peoples into either of these religions.

Consider the video below. The speaker here is looking at Indians as potential converts into Christianity and India as fertile ground to “spread the word” as he sees fit. He exhorts people to put in greater effort to achieve the same. He further adds that one should study and understand Indians to be able to convert them. He does not seem to have any malicious intent. It appears that he genuinely believes that he is doing the “right thing”. But when one looks at it from the eyes of a Hindu, who is the target of his attempts, in my opinion, there is no option but to feel fear, apprehension. He is nothing but a threat, for what he is advocating, is not needed, and what he thinks about all this in not relevant, if it is indeed a free world his country of origin believes in.

We saw earlier how we are all global citizens and how India is inferior to many other nations on the economic and technological fronts. Add to this the fact that we are not superior in cultural power terms compared to many other nations. As we also saw, most of the nations more powerful than India are either Christian or Islamic. Now further observe that Hindus are not really even possessing of numerical might on a global level. This indeed makes one realize that as expression of power or even confidence in holding power goes, Hindus are fairly low on the ladder and are justified in being aware of this imbalance, even if they are not actively afraid.

Further, the numerical superiority that exists within India itself, when even remotely threatened only adds to the concern which might push one towards being more afraid. This is especially true when one remembers that there is absolutely no evidence of either Christianity or Islam, in the last thousand years, of carrying out any activity to preserve the culture of even converted populations. What is left over is that which did not threaten the new religion into which the peoples converted or proved useful in the conversion in the first place!

Now consider the fact that there is an active movement within Hinduism itself to split it into its component parts which are not in harmony with one another. And then there are the anti-religion movements. Past-Hindus, actively denounce Hindu practices, suggest that Hindus should not denounce either the denouncers of their religion or the practices of other religions, nor denounce active conversion out of Hinduism or even suggest why someone should not convert! These folk also never state the positives of Hinduism, while they wax eloquent about its supposed problems.

This above group can draw on technological, economic and cultural might from not only within the country, but also from nations that are superior to India, which creates a genuine power imbalance against Hindus.

Considering all the above aspects, Hindus feel outnumbered not in India (yet!), but within the Global ecosystem where we all live today. This will continue until Islam and Christianity give proactive and well enforced declarations that they will never convert anyone to their religions, at least within the existing political boundary of India. This declaration will have to be in perpetuity and not time bound. Additionally they should allow an audit of the practice of this declaration by Hindus. Lastly, they cannot oppose any attempts to reconvert Christians and Muslims within India into any other Dharmic faith. In short, Islam and Christianity cannot have objections to reducing their own number in the civilizational Hindu homeland of India**. When all of this comes to pass, the “Majority” of Hindus will be become real from the current notional. After this perhaps, the “Minority complex” can be ridiculed and the Illusion of a Hindu Majority will have been shattered.

Since this is a long and wordy article, let me reinforce in conclusion. Hindus live in a country that is not overly powerful in the world. The size of their population is not an advantage as is expected and even this is not unchallenged, and faces threats. The geographical spread of Hindus is very limited as well. So, any factor of comfort that arises based on superficial conventional wisdom might not be relevant. The minority complex is relevant, considering this is with relevance to the whole world, not just India. The “majority” is just an illusion and the majority would do well to not have the “illusions” of a majority!

Notes:

* https://www.tanoshiijapanese.com/dictionary/entry_details.cfm?entry_id=97220

3 Watch between the 17 and 18 minute mark.

2 https://www.onmanorama.com/travel/outside-kerala/2024/03/19/azerbaijan-europe-asia-tourism-e-visa-caspian-sea.html

2 https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/from-bhutan-to-baku-indian-tourists-look-everywhere-for-their-travel-plans-in-summer-2024-12712173.html

2 https://www.timesnownews.com/travel/amid-schengen-visa-delays-indian-tourists-flock-to-these-new-holiday-hotspots-article-110247148

+ https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/rankings/power

+ https://power.lowyinstitute.org/

+ https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.php

1 https://mundanebudo.com/2023/10/15/missile-long-range-weapon-narrative-long-time-weapon/

4 I have heard it said that there is a definition from either the Supreme Court or in the Constitution, where there is supposed to be a definition of Hindus as the people of India who are not Christians, Muslims and Parsis. I personally am not sure where this definition is from and have not been able to find it. So, I am mentioning this point in the notes. If anyone know where this definition is from, kindly help me by sharing the source of the same.

**Every sentence in this paragraph is fantastical to say the least. How any of this can be done and the part about the audit specifically – I have no idea this is feasible in reality without causing problems, even if the words make it seem plausible (like faster than light propulsion).

Post No. 43 – Ninja, Mummy, Lawyer, Hiker

Vikram M R, , , , Leave a comment

This is my 43rd post. I was going to call this “Post No. 42” but changed it to 43. The post is inspired by the focus on a “42-year cycle” in the Bujinkan in 2014-15. I am a practitioner of the Bujinkan system of martial arts, which is Japanese in origin. The number 42 is also considered unlucky in Japan. So, out of respect to the country of origin of the martial art which has given me so much, I changed it to “43”. “43” is after the end of bad luck, so, “All is well”. 😊 The rest of this post is just some rambling on my part, for fun. I hope readers are entertained; else they can skip this altogether.

Back in 2014 the Soke of the Bujinkan, Sensei Hatsumi Masaaki released a watch to commemorate 42 years since the passing of his teacher, Sensei Takamatsu Toshitsugu. Takamatsu Sensei passed away in 1972 at the age of 84. Hatsumi Sensei was 42 at that time. Also, Hatsumi Sensei turned 84 in 2014 and that marked 42 years since he had started training on his own and had taken over from his teacher as the Soke (inheritor) of the 9 schools of the Bujinkan system of martial arts. ++

So, it was a play on numbers and an important occasion for Hatsumi Sensei. It was important to other practitioners of the Bujinkan as it was important to their Grandmaster. An image of the watch is seen below. It has the number 42 engraved on the back.

However, the number 421 is considered unlucky in Japan as the pronunciation of the same sounds similar to “to die”. I recall that in early 2015, Hatsumi Sensei had created an artwork to signify “a good harvest” as the bad luck of “42” was now past. So, the beginning of the 43rd year was like the start of a new 42-year cycle, apart from just the symbolism of the unlucky 42 being in the past now.

The number 42 brought to mind the short story by Arthur Conan Doyle, called “Lot No. 249”. It was published way back in 1892. The story is set in the University of Oxford. It involves one student reanimating a Mummy and using the same to terrorize people he dislikes. The student acquires the Mummy by purchasing it in an auction. If I recall right, the Mummy was a part of “Lot No. 249” in the auction. I was first acquainted with this story a few years ago, when I heard it on radio as a play, in Hindi, while on a drive. The play was great fun to listen to.

An illustration of “the Mummy” from “Lot No. 249”, by Martin Van Maele. Image source – Wikipedia

The reason the story came to mind is convoluted to say the least. In the number “249” in the title of the story, the first two numerals 2 & 4 form “24”, which is a reversal of “42”. The last two numerals 4 and 9 form “49”, which is also considered an unlucky number in Japan. The pronunciation of the number is supposedly similar to “a painful death”.  No wonder the reanimation of the Mummy caused such trouble, it was part of a story whose title references two unlucky numbers! Yes, all this is conjecture and an extreme stretch as far as connections go! 😀

Now, we move on to the next convoluted connection..

In the Bujinkan, we train iteratively. 6 of the 9 schools that make up the Bujinkan have defined forms/techniques. There is the Ten Chi Jin, which is the core of martial art. There are the various weapons to train with. Then there is the collective knowledge of various seniors that practitioners are exposed to. Lastly, there is personal experience from past training. All of these are trained over and over. Considering the large volume of options to train, each of those gets a turn only once in many months. Every time any of these is trained is an iteration.

Every iteration has new insights and revelations coming forth. There is refinement and fresh learning. So, every time we bring a specific school or weapon back to life in the dojo with training, there is an upgrade in the experience and addition to knowledge. This happens over and over. It is something like the Yuga cycle in Hindu tradition. Practitioners go through the same definition of the motion, but the movement that it results in is similar to the last time or the one before that, never the exact same one. This is why it is a martial art*.

This is where the convoluted connection comes forth. In the story from earlier, the Mummy is reanimated multiple times. But nothing good comes of it. There is only misery caused with every iteration of its coming to life, for the people who come in contact with it (no idea what the Mummy itself felt, or if it could feel anything at all). And hence it has to be burnt and destroyed at the end of the story, so that there is no more terror, no more iterations.

This is the exact opposite of the iterative process in the martial arts. Every reanimation of the previously experienced forms is an improvement, a rediscovery, a new series of “aha” epiphanies. So, even though “42” is not lucky, the end of it is the beginning of a new cycle, so seeing the back of it is a good thing. This brings me to the last, very happy, and much more popular reference in pop culture to “42”.

“42” is the answer to “Life, the universe, everything”. This is what Douglas Adams has shown us in the immensely popular novel series “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”**. In the novel, this is the answer to the ultimate question, provided by the “greatest computer with an exception”, “Deep Thought”. But for the purposes of this article, there is reincarnation, after a fashion, in the Hitchhiker’s Guide as well.

At the beginning of the story, the Earth is destroyed. But in a later part of the story, a new Earth is made available! I cannot recall exactly, but I think it is found in the folds of space and provided by the Dolphins to Humans. This new Earth is a different one from that which was destroyed. In this aspect, it is like training iteratively. We end with up with an understanding of the martial art which is new and slightly different from the one we started with at the beginning of the iteration.

That’s all for the twisted connections. Hope you enjoyed this post. In case you did not, I will end with yet another reference. Just as the title of the post was a reference to Conan Doyle’s “Lot No. 249”, I end with a reference to the message from God as seen in Adams’ “Hitchhiker’s guide to the Galaxy” – Sorry for the inconvenience! 😛

Considering that I am apologizing for the inconvenience, I will conclude for the second time, with one last connection with 42 and Indian laws. In the Indian Penal Code, there is Section 4202. It deals with cheating and deceiving a person and the punishment for the same. Four hundred and twenty is commonly pronounced “four twenty” and this is essentially 42 multiplied by 10. This seems about right, given that it is bad luck times 10! If someone is being deceived, it means that that person is really down on her or his luck! Therefore someone really needs to be sorry for that individual’s inconvenience. 😛

An image of Section 420

Notes:

++ A big thanks to my friend and buyu Santosh Nagasamy for the wonderful conversation where we were trying to relive 2014, 2015 and 2016 in our training while attempting to recall and relive the significance of the 42 year cycle.

1 The term “Shinigami” made popular by the Anime series “Death Note” shows why the number 42 is considered unlucky. “Shinigami”, as I understand it, is made up of 2 words, “Shini” and “Kami”. Kami is similar to “Deva” or “Devata” from Hindu culture. In English, I guess it could only be translated as “God”. Shinigami is thus, “God of Death”. But from the way the character is shown in the series, it is more like the “Yama Doota” in Hindu culture.

“Yama Doota” are those that work for Lord Yama, who is the God of Justice/Death (judgement after death). They are the ones that escort the soul when their time in a physical manifestation is at an end. Lord Yama is also the Guardian of the South.

“Shi” is 4 and “Ni” is 2. So, 4 and 2 like in 42 could be pronounced “Shini”, which is also death. Hence the association with bad luck.

* This definition of the Martial “Art” was discussed in an earlier post of mine, the link to which is seen below.

Expression through obstacles – An exploration of the “ART” in the Martial Arts

** It was a radio series before it was a series of novels.

2 Thanks a lot to my friends Sandeep Kumar and Keane Amaral for helping me with details and images of Section 420, and no, they did not cheat me. 😛

Extra note – There is an old Hindi movie called “Shree 420” (1955). The tile is a reference to Section 420 which deals fraud in the Indian Penal Code. The journey of the protagonist in the movie apparently leads him from being a fraudster to a reformed do-gooder. I have not seen this movie and hence have not considered it as one of the connections.

An afterthought – “Luck” and “being lucky” are important factors in the Bujinkan. “42” is unlucky and therefore the end of “year 42” is to be celebrated. It is like entering an era of good luck after one of potential bad luck. It is like coming back to a good life, and that is the same as destroying the reanimating mummy in “Lot No. 249” and putting it to rest, for a good life in the afterlife. 😛

“Real” Issues

Vikram M R, , , , , , , 1 Comment

Let me start by sharing 3 anecdotes. The first is something I heard from a colleague of mine. This colleague is also someone I consider a good friend and I respect his opinions and observations. The anecdote goes thus.

My friend is a Manager and leads a team 60 to 70 strong. Many of his team interact and report directly to clients. One such member of his team put in her papers. While discussing the reasons for her resignation, she said that the pressure of work was too much and the client she was working with had too many demands in too short a duration. She simply could not keep up and the client could not understand the same. The client was not Indian, she was from a European nation.

My friend made a suggestion to the lady who had put in her papers. He suggested that she start saying “NO” to any work she could not do at a given time. She was also told to give exact timelines about when she could take up anything new and tell the client how long the existing work would take. This included the delays due to personal responsibilities. She could do this without any worry as she was on the notice period and had 90 days to experiment with this new way of working. Additionally, my friend, the manager, would protect her from any blow-back. In simple terms, he told his teammate to stop saying “YES” to everything the client asked for; specifically on the timelines she expected.

The client had no problem at all with the lady saying “NO” many a time and accepted the timelines she was provided based on realistic expectations. The lady took back her resignation and continued working for the team. At the risk of sounding racist, here is an additional detail. The client was White.

This is a common problem when Indians work with Europeans (and likely other cultures as well). Indians, especially the ones that work in salaried jobs are raised to be averse, if not afraid, to say “No”. One is raised at home, at school, at work and society in general to be ashamed to say “No”. Saying “No” when one is asked “Do you know this/how to do this?” or “Can you do this (or within a given time)”? is anathema. One assumes that it is a shame to not know something and there will be adverse consequences career-wise if one cannot do everything, even if this means always being overworked.

So, when the ability to say “NO” is realized and experienced, it is a wondrous experience, even cathartic! In reality, saying “No” is not a big deal and most people, including clients have no problem being told “No”. It is just a start to new direction in a conversation. But for many Indians, letting go of old conditioning and changing the mind-set to be able to say “No” is a very big deal. And it is a matter of pride to have made the mind-set switch that makes “No” a commonplace answer. This is especially true when the person to whom “No” is said is a foreigner, and even more so, if the foreigner is White.

Now consider the next anecdote. A close friend of mine and a fellow black belt in the Bujinkan system has been running his own company (“start-up”) for about 10 years now. A fellow martial artist from France was in India training with us, some 7 years ago. This Frenchman decided to intern with my friend’s company.

One day a visitor made his way to their office for the first time. This visitor had not met anyone in my friend’s office earlier. On that day both my friend and the Frenchman were at the office, apart from other regular staff. I need to add here, the Frenchman, is White. The first person the visitor decided to approach for queries and instructions was the Frenchman.

It is by default assumed that one who is White is the boss. If not, the White is at least someone who knows better, if not best, in any given situation. This again comes as no surprise to many of us. Being a country with a history of colonization, even though most of us are born long after the British left, this behaviour is obvious and expected.

This though is changing, as evidenced in the first anecdote, with greater interaction with people from around the world and due to greater travel by Indians. The change again is in the mind-set. This change has made many Indians surer of themselves and assertive with respect to their ideas, opinions and experiences.

Now for the third anecdote. Back when I started training the Bujinkan two decades ago, we had a rule while training with women. We could not hit women or hurt them. We trained to take their balance with no force and with effective movement. This rule was used, as far as I know, in a few other countries in Europe, but most other dojos from outside India did not have this rule and I recall some women practitioners from abroad being surprised by this rule we practiced.

The rule was completely valid in the Indian context. The number of women practicing the martial arts was small in India back then (so was that of men, but this was more pronounced in the case of women). The number of both men and women practicing the martial arts has increased in the last 2 decades, proportionally. Back then, even the women who did train were a lot more concerned about physical pain and felt vulnerable. So, to create a safe environment, only once a women attained a black belt could she choose to ask men to hit, but with lower power if necessary. Women could gradually increase the intensity and speed of the attacks they encountered during training.

This notion of all women being vulnerable in the dojo has changed. The female practitioners who have started at our dojo more recently seem to not feel vulnerable, or at least feel a lot less so than years ago. The young women who have joined us recently are not worried about physical pain and train just like the men. One of them even said that she expects to feel pain and overcome it with time! This is a marked change. It is not that they are not worried anymore, they are a lot more comfortable communicating how they would like to train. They are also far more certain of their own abilities and the reasons for their training in the dojo.

While this is true of young women, we have a fellow budoka who is in her fifties and started training a couple of years ago. Even she seems a lot more comfortable with pain, to the extent of coming back to class after recovering from a fractured leg. So, the self-confidence and self-awareness of practitioners, specifically women, has changed and is becoming similar to those of women from other parts of the world.

All the 3 anecdotes above, in my opinion, demonstrate the same thing. Indians and therefore India is a much-changed nation over the course of the last decade and a half, thanks to much greater interaction with the rest of the world, increasing income levels and to a large extent, the internet revealing new (and old) ideas that were not widespread earlier.

Indians are now a lot more confident and assertive. This awareness of the newfound confidence and assertiveness and the fact that they can be that way and earn respect across the world is a vitally important aspect in the lives of many Indians. Perhaps this was always true about Indians and the respect they earned across the world, but the number of Indians who are aware of this is vastly greater of late, thanks to various media platforms. This change is lovingly acknowledged at all levels of social interaction – at work, in the family, among friends and any other that one can think of.

Granted, all of this is anecdotal experience, and the sample size is small. The concurrence about these opinions of mine is also from the set of people I interact with regularly at work, in the family and in the dojo, and the set of friends I interact with often. This is not a large number and could be the experience and opinion set of a bubble or an echo chamber. But considering that this is being spoken of at a national level on various fora, I opine that it is a larger trend. I would be glad to be proved wrong.

With this introduction, I would say that one major “REAL ISSUE” for many Indians was the need to have self-confidence and develop the traits in life that lead to the same. The ability to be assertive, to say “NO” and to in general be confident of oneself and one’s background and identity is a HUGE positive and fulfillment of a desire for Indians. And if a government is seen to either facilitate or help improve the development of the mind-set needed for self-confidence, then that government will be seen to have done a great deal for the people, or at least to the section of society that feels an improvement in its mind-set. If this section is large enough, it is likely to sway the result of elections.

Confidence is a part of one’s identity. Self-Confidence, despite a background that is not a driver of confidence is an even greater and cherished part of one’s identity. And this mingles with the other aspects of what defines an identity, which could include religion, heritage, traditions, community affiliations, family background, employment, hobbies, life experience, education, wealth, prosperity, skill sets (including physical abilities) and any other one can think of.

Any aspect of identity that gets enhanced due to government actions, due to any of the various affiliations of an individual, will boost the chances of that individual voting for the government. This leads us to yet another aspect we see in India, considering that it is election season.

**

We hear a phrase a lot these days on the “News” on Television, in all the English news channels in India. This phrase is, “to distract from the real issues”. This phrase is used by many from the opposition political parties and also from people inclined to be aligned with that is referred to as the “leftists”. These individuals use this phrase mainly when they refer to the various temple-mosque or conversion related issues that are high in the mind space of Indians. Consider the reactions to the inauguration of the temple at Ayodhya or the telecast to “The Kerala Story” on Doordarshan to get an idea of the same.

A modified photo of a news story on TV on April 17, 2024. This day was Rama Navami, a major festival, in 2024. On this day, there was a lot of talk about the “Surya Tilak” on the vigraha/murthy (statue in a simplified sense) of Lord Ram Lalla in the new temple at Ayodhya. As expected, when this was a major new item, the statement that highlighting this event was a “diversion” from “real” issues was making rounds as well.

They claim that the current central government is not improving the quality of life of Indians and to distract from this fact they resort to polarizing Hindus from followers of the Abrahamic faiths by making them want a restoration of old temples as against a “better quality of life”.

Now, this makes one ask, what is a “real issue”? In my opinion, a real issue is anything that a voter thinks the government should do for her or him if they are to expect her or him to vote for them (either as a repeat vote or for the first time). That said, one needs to know what any voter wants. When a large enough number of voters want something, that becomes an important issue for the government or a government wannabe to address to the satisfaction of the maximum number of voters wanting the same.

A large number of voters want better employment opportunities, better health care, education that can help aspiration fructification. There are also still many in our country who would want easier access to cooking fuel, shelter, clean water, good roads and healthy meals. Thus, these are “real issues”, no doubt there. Now consider the issue of access to and potential reclamation of temples, or at least the Gyanvapi mosque and Shahi Idgah in Kashi and Mathura respectively. Are these “real issues” or not? Let’s attempt a break down.

There is definitely a large section of the population in our country which has access to good quality food, water, shelter, roads, healthcare, education and employment opportunities. This is not to say that they do not aspire for cheaper healthcare or better roads, better education and better paying employment opportunities. They certainly do, but they are not deprived of any of these at the current moment. Of course, inflation is a problem for this set of citizens as well and they do wish for it to be controlled. But they also know that they are better off compared to crores of others. They also realize that inflation in its current form is a global problem the government can only do so much about. They also realize that the government is trying and doing things for the better, albeit slower than what can be desired and not to the expected levels. This same holds true for the problem of youth underemployment. But in my personal opinion, every government in our country has improved upon its predecessors and hence we are definitely progressing.

This progress has improved the lives of crores over time, while crores more are yet to be beneficiaries at the same level as the rest. Those that have been beneficiaries of reasonably good governance over the last several decades know that, and with that knowledge their definition of “issues” have also changed.

If one has a country to live in where one’s life and livelihood are not under threat of extinction and one can lead a life without active government support, then one of the things citizens might wish for is pride in their own country and in themselves. Pride in one’s country is not uniformly defined. For several communities that that have existed for millennia longer that the modern nation of India, pride in the nation extends to its civilizational history and not just to the republic and its supposed values.

So, these people might feel that they have what is needed for a good life and now aspire for civilizational pride by having a temple where it is known that an external aggressor built a place of prayer to humiliate those that revered the temple. Does this then not become a “real issue”? If snob value can be an attribute of a brand, why can yearning for pride in civilizational history not be one? Is this need to have pride in one’s culture/civilization not an extension of one wanting to be self-confident and assertive? I would opine that it is.

Are psychological or emotive desires not real issues? If yes, then this Gyanvapi issue is a real issue and there is no distraction at play. The distraction might be to underplay the emotive desires of an electorate. A clever government would obviously identify an emotive need that other governments chose to not identify and tap into it as a means to achieve adulation from citizenry, and hence electoral success.

Now, if this is a real issue as suggested above, what does that say about those saying this is “distraction from real issues”? Are they not saying that until everyone in our country has the same standard of living, those that have a good standard of living currently should put all their aspirations on hold until those whose lives are not as good as their own match what they currently have? Is this anything more than clumsy ideology considering that an “issue” might have to be on hold for years? They are saying, “your desire is not a real issue because there are other issues that we consider as real issues, and you should listen to us”. They are also saying that many people need to consider as real issues, only those that are issues of others and those less unfortunate, irrespective of what they consider as real issues for themselves.

In summary, they are saying they know better, and many people do not.  Also, this line of thinking means that many people should not want what they do because others have less. So, should they be happy with what they have for indeterminate times? And be at risk of being shamed, as what they want do not constitute “real issues”? It certainly seems so. This leads me to the last part of the aspects I wanted to share.

**

There were two interviews recently on the YouTube channel “Mojo Story”, run by the well-known journalist Barkha Dutt. One was with journalist Neerja Chowdhary in early January 2024 and another was with yet another journalist, Vir Sanghvi in late February 2024. I am sharing links to both below.

The two interviews show diverging views about the current Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi. Vir Sanghvi agrees that one major plus point attributed to PM Modi is that he has improved India’s stature on the global stage. This extends to Indians being seen with greater respect abroad and Indians at home feeling more confident due to the same. But Mr. Sanghvi also ridicules this idea saying nothing much has changed abroad, meaning Indians were respected earlier as well and that the stature of India while it has improved has not changed greatly. He is an experienced journalist, and his observations could be right. But this does not take away from the fact that the mind-set among many Indians has changed and they might just be seeing the respect more clearly and hankering for more, and pondering actions to get the same.

Ms. Chowdhary expands on the idea of the change in the mind-set of many Indians. In the interview she shares her experience and states that specifically Hindus are seeing a resurgence in cultural pride. This is seen as an extension of confidence and greater aspirations. There is also no diffidence or guilt about being Hindu and the purported weaknesses with their religion among those who identify as Hindu. Ms. Chowdhary shares how she has seen the number of devout visitors in Kashi increasing manifold and at the same time being younger, indicating a hunger to connect with the ancient culture of the land.

She goes on to say that the phenomenon of PM Modi is not yet understood well in India. She also states that she is not sure if the consistent popularity and approval of PM Modi is a consequence of a changing India or if the change in India is a consequence of the NDA Government led by PM Modi. The change in India she refers to, as I understand it, is related to the aspirations and change in mind-set that we discussed earlier, apart from just increasing disposable incomes and awareness of one’s standing in the world.

I personally think that election of PM Modi is a reflection of the changing mind-set in India and not the other way around. The increasing number of people sharing the mind-set in a short duration of a decade might be partly attributable to the Government, but not its initial rise to power and continuing popularity. I believe that there is a large enough section of the electorate in India whose basic physical needs are met and now the psychological/emotive needs of cultural affinity and pride in one’s civilization, history and identity is what is desired. The culture and narrative debates in India on all media platforms likely fuels this desire to greater urgency than in the past.

The points in the above few paragraphs, in my understanding, explain why the need to retell Indian history and highlight the positives of the same are now very REAL issues. They are not just “distractions” as some sections of the media and others would like everyone to agree.

I am currently reading a book titled “Sword and Soul” by Hindol Sengupta**, the link to which is seen below. The book is about the history of and potential near future of Political Hinduism. I am only a third of the way through the book. The author walks the journey of political Hinduism from roughly the time of the Company Raj, through the time Ananda Math was written through Veer Savarkar, the Revolutionary movement and the interaction of all of these with the INC of old. Based on what I am reading, it seems that the yearning for civilizational pride that is seen and spoken of today is pretty much the same as that expressed over the last 125 years. It also seems that this yearning was suppressed post-independence for some five decades and then it came back with renewed vigour, with improving circumstances of a considerable section of Indian citizens. This further lends credence to the fact that any issue related to identity, pride in the same and the mind-set change of a people will likely always be a REAL ISSUE, until it is fully satisfied.

**

In a previous article, I had shared some thoughts on the various opinions of western content creators on YouTube, regarding the practice and effectiveness of different martial art forms. The link to the article is seen in the notes below*. One common theme among a section of martial artists is that one should focus on training ONLY fighting styles that prepare one for self defence in a modern context (they are mainly referring to western scenarios, but are not limited to the same). Some of them are disparaging with regard to traditional martial arts which focus on fighting as it existed in the past.

These opinions are absolutely correct. But, there is another side to this line of thinking. Their opinions assume that everyone who trains the martial arts, does so ONLY to learn self defence. In other words, their opinions regarding the reason for training is ONLY physical. This again is a valid assumption for a large section of practitioners of the martial arts. To be fair some of the content creators I am referring to only have a problem with martial artists who claim to be teaching self defence without actually testing the same in a tough simulation.

There could however be several other reasons for people to train the martial arts. In the article I wrote I came up with some 16 reasons, some of which had nothing to do with physicality of any sort. Some of these involved reasons of recreation, meditative attributes of the martial arts, self-development and the like. These are reasons that are PSYCHOLOGICAL and not really physical, despite have a physical component to the training.

This divergence in opinion for the reasons of training the martial arts is exactly like the Leftists suggesting that any “real issue” has to do with the physical needs of citizens alone, and anything that has to do with matters of cultural confidence or civilizational pride is a distraction from the real issues they define. Could this partly be due to the lesser focus in India on matters of mental health? Or is there a lack of focus on mental health due to psychological needs not being considered real? I do not have an answer; perhaps someone who knows can shed some light on this.

I feel that it is precisely because the current government of India has a focus on both the physical and psychological needs of the electorate that they continue to enjoy a high rate of approval. The physical needs of the citizens are addressed in the form of the free rations, better toilets, access to cooking gas, electricity and drinking water and the digital platforms for ease of doing business for small traders. The psychological/emotional needs are addressed in the actions on the temple building, CAA and other activities that emphasize civilizational pride and a decolonization of the Indian mind.

We live in a time when debates do not result in any change of position or opinion. In such an environment, I suppose the “real” in what one considers is a real issue is purely personal. It depends on the political leaning and convictions of every individual, and that in turn depends on the social circles one chooses and the narratives those emphasize. Perhaps the only real issue was that we considered that there was a shared reality which everyone could agree on. There are likely as many “REAL ISSUES” as there are people. Perhaps this need for a “real” and personal reality is what led to there being 300 versions (supposedly) of the Ramayana, each of which are likely undergoing personalization with every reading and retelling.

Notes:

** https://www.amazon.in/Soul-Sword-History-Political-Hinduism-ebook/dp/B0CJRKDZYM/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3BFE4YOMX9U5K&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.ThIbasUc6bjV43OeZKU63gpE4ikp8r7zfkVTUvnHiW-C6gojdwKZOiHxeBloN1ah2uEPNHlj6u8dS4OMJ9FmhS52X_-JI3rou5A-4-3k_HGx7xVUEBbf5NRE16ci23YBxYEwXhNlR0xljt2CCEbFBoouO-37LIFRmFJZ3jssbi-dtTC-UjwSB2SIKGl12uJtyW3JiuDJVkAFNI-s8gvhlK_qUuA_L0XlQrzmFoV04Z4.hzg9y3wwXIjhMw3AMUnnTOeXGFJD8EFowDv27sqdK88&dib_tag=se&keywords=sword+and+soul&qid=1712822288&sprefix=sword+and+soul%2Caps%2C3106&sr=8-1

* https://mundanebudo.com/2024/03/14/effort-luck-effectiveness-morality-some-thoughts-also-why-do-you-train/

The Book vs The Library

Vikram M R, , , , , , Leave a comment

In the Bujinkan system of martial arts, we are reminded constantly of how adapting is the key to survival. This is not different from what we all hear in our daily lives and at work, “Change is the only constant”. Practitioners who have trained for many years are reminded every now and then that we need to be able to unlearn techniques. Techniques are vital in the early part of one’s martial training journey. But over time, the concept behind the technique is more important the technique itself. If the concept is not explicit, it needs to be realized with training, be it with peers or seniors or different teachers.

But martial arts manuals, scrolls and books contain techniques. They do contain concepts, but these are not easy to practice without what in the Bujinkan is called “kuden”. “Kuden” is knowledge that is transmitted orally, and is not present in literature or manuals. It is a part of experiential learning. This fact leads to another statement that we hear fairly often, “The book will not fight for you”. Variants of this statement are “Do not fall in love with the book/technique” and “Sticking to a technique in a real fight will get you killed”.

So, it is drilled into a practitioner of the Bujinkan that with experience it is very important to not become someone who “collects techniques”. One needs to learn to respond to the attack or situation as it presents itself. One cannot depend on techniques. This is not a new concept and all of us face changes regularly in life and unexpected challenges every now and then. But we deal with these as a matter of course. We might be irritated, angry or sad and experience other negative emotions at the moment of the challenge. But we deal with it and move on, maybe even laugh over it in hindsight and if we are lucky, gain something positive from the experience.

Adherence to dogma from just one book might be detrimental to any person. Exposure to multiple opinions and sources of knowledge and ideas is vital. Art work by Vishnu Mohan

We are currently in the high noon of elections in India. The general elections of 2024 for the Lok Sabha are starting in a few days. Like everyone else in the grand democracy that is India, I have political opinions and also have a blog. 🙂 Add to this my love for and experience, such as it is, in the Bujinkan, and my political opinions are coloured by concepts and learnings from the martial arts.

I started this article with a reference to books and the knowledge in them. I also mentioned how they cannot be an exact guide to life, even if what they contain is vitally important. Multiple books might help us lead a better life, but no one of them can be THE BOOK to live life by. This is common sense, even if some or A BOOK has a far greater influence on our lives than others. Of course, these days we can replace the “book” in the previous few statements with the media that one consumes most.

The rest of this article is my opinion about a few things that are heard every now and then in Indian media as part of the current political discourse.

We hear a lot these days about how the Constitution of India is supreme, when it comes to informing our social interactions on a day-to-day basis. This assertion is made on various media platforms. It is assumed that it is common sense to realize this. It is supposed to be “known” that the Constitution is what defines the current Republic of India.

The reference to the constitution being supreme is mainly mentioned in reference to the way the Government conducts itself. But considering that the Government is elected by the people, would this not extend to the electorate? Perhaps it does not, but it could, as elucidated below.

The electorate might appreciate a specific aspect of the government or a political party and hence vote for the same. At the same time, if the Government or a party senses a specific aspect as the pulse of the electorate that votes for it, will they focus on it to increase their chances of winning an election? It would seem likely. If the “aspect” that is likely to bring a party or a government to power is in contradiction to an existing Constitution, what happens then? Would the government or party not want to deviate from the existing principles of the constitution to achieve victory? If yes, would that mean that the electorate is what was responsible for an eventual change to the constitution? If this is true, would the argument that government should adhere to the constitution not extend to the electorate? As they are responsible for the creation of the government. Since the electorate is the people, does not the expectation of adherence to the constitution then not extend to the people of the country as well? It is hard to have a clear answer, but the answer does seem to be a yes. The people are expected to adhere to the constitution.

In this way of thinking of the relationship between the Constitution and the Country (more than just the republic, including the geography and the life forms within it), the people of the Republic of India are supposed to be a People of the Book. Of course, the Book here is the Constitution of India. One can’t help but feel that the Constitution thus makes Indians exclusively like the followers of Abrahamic religions, who are the people generally referred to when one thinks of “People of the Book”. The Jews, the Christians and the Muslims all follow one “Book” respectively.

But the Indian people have always followed several different traditions even when it comes to governance, administration and law and order. There have been multiple treatises in the past that attest to how government and interaction of people “should be”. A few these could be Vidura Neeti, Krishna Neeti, Shukra Neeta, Brihaspati Neeti, Chanakya Neeti, the practices of the medieval South Indian kingdoms, the practices of the various Sultanates in India etc.

But none of these were binding on the administrators during different periods of history. They could and in some cases did know of many of these various traditions. They used these in the ways they though best, based on the situation and context of the same. This is not unlike one using a library or the internet to refer to all possible sources of knowledge to come up with a new feasible solution, in a given space and time. There is no need to adhere to a “Single Tradition” even if some facets of the same are useful. This then makes Indians if anything, a “People of the Library”. This is not something I have come up with; I heard Dr. David Frawley use it once and it seems apt.

The memory of past governance traditions is alive, even if in an imperfect manner (the notion of a Dharma Rajya, for example). Also, these governance traditions of the past are part of the cultural identity for many Indians, for they are a part of the socio-religious knowledge and texts that are a part of one’s upbringing and heritage.

The contents from a library will serve to help oneself over the course of a lifetime. 🙂 Artwork by Vishnu Mohan

Now consider the article in the link seen below. It came out a little after the Prāna Pratishta of the Rama temple at Ayodhya. It speaks of how the Government is supposed to adhere to “Constitutionalism”. The article only addresses the Government and not the citizens.

https://scroll.in/article/1062519/in-its-74th-year-indias-constitution-has-been-emptied-of-its-soul

But if, as I was pondering earlier, the Government is the people, does the need to adhere to “Constitutionalism” extend to the people as well? The article literally adds an “ism” to the Constitution. Considering how the culture of Hindus also has an “ism” at the end, “Hinduism”, one can’t but help feel like the article is really close to telling people that there is a primary religion we owe allegiance to, the religion of the Constitution. This again feels like an attempt to make Indians a “People of the Book”, the Book being the Constitution of the Republic of India. I reiterate, this is my feeling, not something I am certain of, but it does seem plausible.

Next, consider the following article. It specifically speaks of how “culture” and maybe even “customs” should not have a place in law, with respect to marriages.

https://thewire.in/law/marriage-equality-narasimha-supreme-court-cji-chandrachud

I am not aware if the author is of the inclination that this should be the case in general or only with respect to marriages and similar social relationships/contracts. But if it is in general, again, there is an argument against cultural precedents in governance. This again would extend to a cultural memory of other traditions of governance being a no-no as well.

Considering the opinions expressed in the above two articles, is it not akin to telling people that no matter what, their belief systems, culture and traditions are going to be second to the Constitution? If the past traditions of governance are linked to their religions and cultural identity, what then? Will this subordination not be exacerbated if the memory of past governance traditions is alive? I am not certain I have clear answers to these. I only have opinions, and those are not static. Based on my limited experience, this is also true for many other people.

India has a hoary tradition of ideas and texts related to governance having commentaries (Bhāshya) written about them. These commentaries can have criticisms and preferences as well. There could even be suggestions of what in a given text should be followed and what should not. This is not unlike an amendment to a doctrine when the same is needed (whatever the root cause for the same might be).

Considering this tradition of criticism and change to traditions of governance, what if the electorate prefers a change to the Constitution or addition of newer (or older) traditions of governance into the same? Would this be a threat to the constitution or a violation of “constitutionalism”? I would opine that neither is true.

After all, the idea of the constitution NOT being THE BOOK is well known. Otherwise, there would not be 106 amendments to the document. It is an organic, living document that is changed as the nation evolves. There might be a lag in the change and the speed of response, but that it should be changed is not disputed.

Indians thus, do not believe that this latest tradition is perfect, but needs constant correction, just like past traditions of governance. Some of these might be informed by other traditions, not even necessarily from the geography of present or past India. The Library, will be referred to no matter what. The numerous and consistent amendments to the tradition of the Constitution itself is a testament to this. “The Library” here refers of course, to the other traditions of Governance that are in the memory of the citizens. These are the various Smritis and the “Nitis” that I referred to earlier and the overarching concept of a “Dharma Rājya”.

Granted, the Constitution of India is very long and fills in several books, but it certainly is a single tradition of governance, administration and law and order. Assuming that Indians will by default adhere to this latest tradition, specifically when memory and knowledge (and baggage) of other similar traditions from the past persists, is a bit rich.

So, when people make assertions that suggest India will cease to exist if the Constitution (or the institutions it defines) stops being sacrosanct are both right and wrong. They are wrong because India has always been India and never static, but always in flux, which seems to be its natural state. They are wrong because the Constitution will be yet another tradition in the Library to refer to, never to be excised from our collective existence. They are wrong simply because Indians are not a “People of the Book”, and the Constitution does not define the geography or the life that thrives within it. They are right because they only refer to the “Republic of India” and not “India” when they make this assertion. This prerequisite has to be stated and again and again, and never wrongly assumed to be common sense. They are right because India was never meant to be stuck to a given tradition for too long. India is always dynamic and in flow and that is what defines it, the absorption of traditions and the expansion of “The Library”.

Holika and the idea of the Kunoichi

Vikram M R, , , , , Leave a comment

Today is the festival of Holi. International Women’s Day was three weeks ago. The two together, along with martial arts and pop culture are the inspiration for this article. The night before the festival of Holi is considered Holika Dahan. This is the only other “dahan” that I am aware of apart from the Ravan Dahan that happens during the festival of Dasara. A dahan is the burning of an effigy. This could be over a bonfire or by having fireworks stuffed inside the effigy. In both Holika Dahan and Ravan Dahan, the burning of the effigy signifies the destruction of adharmic forces and the victory of Dharma (simplistically translated as victory of good over evil).

Holika is a woman from stories in Hindu tradition. Her burning is nothing like the burning of women at the stake during the witch trial years in Europe and America. This is because Holika was NOT burnt by others in the story. Holika, would be classified as a “villain” by modern day storytelling standards. She was also a formidable woman in her own right. The story related to Holika and Holika Dahan can be considered to be a part of the story of Prahlad and the Narasimha Avatāra of Lord Vishnu.

Holika is also known by the name Simhika. She was the younger sister of Hiranyakashipu and Hiranyāksha. She was the wife of Viprachitti. All of them were Asuras. This means they were the enemies of the Devas. Hiranyakshipu, Hiranyāksha and Holika were the children of Rishi Kashyapa and Diti. Being the children of Diti, they were Daityās (a group within that of the Asuras). Viprachitti, Holika’s husband was a son of RIghi Kashyapa and Danu. Being a son of Danu, he was a Dānava (another group within the superset of the Asuras).

One of Vipirachitti and Holika’s sons was Svarbanu, whose daughter was Prabha. Prabha was the wife of Ayus and the mother of Nahusha. Nahusha once ruled over the Devas when the rightful ruler Indra was weakened and could not be a ruler anymore. Nahusha was also the father of Yayati, to whom both the Yādavas and Kurus (through the Purus) trace their lineage. In this manner, Holika was one of the progenitors of the Chandravamsha (Lunar dynasty) around whom the entire Mahabharata is centred.

Image credits (L to R) – “Nahusha”, published by Amar Chitra Katha; “Yayati”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

However, Hiranyāksha, Hiranyakashipu, Holika and Vipirachitti would all be classified as villains today. Hiranyāksha was incredibly powerful and tried to drown the world. Lord Vishnu had to incarnate as Lord Varāha to defeat and kill him. Hiranyakashipu was equally powerful and imbued with a boon (vara) by Lord Brahma which made him invincible. Lord Vishnu had to incarnate as Lord Narasimha to kill him. Viprachitti was an incredibly capable Asura king as well. He fought the Devas and was killed by Indra after several battles, in most of which Viprachitti and Svarbanu were victorious. The war in which Viprichitti was killed is called “Dhwajapatta” or the “fall of the flags”. Each of these fights with Hiranyāksha, Hiranyakashipu and Viprachitti is considered one of the 12 wars between the Devas and Asuras.

Image credit – “Dashavatar”, published by Amar Chitra Katha, Kindle edition

Image credit – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

The only person in the family of Holika who is a “positive character” is her nephew Prahlad, the son of Hiranyakashipu and Khayādu. He is the main character in the story of the Narasimha Avatāra. This is the story which makes Hoilka a villain and also gives rise to the Holika Dahan.

Prahlad was a great devotee of Lord Vishnu. This was detested by his father, who consequently made several attempts to kill his own son. This was after all attempts at re-education failed. All the attempts on Prahlad’s life failed due to the grace of Lord Vishnu. One of the attempts on Prahlad’s life was by Holika, which also failed.

Holika wanted to help her brother get rid of his son. Holika had the ability to be immune to fire. She would not be burnt even while in a large blaze. So, she sat on a bonfire with young Prahlad on her lap. But her ability failed her. She was burnt to death, while Prahlad survived unharmed. This burning of Holika is what is replicated as Holika Dahan during the festival of Holi. Prahlad eventually became king of the Asuras and was the grandfather of King Bali, who will be the holder of the title of Indra in the next Manvantara. So, the Asuras did overcome the Devas, while the Devas did defeat the attempts of the Asura to overthrow them at that moment. The great conflict, in my opinion, was a draw, with a negotiated settlement (I am not going into my theory regarding this here 😊).

Image credit – Artwork created by Subhashini Selvaraj

How did Holika have immunity to fire? There are two stories that explain this differently. One story says that she had a boon that made her immune to fire. This is similar to her brother Hiranyakashipu having a boon which made him invulnerable to any attack by a human or animal, inside or outside, during the day or at night (he was unkillable for all practical purposes). The other story is that she was granted a scarf or shawl, which, when worn, made her impervious to harm by fire. The garment, either a scarf or a shawl was what she received as a boon.

So, why did she die in the fire and Prahlad survive? The story with just the boon suggests that since she had bad intentions toward the boy who was a devotee of Vishnu, her boon failed her and she died, while the boy was protected by Lord Vishnu. The other story says that there was a gust of wind when the bonfire was lit, which pushed the scarf or shawl onto Prahlad. So, he had the protective garment. Thus, he was protected, while Holika died in the blaze.

Personally, I prefer the story with the protective garment. Boons, once granted, never fail. A loophole has to be found to overcome its protective nature before the person on whom it is bestowed can be defeated. We do not know who Holika obtained the boon from. Nor do we know of any terms and conditions applicable for its functioning. So, to simply assume that her intention, however wrong, to harm a young lad rendered her boon worthless does not fly, in the absence of any other information. Boons are sacred blessings, which are obtained after tremendous efforts and will never fail. To suggest that is simplistic and lazy.

On the other hand, if she received a protective garment against fire in exchange for the effort she put into obtaining the boon, the story makes sense. The garment was the source of the protection and when it was transferred to Prahlad, even if through a chance factor, he would survive and Holika would die. So, I personally think Holika performed tapasya, in exchange for which she received a garment that would protect her from fire. But this garment got transferred to Prahlad, due to which he survived and Holika died in the bonfire.

Image credit – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

From all that we have seen, Holika was an incredible woman. She was a queen, from an illustrious family, which had great consequences both during and after her lifetime. Also, we know she was granted a boon against fire. This fact means she was capable of great effort to achieve a goal, for that is what it takes to achieve a boon.

Now, I will speculate based on the information that we have. I speculate that Holika was also a warrior and that was the reason that she worked towards a boon that gave her protection against fire. I will push this further and offer the following explanation for my assertion.

There have always been Special Forces and spies (undercover agents, saboteurs etc.) in any battle or war around the world, from ancient times to this day. One of the things either of these indulged in was sabotage. Fire was an oft used tool to cause sabotage, like destroying supplies, hurting forces in fortifications and forcing troops into the open. If Holika needed protection from fire, could the reason for this have been to ensure that she was safe when she carried out acts of subversion using fire? If this was the case, would that make her an operative of warfare of a covert nature? And does this not make her a warrior? I would say yes to both of these.

Consider this. Her brothers, son and husband were all involved in fighting the Devas. Lord Vishnu was considered an enemy as he protected the Devas on many occasions. It was a time of warfare all around and the stakes were life or death. In such a situation, a woman from the royal family helping with the war effort is not entirely implausible. So, perhaps she did what she could and specialized in sabotage. This led to her boon. Of course, this does not make her act of trying to kill a young lad in a bonfire any less despicable. Nor does it absolve her of her misdeeds and make her a “good” person. I am only suggesting that while still ending up a villain, she could have been quite a fantastic individual despite the negative traits, ones that she paid for with her life.

If we can accept that Holika was someone who was involved in sabotage and covert warfare and used fire to achieve her aims, this leads to an interesting parallel from Japanese history and pop-culture. This is where the “Kunoichi” come into the picture.

Everyone has heard of “Ninja”. Pop culture, in the form of movies, books and series, either animated or live action, has made the masked, black clad assassin from various eras of Japanese history an incredibly popular mainstay in stories related to martial arts action. Of course, usual consensus is that the Ninja in the cinematic form did not exist historically.

However, Japan was embroiled in warfare for many centuries and these phases of conflict involved special operatives who carried out assassination, espionage and of course sabotage. The individuals who carried out covert warfare could be called “Shinobi”, which, as far as I know, is the correct term for “Ninja”. A female Shinobi is called a Kunoichi, a female Ninja if you will. One can expect a Kunoichi to pretty much be as capable as a Shinobi, their male counterparts, and carry out similar covert activities.

There are many experts who have written about the linguistic and historic aspects of the terms Ninja, Shinobi and Kunoichi. There are also many experts on what the Shinobi really did and what evidence exists in history for specific acts carried out by them. I would recommend that people seek out and read these opinions and books. One book I would suggest is “Ninja: Ancient Shadow Warriors of Japan (The Secret History of Ninjutsu)”, by Dr. Kacem Zhougari*. I am suggesting this book because Dr. Zhougari is a very senior and long-time practitioner of the Bujinkan system of martial arts, which I practice as well. I recall at least one example of Shinobi using fire as a tool from this book.

When it comes to pop-culture like Manga (Japanese comics) and Anime (Japanese animation) there is no dearth of Kunoichi. The Kunoichi from fiction can sometimes have superpowers. Three examples that are top of the mind for me are the anime series “Basilisk” and “Samurai Champloo” and the anime movie “Ninja Scroll”. “Ninja Scroll” has a kunoichi who is a great martial artist, nothing magical, the magic is left to magical beings. In “Samurai Champloo” there is a kunoichi who is blind. She is also a terrific martial artist whose weapon of choice is a modular and hidden naginata. She defeats two great swordsmen in an episode. Most importantly, no one thinks she is a martial artist and hence is a perfect covert operative.

“Basilisk” has a whole host of kunoichi, each of whom has a different super power. Some of them are also experts at seduction, gathering information and in making warriors drop their guard. There are also kunoichi in the super popular “Rurouni Kenshin”, but I cannot recall the details at this time. There are likely many other example which I am unaware of, for I am not a hard-core fan of either Manga or Anime; I am just an admirer of the two media of storytelling.

Irrespective of the greater fictional presence of kunoichi and the somewhat questionable historicity of Shinobi, it is safe to accept that there was definitely participation of women in covert activities during times of conflict in Japan. This of course is not Japan specific, and examples are likely available from many cultures around the world. One example from Indian history that comes to mind for a real life kunoichi is the “Visha Kanya”. These women were perhaps historical. But I have not heard of any evidence that shows beyond any doubt the handiwork of Visha Kanya. The Visha Kanya were supposedly an order of women created under the watch of Acharya Chanakya during the reign of Chandragupta Maurya to further the cause of the empire using amoral and questionable methods. There are also interesting stories of how a Visha Kanya was created. I am not going into the details of those here. Interestingly, Emperor Chandragupta Maurya was also supposed to have had an all-female personal guard.

Considering that the notion of a trained female warrior exists in multiple cultures and that they likely did exist, can we say that Holika would likely be called a Kunoichi? I would say yes, based on the earlier observations. If the assumption that she chose protection against fire so that she can use the same as a weapon in covert activities, would that not make her a covert warrior? If yes, and this is exactly what a kunoichi also specializes in, Holika would likely be considered a Kunoichi in modern stories.

I must clarify one aspect here. When I am referring to a kunoichi, I am referring to women who participate in covert warfare and not in explicit warfare. Women warriors who participated in wars are known from all cultures around the world. If we consider Indian history, we see several examples. A few examples would be Queens Velu Nachiyar, Kittur Chennamma and Lakshmi Bai of Jhansi who fought the British, Rani Abbakka Chowta who fought the Portuguese, Rani Tarabai and Keladi Chennamma who fought Aurangzeb and Rani Rudramadevi who fought the Devagiri Yadavas, to name a few.

If we consider stories from Hindu tradition, we see Tataka, who was killed by Rama early during the events of the Ramayana (Bālakānda). She was an incredibly powerful Rākshasi who was also the mother of Māricha (who played a part in the kidnapping of Sita by Rāvana). She was a very capable fighter who had laid waste to entire cities. Then there is Mashishi, the wife of Mahishāsura. After Mahishāsura was killed in battle by Devi Durga, she performed tapasya in order to avenge her husband. She became a great warrior, who could not be defeated by either Lord Vishnu or Lord Shiva, thanks to her boon. She was eventually defeated and killed by Lord Ayyappa.

The women warriors I have mentioned from the stories and history are warriors, but they are not covert operatives, and hence not kunoichi. There is no information that I am aware of which shows that Holika fought in a conventional war. So, due to her likely participation in special operations, I am suggesting that she can be considered a kunoichi.

One aspect of covert operations is to be able to nudge people into carrying out specific actions to suit the needs of certain individuals or communities. If one can gather information about an individual and understand their behaviour to the point of being able to predict the same, this becomes a weapon. If an operative can, over long durations of time, become a confidante of a person in a position of power, the operative can subtly get the person to carry out actions as she or he chooses fit. If the operative is a he, then it is a shinobi and if it is a she, then it is a kunoichi. This information gathering and guiding of a person to behave as the operative prefers is absolutely covert warfare or a special operation, for it is not open warfare, but definitely subversion.

So, if a woman can bring another person to do things they might not otherwise have, that woman could perhaps be considered a kunoichi. In this context, three examples come to mind, two in a negative context and one in a positive context. The two negative examples are from the Ramayana while the positive one is from the Mahabharata.

Manthara was a maid and confidante of Queen Kaikeyi, wife of King Dasharatha of Kosala. Dasharatha was the father of Lord Rama from another Queen of his, Kausalya. When Dasharatha decided to name Rama the crown prince, Manthara brought the news to Kaikeyi. Kaikeyi was pleased as he had no ill will towards Rama. But Manthara was not pleased. She convinced Kaikeyi with her arguments and communication skill to ask that her own son Bharatha be named crown prince. She even got Kaikeyi to invoke the offer of two boons to get Dasharatha to agree.

Kaikeyi was a warrior in a conventional sense and had been Dasharatha’s charioteer in a fight against Asuras. She had saved his life in battle. So, a grateful Dasharatha offered two boons. Kaikeyi chose to request the same at a future date. Manthara knew this and used the information to not only get Kaikeyi to do things she would not have, but also gave her the means to achieve what would never have been her goals! Manthara, in my opinion, can definitely be considered a kunoichi.

Image credit – “The Ramayana”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

Shoorpanakha was the sister of Rāvana, King of Lanka. When Rama, Lakshmana and Sita were in the forest on exile (Vanavāsa) she was enamoured with Rama and proposed to him. Rama declined saying that he was already married. So, the spurned Shoorpanakha tried to kill Sita and Lakshmana cut off her nose and ears. Shoorpanakha then goes to Rāvana and convinces him to kidnap Sita. She does so by appealing to Rāvana’s pride and ego. She suggests that Sita’s beauty was such that she could only be Rāvana’s wife. She also goes on to suggest that with Sita as his wife he would be ruler of the three worlds. She never considers the kidnapping as a means of revenge for what was done to her. So, with the clever use of words, Shoorpanakha got Rāvana to kidnap Sita, something he had no need to attempt. In doing so, she precipitated the war of the Ramayana, even if that was not her objective. I would think that Shooprpanakha is a kunoichi, for her constant use of her ability to nudge people’s behaviour. She failed with Rama and Lakshmana, but succeeded with Rāvana, perhaps because she had more information about the character of her brother than she did about the nature of the two princes from Ayodhya.

Image credit – “The Ramayana”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

Lastly, we have the positive example. In the Mahabharata, we see the story of Sāvitri and Satyavan. Satyavan is destined to die early. But Sāvitri is determined to save him. When it is Satyavan’s time, Lord Yama himself arrives to free Satyavan’s soul of its body. But Sāvitri follows Lord Yama. When she is asked to turn back, she has a conversation with Yama. She pleases Yama multiple times with her intelligence, knowledge and communication skills. He offers her boons on multiple occasions as a reward for the same. She regains the kingdom and eyesight lost by her in-laws initially. But as the conversation progresses, she gradually gets Lord Yama to offer more boons and eventually asks for the return of her husband’s life. So, with sheer fortitude, communication skills and knowledge, she gets the Lord of Death and Justice to return a soul which was completely against his mandate! I would say that Sāvitri was the greatest kunoichi ever!

Image credit – “Savitri”, published by Amar Chitra Katha, Kindle edition

Since many of the examples I have shared are of negative characters, I will share what a contributor in the site reactormag.com wrote in her review of the book Kaikeyi by Vaishnavi Patel. The book is supposed to be a feminist retelling of the Ramayana from the perspective of Kaikeyi. She asks why a character must be cast as good and why a villain cannot have story with nuance just based on her or his demands and desires**. This is something I agree with. So, irrespective of whether or not a character in a story is considered bad or not, the traits they exhibit cannot be dismissed. So, if they can be considered kunoichi, we can still respect their abilities, even if not their intentions and actions. And one way to do that is to not dismiss their abilities due to what their lives are remembered for.

That concludes the ideas I wanted to share with this post. It is indeed fortunate to have the festival of Holi in the same month where women’s achievements are being celebrated. Even if a part of the festival is named after a villain whose destruction symbolizes the triumph of Dharma, it perhaps reveals a woman with great achievement and reminds us of the participation of women even in covert activities over millennia.

Notes:

* https://www.amazon.com/Ninja-Ancient-Warriors-History-Ninjutsu-ebook/dp/B00E78HSDI?ref_=ast_author_dp

** https://reactormag.com/book-reviews-kaikeyi-by-vaishnavi-patel/

Effort, luck, effectiveness, morality – some thoughts. Also, why do you train?

Vikram M R, , , , , , , 1 Comment

The renowned author Salman Rushdie won the Peace Price of the German Book Trade for 2023. He started his award acceptance speech, in Oct ’23, with a reference to a story from the Panchatantra. The Panchatantra is a work of literature from ancient India which was used for the education of princes and contains several tales/fables that are an exploration of human nature. Mr. Rushdie refers to a tale about two jackals. The characters in many stories in the Panchatantra are anthropomorphized animals. A link to the video of the full speech is seen below.

In the speech he specifically mentions why he finds the Panchatantra special. He says that the text does not moralize and that the supposed “good guys” need not win in the stories therein. In the above video, watch between the 1:20 and 5:00 minute mark to listen to the same. This notion of morality not being relevant to a conflict or a difference of opinion and its potential resolution is what inspired this article. Also, this post will be a culmination of ideas flowing through the last two posts, the links1 2 to which are seen in the notes below.

The Panchatantra is supposed to have been compiled around 200 BCE with the specific stories therein being older still. Many stories deal with how to deal with conflict on various levels. There are other Hindu scriptures which are as old or older that do the same and these also depict debates and duels. These were topics of the previous two articles I posted. It is nice to see that we as a species have not changed in this aspect over many millennia.

In the Tamil movie “Saraswati Sabatham” (1966), there is a small segment where the lack of morals is clear as is the absence of any labeling as “good guy” or “bad guy”. The movie is about a contest between the three principal Goddesses, Lakshmi, Saraswati and Parvati, when they try to determine whose blessing can take their respective devotee farthest in life. The movie ends with all being shown to be equal. The segment I am referring to has absolutely no bearing on the main story. It just sets up the beginning of the story of the person who receives the blessing of Goddess Parvati. A link to the movie is seen below. One only needs to watch between the 1:04:00 and 1:09:00 mark to see the segment I am referring to.

In the segment I am referring to, a wrestler who holds the title of the “Court Wrestler” is worried. He has to fight against another wrestler who was formerly his student. His student has surpassed him in ability and he feels he will lose, and more importantly, lose the title of “Court Wrestler” (Aasthaana Mallan). His sister gives him an idea on how to win the wrestling bout. He turns up at the venue of the fight with a ladle and a plate. His student who is cocky and sure of victory asks what his former teacher is doing with kitchen utensils. The master responds saying that he has taught his student everything he knows except the skill with the utensils he is carrying.

The student is flustered and loses his confidence instantly. He says that he cannot challenge him anymore, for he has to learn this last skill before going up against his teacher. He thus concedes defeat and the teacher keeps his tile as “Court Wrestler”. Let us consider the “good and bad” and “morality” in this situation.

The teacher is most interested in keeping his title. He is also concerned because he is not capable of defeating his student. He is not concerned by the lesser wrestler (himself) keeping the title of “Court Wrestler”; only the best should have the title for that person takes on the best from other states. So he is likely letting down his king, court and country here. Also, a teacher should be proud of his student surpassing him due to his teaching! This trait is missing in this teacher! So, is he a good guy? Likely not. But is he a bad guy because he is attached to the privileges that come with his position at court? Likely not. It is no different from any senior in a modern day organization or a sporting team holding on to a post or position beyond the time when they still deserve it. They are messing with the dreams and career progression of many that might be deserving. So, the teacher is not a bad guy right? Most likely. The teacher is just a normal guy, not specifically good or bad.

Now consider the student. In the little that we see of him, he was cocky and was looking forward to showing down his teacher. Even if his teacher was an opponent, disrespect was possibly not the right attitude, especially in a place in ancient Bharat, where a teacher is considered a form of God. So is the student as good guy? Likely not.

If he was so sure of himself, should he not have tried to match his skills against those of his former teacher even if there was one single skill he was not trained in? One that would have seemed suspect to anyone watching? He fell for the deception. It seems like he was more worried about not losing rather than about achieving the title of “Court Wrestler”. Does this make him a less deserving martial artist? Likely not, or does it? So, the student is not a good guy, nor is he a totally deserving winner/martial artist. Again, this makes him just another normal guy, not a good guy or a bad guy.

So, both of them are normal guys. One gets lucky in that he has a sister who helps him win through deception. This is exactly like in the Panchatantra, deception is possible and so it is used, it does not matter if the one who loses out due to its use is the more deserving wrestler. The fact that a position was attached to the match made it more than a wrestling match. The prestige and privilege of the position of “Court Wrestler” triggered the use of deception.

The stakes, be it in a duel, a debate, an argument or any other conflict, drive the use of deception. This in turn means that a biased opinion with information that is not entirely true takes centre stage and creates a supporting narrative. In my previous two articles, honour of the court/king was one motivating factor that led to deception being used. I had shared a few examples of debates from Indian history in my article related to “Tilakāshta Mahisha Bandhana”1. I am not going to reiterate the same here. With hindsight the end result of these debates show that the stakes of the same were very high at times. This perhaps increases the attractiveness of the use of deception.

When deception is used, it is quite likely that it is to overcome something that is lacking. Add the stakes or motivation to win and the drive to use deception is magnified manifold. If one is going to gain wealth or power or influence or comfort or convenience, reputation or the improvement/security of one’s own or that of one’s family as a result of a victory, deception is absolutely the right way to go. These factors in the negative, if one is going to lose something, either material or abstract (pride, reputation and such), the urge to overcome a disparity with deception is perhaps even greater, and impossible to overcome.

In the case of the debate, what was lacking was knowledge/wisdom and experience. In the duel it was perhaps a disparity in strength or speed or skill or a decrease in skill/ability due to a lack of experience or practice or age. This disparity in the duel and therefore the martial arts sheds light on two aspects.

One is the objective of the martial art and the other is the reason for the practice of the martial art. These two are very important in the practice of the martial arts and also in a discussion regarding the attributes and benefits/drawbacks of the same. While looking at these two aspects, it needs to be reiterated that there is no right or wrong in these debates. They are just opinions. There is no moralizing or good or bad guys here, just like the idea we started with.

When I say “objective of the martial art”, this can be further divided into two parts. The first part involves the history and tradition of the martial art and the application of the same either as applied in the original timeframe or in contemporary times. The second involves the interpretation of the previous point and its application by the specific teacher or dojo/akhada/kalari/gym teaching the art form. The “reason for practice of the martial art” is specific to the individual who is either training a specific martial art or is looking to begin practicing one.

Every martial art, however old, has a history and a tradition. This has an influence on what is taught and shared. It also affects what is can be used for. The change in application and addition to the art form over time impacts the same as well. The other part of this is the teacher. A teacher can choose to focus more on the historical and traditional aspects or adapt these as she or he chooses to contemporary times as one sees fit. This could also mean that a teacher focuses on specific aspects of a given martial art form and either lets the others go or teaches very little of those.

The history, tradition and geography of origin could inform,

  • Use of weapons & armour
  • Focus on striking or grappling or their combination
  • Speed of movements
  • Focus on hands or legs or a combination
  • The agility or gymnastic ability of the art form
  • Any others…

The following are also a result of the history and tradition of the art form.

  • The focus on spiritual and meditative aspects as an aid to development in the martial art
  • If the art form can be or has developed into a duelling friendly version
  • If the martial art is a modern day sport (with defined rules, weight and gender categories)

Different people train the martial arts for different reasons. These reasons could change or stay the same over time, with experience and with age. The reasons for training could vary from,

  • A need for self-defence or self-protection
  • Sporting skill development
  • Fitness of mind, body or both
  • Improvement in focus and balance
  • Self-discipline
  • Ability to fight
  • Develop aggression
  • Develop self-control
  • Overall self-development
  • Develop gymnastic ability
  • To look cool and impressive
  • Beat the shit out of someone
  • Meditation
  • Sporting excellence
  • Ability to choreograph and enact action sequences on stage or film or book
  • Create art in video games or paint and draw action and characters performing the same
  • Just for fun!
  • Who knows how many more!

All the reasons for training are valid, as are the awareness, interpretation and teaching styles of the art form. WHAT IS KEY IS THE FIT BETWEEN WHAT IS TAUGHT AND ITS OBJECTIVE AND WHAT THE PERSON TRAINING IS LOOKING FOR. A student of the martial arts needs to realize from time to time why she or he is training. This objective should match with what is being taught. If it does, keep training. If it does not, quit and find a different art from or a different teacher, or both.

In the above image, the greater the area of intersection, the better it is for a student

The other side of this is that a teacher needs be able to communicate what she or he is teaching and what the application of that teaching is likely to be, for a student in contemporary times. This communication could be needed from time to time as well, for what the teacher is teaching and the reasons for the same are likely to change over time. A part of being a martial arts teacher is to be able to communicate this to students.

Both of these require effort. And this effort is part of the martial training. I opine that it is a part of the martial journey (musha shugyo) that has always been a part of the training of the martial arts. This journey is both external and internal to an individual. Identifying the reason for training and for teaching what is being taught, is likely part of the internal journey while finding and training with the right teacher is external. People still travel across countries to train with teachers of their choice. At the same time, people spend a lot of time trying to figure out why they train and what various art forms and specific teachers have on offer.

Once this is part of an iterative process, whether or not one choose to listen to the fans or critics of specific martial art forms or teachers is irrelevant. Both can be a positive experience to add to one’s own learning and progress. Knowing the answers to why one trains and whether what one is training matches the same informs a practitioner of what aspect of one’s training needs to tested, and changed if need be.

On some YouTube channels, I have heard the term “pressure testing” used for checking if one is capable of fighting. The fighting could refer to a real situation, a street fight, sport combat, knife attack or any other situation requiring self-defence. This means checking if one’s training works when an attacker with real intent goes all out to harm you, even in a controlled training environment. For a lot of practitioners, a failure at this could mean that the martial art or the teacher might not be the right fit for the practitioner. They are correct, if “self-defence” was the only criterion being considered.

If the objective was any of the others that I referred to earlier, then the test for the efficacy of the art form has to change as well. Even while just considering the “real fight” simulation, factors other than those considered earlier have to be factored in. These include the socio-cultural aspects of the geography where the practice is occurring, and whether the art form is focusing more on traditional aspects.

Based on these parameters, a martial artist will have to recognize if the “pressure test” being applied is relevant at all. The test and art form need to match as well. If they do not, and the practitioner still wants to try a test that does not fit the art form, then suitable changes have to be made to the art form being practiced; otherwise just train the art form from which the test originates.

Martial arts are evolving all the time. Newer art forms like MMA specialize in close quarters fighting. So, if one wants to test herself or himself in a situation for which MMA was fine-tuned, the first step is to check if that scenario is what one was training for, and if the art form one has been practicing is geared for the same. If the art form is designed for armed and armoured fighting in either a melee or a duel, or if the art form is geared for military use or if it is for fitness only, the practitioner should perhaps reconsider – do not fight an MMA practitioner when one has not trained the forms requisite for the same!

If the test was known and the questions mentioned earlier were answered, perhaps the traditional martial art masters in China would have known to not fight Xu Xiaodong, an expert at MMA. This was something I referred to in my article about Tilakāshta Mahisha Bandhana1. The masters of the traditional forms should have been able to answer what the application of their teaching is and whether it is applicable in a test set for MMA. Perhaps an inability to answer this is why they were defeated, in all likelihood causing more harm to their reputation than to their physical selves.

But there is a counter to this observation. Was it the worry of the loss of reputation that led them to accept the MMA challenge in the first place? Were their students expecting their teaching to work in a modern day unarmed duel which is the MMA? Would their students have moved to other art forms if they realized that it could not? If yes, then the stakes for this “martial debate” was reputation and a loss of business. When stakes like these are present, how can a practitioner not accept the challenge?

The masters could have the explained the application to the students and to themselves, if those were indeed the questions. If the application was not MMA, they could have simply refused the challenge. Or should they not have used deception to win the fight? What the deception should have been is anyone’s guess. More importantly, did the masters of the traditional art forms deceive themselves by getting into the duel in the first place? If they did, is it not likely that they did not ask the questions regarding the applications of their art form earlier? These questions can be pondered, and answers sought at an individual level.

It is said that Xu Xiaodong faced trouble with the authorities for defaming Chinese traditions, after his victories. So, was this a smart deception used by other masters of traditional art forms to prevent him from challenging them? 🙂 Was this deception not wonderful? Bringing in an opponent (the authorities) to a duel he could never counter? After all, when Musashi was facing a long sword, he created for himself a bokken that was even longer1. He asked about and found his own disadvantage before the duel. Remember, there is no judgement or moralizing here as we stated earlier. Just survival, considering the stakes (life or death).

The process of questions and answers with oneself for reasons of understanding the self is part of “Swayambodha”. The process of knowing the opponent is called “Shatrubodha”. These are terms from Sanskrit and other Indian vernacular languages. They are vitally important in all conflicts, from duels between individuals all the way to those between nations and civilizations. I have discussed these in detail in a dedicated article, the link to which is seen in the notes below5.

I personally am of the opinion that martial arts are all about conflict management. Knowing this is as much a mind-set or mentality as any. The questions martial artists ask of themselves form a part of the mind-set as well. Adapting to a situation, identifying the strength & shortcomings of the self and the opponent(s) – making these a habit with training is part of the development of the mind-set/mentality. Adapting to a situation includes determining when deception is applicable. It is just another tool to be used as and when required, to adapt successfully.

Once a mind-set is identified, relentless effort is spent in internalizing and training the same. The same is true when a habit has to be unlearned. To give examples of mentality, I will share two video links. The first is from the YouTube channel Hard2Hurt. It is driven by Icy Mike**, who I believe is a former law enforcement professional and an avid MMA practitioner. He speaks of the mentality to cause maximum damage when possible, as part of his MMA training, in the link seen below. Watch between the 7:30 and 9:30 mark for the specific statement about the mind-set.

Lynn C Thompson is the founder of the knife and weapon making company Cold Steel. He is a lifelong martial arts aficionado with a background in Filipino martial arts. He had a big role in designing many of Cold Steel’s iconic knife designs. He sold the company in 2020. Lynn Thompson refers to the advantages of carrying large knives over smaller ones. He says this specifically because he feels many people carry smaller knives to be “politically correct”. If one listens to him in the video linked below, it is pretty clear that the need to stop worrying about carrying a large knife is more of a mind-set change. I believe this video is addressing an American audience, where carrying knives is a part of the culture. It would not really matter in India, where hardly anyone of us carries knives. But the ideas expressed hold in either cultural context.

I am neither endorsing nor warning against either mind-set expressed in the two videos. They are just illustrative of how martial art practitioners form a mentality as part of their training. These mind-sets are a product of asking questions of oneself and identifying answers one knows will work for oneself. They are the end result of a lot of discussions and training, both internal and external.

Once (or if) a practitioner can accept that martial arts is about conflict management, identifying what “test” to set for oneself and one’s art form is also affected. It is not limited to the test set by the mind-set of a practitioner of a different art form. I will use two examples to illustrate the same.

A few months ago, there was a discussion across multiple YouTube channels about what would happen if rapier met katana in 16th century Japan in a duel. The YouTubers partaking of the discussion were experienced martial artists (usually in HEMA – Historical European Martial Arts). One thing most agreed upon is that there is no evidence in primary sources of this duel happening. So, this was a speculative duel. There was discussion about the advantage or disadvantage due to the length of the two weapons and of the rapier being a one handed weapon while the katana is usually used with two hands. Even the side arms like the dagger with the rapier and the wakizashi with the katana were considered.

Many good points were put forth about what a potential duel of this nature would result in. The outcome of the discussion is not important, nor is the “who would win most times” aspect of this discussion. The entire exercise was awesome fun, but counter factual with no way of being certain of a specific outcome.  I am sharing the link to two videos on this topic by Matt Easton of the YouTube channel Scholagladatoria. It is a fantastic channel with a lot of information on a wide variety of martial aspects. He has more videos on just the topic of rapiers vs katana. I am not sharing all the links here, but I would recommend everyone to have a look at those.

I would add one point to the list of counter factuals of this discussion. If adaptation was a key aspect of martial arts around the time of Musashi, when this speculative duel was set, would the odachi or nodachi not come back into vogue? Both the odachi (very long tachi) and the nodachi (a long tachi that can be used in an open field) were older than the katana. If the rapier had a reach advantage due to its greater length (as it was specialized for dueling), would that not have led to a resurgence of, or at least, made more commonplace, the use of longer blades on Japanese swords, like the odachi or nodachi? We will never know, but perhaps it would, due to the adaptation/deception mind-set. After all, to reiterate, Musashi did adapt to overcome Sasaki Kojiro’s longer blade. Musashi is also credited with wielding two swords, which would be the counter to the use of the rapier and dagger, as the YouTubers also recognized.

The other example comes from the term “Coup de Jarnac”3. This term is used to refer to an attack that is “barely legal” (perhaps unfair) and therefore unexpected. In other words, this is deception for certain. The term comes from a judicial duel that occurred in 1547 in France. The Baron of Jarnac, Guy Chabon fenced Francis de Vivonne, Lord of La Chataigner in a duel. De Vivonne was a very good fencer and Guy Chabon supposedly stood no chance of winning. So he trained with an Italian fencing master to achieve an attack which was legal but looked down upon. Due to this nature of the attack (it was to the leg) it was not going to be expected and gave Guy Chabon the best chance of victory.

With the effort put in to perform this attack, Chabon won the duel against all odds. Due to this victory an unexpected attack which may be unfair but still legal, came to be called a “Coup de Jarnac”, after the Baron of Jarnac. This shows that the Baron put in effort in identifying his weakness, the strength of his opponent and found a teacher who could help him overcome his shortcomings. He put in further effort to train the move suggested by his teacher and eventually won the duel. Of course, one has to understand that for all these things to have fallen in place perfectly, he had luck on his side. Guy Chabon had in effect adapted to the situation by applying deception successfully. This episode perfectly encapsulates the aspects of the mind-set of adaptation, use of deception and being lucky*.

It is this development of a mind-set as part of training that lends the concepts of martial arts for application in the corporate world. This is perhaps why the “Go Rin no Sho” (The Book of Five Rings) by Miyamoto Musashi is popular in some circles as learning for corporate leadership4. While on the topic of Musashi, I will share something that I was told by my teacher and mentors in the Bujinkan. This was something they were told by Soke Hatsumi Masaaki of the Bujinkan system of martial arts.

Hatsumi Sensei apparently said that Miyamoto Musashi was very lucky, apart from being a great swordsman. His luck was more in the manner of the era in which he lived. Musashi fought his duels after the Battle of Sekigahāra when the Edo period had begun and large battles were no longer a matter of course. This meant that he lived in an era of peace and hence could stick to duels, one on one. He could write about his experiences later in life and achieve fame. There were likely practitioners of the swords before Musashi who were as good as or better than he was. They lived in an age of constant warfare and hence did not have an opportunity to compile their thoughts and achieve the fame they perhaps deserved, if at all they lived long a long life. A surfeit of war all over Japan meant that any swordsman likely would not live long enough to be well known, unlike Musashi.

Musashi became a great martial artist through his efforts and achieved fame by way of the luck that came his way. Perhaps his luck was a manifestation of the efforts that went into his training. There is a similar example of Hatsumi Sensei being lucky in a duel against an accomplished Sumo wrestler. Sensei is supposed to have said that his chances of winning were small. But the duel never occurred as his opponent was injured in an attack in a bar before the scheduled fight and passed away due to the injuries incurred. Sensei never had to endure the fight due to luck6.

In these cases, there was no lack of effort. Luck was a final piece of the puzzle, layered over the mentality developed to constantly learn and adapt to the situation as it evolves. This leads to the final point I have in this article. In my previous article I had shared examples of a host of stories which emphasize the superiority of brain over brawn2. Many of these stories are targeted towards children. These are very revealing.

When we try to instill values in a child through stories and ensure that they imbibe the fact that intelligence is more important compared to physical abilities, what is the objective? Could it be that we do not want young people to focus on anything competitive that requires physical attributes? This includes sports and definitely the martial arts. Further, most of the examples I shared were from the late 80s and the first half of the 90s. Could the value systems of Indian society at that time be responsible for this?

I opine that the answer is yes. That was a time when the unquestioning following of rules was greatly appreciated. Being a follower was a preferred trait in school and in large families. It was a time when “sacrifice” was appreciated. Not “trade off”, but sacrifice. Expecting a reward was never a thing to do; enduring pain and suffering was the way to go. It was a time when making do with less that was needed was celebrated. Curtailing of or not having dreams beyond the raising of one’s own family was an appreciable quality. That was a time of lower technology and far lower economic strength in India.

With the mind-set mentioned above, it was but natural to not do anything out of the ordinary, especially not anything that was competitive, like sport, which needed one to learn to win. Also, sport needed investment beyond regular schooling which was beyond many, and worst of all, it meant time away from studies (horror of horrors!). What if marks reduced (horror on a cosmic scale!) due to sports which had no future in India? With this being the situation, martial arts, even martial sports, were to be stayed away from, and the best way to do this was to condition kids from a young age against physical culture. Just say that physical abilities are useless, work only on your intelligence, to get good marks. Build a mind-set to against physical activities.

Contrast this with contemporary India. This mind-set is not gone, but has diminished greatly. All attributes are celebrated, aggression and the ability to be assertive is aspired to (even if in secret many a time). This is a classic case of learning to adapt, to survive in a world that has always respected strength. It was believed if everyone was weak and meek, peace and stability is possible. But once it was realized that anyone who breaks this rule has the greatest advantage, mind-sets changed in a few decades. Now, strength must be achieved and controlled to earn respect. Strength leads to respect leads to the ability to set rules for a prosperous, peaceful society. India is waking up to its martial past and various reasons for training the same are being realized. Train, adapt, evolve and hopefully, stay lucky, and don’t moralize! 😀

Notes:

1 https://mundanebudo.com/2024/02/18/deception-debates-martial-arts-courtly-challenges-tilakashta-mahisha-bandhana/

2 https://mundanebudo.com/2024/02/29/brain-over-brawn-deception-laced-with-luck/

** Icy Mike and a few other martial artists participated in a “Self-defence championship”, which can be watched on the YouTube channel, Martial Arts Journey with Rokas. I am sharing a link to a small part of this below. All of the participants, to the best of my knowledge, believe the ability to fight is all a martial art is about, and have strong opinions about various art forms. This video is only indirectly relevant to this article, hence I am sharing it in the notes section.

3 I am sharing the Wikipedia link to the article on “Coup de Jarnac”. It is in French, but can be translated to English.

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_de_Jarnac

* I am not discussing the climactic duel between Bhima and Duryodhana in the Mahabharata as the factors to describe in that are a lot more. But that duel could be used for the same purpose as the one I have used the term “Coup de Jarnac” for.

4 The Book of Five Rings for Executives by Donald G Krause – I am sharing the link as an example, not as a recommendation, for I have not read it.

https://www.amazon.in/Book-Five-Rings-Executives/dp/1857881338/ref=pd_ci_mcx_mh_mcx_views_1?pd_rd_w=GEBv0&content-id=amzn1.sym.cd312cd6-6969-4220-8ac7-6dc7c0447352%3Aamzn1.symc.ca948091-a64d-450e-86d7-c161ca33337b&pf_rd_p=cd312cd6-6969-4220-8ac7-6dc7c0447352&pf_rd_r=42JAKHXKN57HQK6N19BB&pd_rd_wg=i9gcV&pd_rd_r=0a2b1154-6c7b-4712-99c2-20526997d22c&pd_rd_i=1857881338

5 https://mundanebudo.com/2023/07/06/connect-control-part-1-connect-control-shatrubodha-in-flow/

6 The article in the link seen below explains Hatsumi Sensei’s potential challenge with Rikidozan, the highly accomplished wrestler.

https://bujinkansantamonica.blogspot.com/2011/12/hatsumi-sensei-vs-pro-wrestler.html

Brain over Brawn – Deception laced with Luck

Vikram M R, , , , , , 1 Comment

Deep Gratitude before I begin – I am extremely grateful to my parents and two of my maternal cousins for being instrumental in my acquiring the comics and book that are references for this article. These were acquired over many years when I was younger, at a time when books and comics were not readily available like they are today. Thank you so very much!

Also, I must express my thanks to Amar Chitra Katha, the publishers of Tinkle Comics. Without these, my childhood would be unimaginable in hindsight! The publications by Amar Chitra Katha (IBH) were a treasure trove of learning for a kid and a gateway to further reading as an adult.

In my previous article I discussed how deception is a valid and expected part of debates and the martial arts, specifically when it is a duel. Further, when there are debates about the martial arts, deception is likely to be used in those as well. The focus of that article was more on the tradition of debates and duels, and modern day debates (including about the martial arts). The link to the previous article is seen in the notes below1.

In this article, I will delve into how “deception” is an exalted concept which is used to express how wits, intelligence and intellectual capacities are superior to physical abilities. Also, the use of the mind (intelligence) is supposed to always prevail over the use of the body (muscles, strength, speed). In simpler terms, “Deception” is the key ingredient in “Brain over Brawn”.

There are several stories from cultures all over the world which celebrate “Brain over Brawn”. There is one key aspect that all these stories have in common, but is never highlighted. It is the presence of “LUCK”. The protagonist is always lucky though this is never explicitly mentioned. It does not need to be mentioned as the antagonist is usually physically very capable but generally stupid (even if this is not explicitly mentioned). The protagonist is vastly more intelligent compared to the antagonist while being an absolute weakling in terms of physical ability (comparatively speaking).

Let me share examples where brain over brawn is the key. In these stories, “brain over brawn” ONLY means that the opponent is deceived, nothing else.

Consider “The Brave Little Tailor” from the Grimm’s fairy tales. Here, a tailor kills seven flies and claims that he killed “Seven at one stroke”. Gullible people and giants mistake this statement to mean that he is a hero with great physical prowess. He goes on to use his wits to defeat several giants and a boar in tasks that prove him worthy of great reward, a marriage to the princess of the land and half the kingdom. In all these tasks, he talks his way out of situations. None of the giants ever looks too closely at what he is saying or doing. This is really lucky for him as even a little scratch at his statements would have meant that he was going to be crushed to pulp.

Image credits (L & R) – “The Brave Little Tailor” from “The Beacon Readers Book 6, William Tell”

Consider the Roma folktale “Stefan and the Dragon”. A Dragon which is talkative (as they happen to be!) threatens to eat Stefan, a farmer. The Dragon is supremely powerful and can fly, but of course, is stupid. Stefan outwits the dragon and also gets it give him its gold (dragons always have gold don’t they, with no economics involved). Stefan is supremely lucky, because the Dragon is stupid, for his ideas are simplistic in the extreme and would withstand no scrutiny at all!

Image credits (Top & Bottom) – “Stefan and the Dragon” from Tinkle Comics 184

Consider a tale of Pandit Ramakrishna of Tenāli in the court of Vijayanagar, more commonly called Tenāli Rama. A story related to Tanāli Rama was the key for the previous article and established deception as a norm. There is another story related to him which involves wrestlers, establishing a link between a debate and a “martial debate”, a duel in other words! 🙂

A very strong and capable wrestler challenges the court of King Krishnadevaraya of Vijayanagar to a duel. The court wrestlers are not sure they can prevail over the challenger. So, the honour of king and court are at stake. As usual Pandit Ramakrishna takes up the challenge to defeat the wrestler. There are multiple versions of what he does to win the wrestling challenge. I will share the two I am familiar with. Both involve deception and luck.

Tenāli Rama identifies where the challenger is staying. A day before the duel, at a place near the residence, he sets up a charade. Rama is acting like he is training for the upcoming wrestling duel. But the wrestlers he is practicing with are in on the plan. They enact elaborate displays to show that they are in serious trouble against Rama and defeating them is child’s play for him. This whole act happens at a distance where the wrestler cannot see all the details clearly, but can get an idea of what is happening. Watching this display, he feels he is outmatched and either accepts defeat or runs away before the actual duel with Ramakrishna. Either way, the honour of Vijayanagar is saved. Rama was lucky of course. If the wrestler had stayed despite the act or moved in for a closer inspection, the deception would be rendered useless and Rama would have lost. But his luck held and he won a wrestling match with his wits! This is one version of the story.

In another version, Tenāli Rama challenges the wrestler to a feat of strength on the day of the duel before the wrestling match, to prove his strength. The wrestler accepts. Rama says that since he is supposedly far stronger than Rama is, he should perform with his eyes open what Rama does with his eyes closed (or is it that Rama is so strong that he can perform with his eyes closed what the challenger will need both his eyes for? I cannot recollect). Rama then proceeds to close his eyes and pours sand over the eyelids. 😀 He then asks the wrestler to do the same with his eyes open, which of course he cannot do. Thus, Rama wins and it is a case of brain defeating brawn. The wrestler does not think to refuse the challenge to a feat of strength as it was ONLY supposed to a wrestling duel. If he had he might have won, but maybe he was so used to challenges he accepted out of habit. So, it was a case of luck again, albeit considerably less than in the other cases; it could be more about knowing your opponent here.

This version of the story leads us to another story where “feats of strength” are required before a duel. In the story “The Clever Court Jester” (the Jester is always clever and a saviour isn’t he! (I have never heard of a she as a jester)), a Giant threatens to take over a kingdom if he cannot be defeated in a wrestling match. If he is defeated though, he will give a lot of gold to the king (Giants also always have gold, maybe they are the pioneers of protection rackets 😛 ). The Jester comes to the kingdom’s rescue as expected. He challenges the Giant to 3 feats of strength and outwits the “stupid” Giant to win the gold.

Image credit – “The Clever Court Jester” from Tinkle Comics 176

The Giant then invites the Jester to his home for further challenges. The Jester accepts, outwits the Giant some more, reinforcing the stupidity of the latter and wins even more gold. All through, the Jester is lucky because the Giant is stupid and never looks closely at what is going on. Did the Jester know the Giant was stupid and was this information available to him alone and no one else in the King’s court? We do not know, but it is possible, as everyone but the Jester is worried. We are never told that the Jester knew, so we can safely attribute his victory to deception, aided very heavily by luck.

Image credit – “The Clever Court Jester” from Tinkle Comics 176

This same beat relating to a physically stronger opponent being defeated at physical challenges by a weaker individual due to the use of superior intellectual abilities goes on and on and on. I am sharing a host of additional examples below. I am not going into the details of most as the point is already made, but I would recommend reading the stories. They are short and great fun, and instructive in many ways.

In “The Dreadful Guest”, in Russia, a talkative (surprise!) and stupid (surprise surprise!) Dragon gate-crashes the Tsar’s banquet and is defeated by being outwitted (it is told a variant of “look behind you” *eye rolls*). The stupidity of the Dragon is the luck of the dragon slayer Alyosha Popovich.

Image credit – “The Dreadful Guest” from Tinkle Comics 178

In “Smudgeface”, a story based on a fairy tale, the protagonist Smudgeface, captures two dangerous animals, a boar and a bull and becomes a minister! Based on the manner in which he captures the animals, which the people and the king call “monsters”, the lack of brains here seems not of the animals but of the humans! Smudgeface got lucky in having to be an administrator for a very simple folk!

Image credit – “Smudgeface” from Tinkle Comics 299

In the Irish folktale, “The Tailor from Galway” (tailor again!), Tom, the tailor, outwits a Giant with normal siege tactics (which no one else in the Kingdom of Dublin could think of!) to build a castle in JUST THREE DAYS. 🙂 He later outwits the same Giant to scare him away from the kingdom. He receives the hand of the Princess in marriage (as one is entitled to perhaps, *eye rolls*). Tom’s luck is the stupidity of the Giant and the extreme inability of everyone else in the kingdom!

Image credit – “The Tailor from Galway” from Tinkle Comics 275

In the story, “The Resourceful Woodcutter”, Gopu the woodcutter outwits remarkably stupid bandits to escape death, gets them arrested and wins reward money. All actions happen and succeed through luck alone!

Image credit – “The Resourceful Woodcutter” from Tinkle Comics 201

Now we move on to stories where the main character does not do much, but reaps rewards. This happens due to the actions of others or a lack of ability on the part of the main character.

In the Burmese (Myanmarese) folktale “Lucky Po”, Po, a poor man, who is also hard of hearing relieves four Ogres (Giants) of their gold by scaring the living daylights out of them. He does this with no effort and due to his disability. This is perhaps the epitome of luck, as the lack of ability became an advantage compounded by the stupidity of the Ogres. Of course, where there are Giants, there is always gold to be had!

Image credit – “Lucky Po” from Tinkle Comics 189

In the story “Una and the Red Giant”, Una is the wife of Sigrun, who is the strongest Giant in the land. The Red Giant (dun dun dun) wants to challenge Sigrun, who is too gentle to fight. So, Una outwits the Red Giant with food and adjectives! Peace and gentleness reign in the end. 😀 Sigrun wins without having to fight, by literally leaving things to his wise wife (LUCKY for him)!

Image credit – “Una and the Red Giant” from Tinkle Comics 266

In the story “The Drummer”, based on a fairy tale, David, the drummer, has to rescue princesses from an evil Witch. To do so, he outwits, wait for it, Giants! But this is only a part of the story. Later he has to overcome the Witch. In this, one of the princesses he has to rescue, rescues him three times! The other princesses are supposed to exist but play no role in the story. So, David is rescued by the princess and in turn rescues them. 🙂 Of course, he is handsomely rewarded for his efforts. David is lucky because the Giants are stupid and the Princess already knows how to defeat the Evil Witch!

Image credit – “The Drummer” from Tinkle Comics 307

In the last two stories above, there is an interesting segue. Character and effort of an individual leads to luck. Sigrun is gentle and hence a loving wife rescues him. David is gentle and puts in a lot of effort at things he has never attempted before, which leads to luck and reward. This leads us to one more example.

Consider the story, “The Tailor and The Hunter”, based on a German folktale (of course the hero is a tailor, no spoilers there). A tailor and a hunter go on an adventure. The Tailor is kind hearted, while the Hunter is haughty. Due his kindness, the Tailor gets lucky in several instances including in slaying a Dragon (duh!). The Hunter goes home empty handed after trying to deceive his companion while the Tailor weds a Princess in the end! The Tailor accomplishes everything only with luck, while the Hunter, a physically more capable individual, is relegated to being a villain.

Image credit – “The Tailor and The Hunter” from Tinkle Comics 284

So, we have looked a dozen stories to see how deception is the key to great achievements. And the deception would never work but for a lot of luck. But we are not done yet. Stories never end, do they?

There is an Indonesian folktale, set in Sumatra, called “The Victory of the Buffalo”. In this tale, a village is facing an attack by the army of King Sanagara, unless they give in to his suzerainty. They do not want to surrender, but cannot fight the powerful army either. So, they choose to use their wits, brain over military brawn. They make an agreement with the King that a fight between buffaloes will decide the fate of the village, instead of a fight between the army and the villagers, thus staving off bloodshed. The deal is that if the King’s buffalo wins, the village will surrender, but if the buffalo from the village wins, the King will leave them alone.

The King obviously finds a large powerful animal which cannot be defeated. The villagers resort to their wits again to overcome the lack of a powerful buffalo. They find a buffalo calf which is a few days old, separate it from its mother and starve it for a few couple of days. They also attach sharp iron horns to its tiny ones.

On the day of the fight, the calf mistakes the large buffalo to be its mother and runs to it to suckle, as it is starving. The King’s buffalo sees no threat in the calf and makes no move to attack. The iron horns on the calf badly injure the larger animal when the former tries to suckle. So, the calf defeats the larger animal and the village retains its independence.

This is deception and luck on two fronts! The iron horns were neither detected nor objected to. The larger animal choose not to harm the calf. This behaviour is not always what can be expected. Lastly, the King agreed to a buffalo fight and on losing, kept his word. The villagers got lucky with King Sanagara being a man of his word. But the efforts of the villagers, the planning they put in and identification of their own weakness, all played a part and they could be said to have earned their luck. Additionally, this shows that luck can be factor even when animals fight, even if it is at the behest of humans!

Image credit – “The victory of the Buffalo” from Tinkle Comics 225

Considering that we are discussing deception in warfare and luck saving the day, let us look at another story. The story “How the Ohias were outwitted” is based on an African folktale which describes how the gentle and outnumbered tribe of the Lumas defeated the tribe of the Ohias in the fight for the waters of the lake Lumai. The Lumas tied torches to sheep and made the Ohias think they were outnumbered during a night attack. This convinced the Ohias to surrender and retreat. This is a classic military deception trope used in many stories across cultures. The same is shown in the Hindi movie “Bajirao Mastani” and the Telugu movie “Baahubali 2”, with cattle being used instead of sheep. The side being outwitted would have won if only they had looked a little more closely. But the effort was commendable and the luck of the winning side held out, perhaps deservedly so2.

Image credits (L & R) – “How the Ohias were outwitted” from Tinkle Comics 286

So, one important aspect of overcoming an adversary is to use deception and this idea is prevalent in so many stories because it is accepted as a common sense approach to a conflict. As observed in all the examples above, deception involves the use of wits, or intellectual abilities to counter physical abilities. I had discussed this aspect in an earlier article titled “Might is Right, always”. A link to the same is seen in the notes below3.

Why is this notion of “brain over brawn” prevalent across cultures? We get a partial answer in another story. In the story titled “The Stronger Strength”, two students of Sage Vishwamitra, Madhur and Rahul have a dispute over what one should pursue, strength or intelligence. Vishwamitra settles this with a demonstration. No one can break a branch that Rahul can. But 5 students together can do what Rahul can. However, only Madhur can answer difficult questions. No matter how many other students put their heads together, they cannot replicate the same. So, strength can be overcome with numbers, but intelligence is singular and cannot be overcome by numbers. Thus “intelligence is superior to strength”. This could be why “brain over brawn” has become a truism.

Image credit – “The Stronger Strength” from Tinkle Comics 308

The reason I mentioned that this was a partial answer is twofold. Firstly, there is a thread through all the stories that the strong individual is not very smart, to the point of having no common sense and being downright dumb. This is never true in reality. Physically capable people can be as intelligent as anyone else. Plus, being strong and physically capable requires intelligence in the real world, for that ability requires planned effort, among other things. The reason the opposite can be shown in stories is because monsters, who are born strong with no effort to build the strength, fill the role of physical superiority (Giants, Ogres, Dragons, Witches, Boars, Bulls, Big Cats, Bandits etc.).

The second reason is that in the current times we live in, technology has reached a stage where intelligence or knowledge is no longer singular. Just as brawn can be overcome with numbers, brain power can be easily overcome with technology. The story of Vishwamitra’s students might have held true in the past, but is no longer something that can be relied upon.

But one thing is true from the stories. The stories suggest deception to counter physical strength and also the strength of numbers. This is another way of saying that one should not give up and apply oneself with every ounce of knowledge (individual or collective) to overcome the adversary. This application will reveal a path that likely involves deception. It must be said, “use deception” only means doing something that the opponent(s) does not expect. If there are 10 people with a knife, bring a gun with a magazine of 15 bullets is roughly what the idea suggests. This again harks back to “Might is Right”. One needs to identify the might & weakness of the opponent and the self, then apply them appropriately to achieve the best outcome for oneself3.

There is a character named Cadsuane Melaidhrin in the popular fantasy series “The Wheel of Time” by Robert Jordan (James Oliver Rigney Jr.). In the 9th book of the series “Winter’s Heart”, this character makes an interesting observation. This observation comes after she and another of the “good” characters in the series have to be anti-heroes. Cadsuane is nearly 300 years old and worldly wise. She says something to the effect that every fight is always unfair. I do not remember the exact words she uses. But the gist of it, as I would say it is this. If a fight were fair, it would be a sport. The objective of every fight is to make it as unfair as possible to the other side, so that one’s own side wins with minimal damage to achieve what is in one’s own best interest. When this is understood, deception is par for the course. If deception is par for the course, brain and brawn become the same, for brain is just another variety of brawn. There is no difference anymore.

Once we accept that deception and intellectual abilities are just another form of strength, we can see very clearly what happens when luck is not present with the help of two stories. One story is from the Panchatantra, called “The Camel who was beguiled by his companions”. The other is a story called “The King’s Choice” from Tinkle Comics. The story from Tinkle comics is clearly inspired by the one from the Panchatantra as I see it. The ending is changed for reasons I do not know, but the two different endings perfectly demonstrate how luck is needed for deception to succeed. The “luck” might be as simple as there being no unknown factors influencing the end result. I am not stating that luck is the most important factor; just that a lack of it is detrimental to the effort that went into the deception.

In both the stories, a crow, a fox and a leopard are the close associates of their king, the lion. A camel becomes a part of their group. There comes a time when the lion cannot hunt due to an injury. This leads to all of them being close to starvation. The crow, fox and leopard conspire to make the lion kill the camel, but the lion does not like the idea. So, the trio decide to make the camel offer itself up as for the lion. To do this, they decide to offer themselves up as food, following which the camel would do the same out of propriety.

So, after the crow, fox and leopard have offered themselves up as food for the lion, the camel does the same. Here the two stories diverge. In the Panchatantra, the deception is successful. The lion accepts the camel’s offer to its horror. The camel is killed and the other four fest on it. In “The King’s choice”, the lion accepts all offers and says that he will eat them in the order in which they offered themselves up. So, the deception fails and the trio take to their feet, while the friendship between the camel and lion endures.

In the story from the Panchatantra, the fox separately convinces the lion to accept only the camel’s offer, but this detail is not there in the story from Tinkle Comics. Irrespective of this detail, the observation holds. If the camel was lucky, the conspiracy would have failed in the Panchatantra as well, if the lion had disregarded the fox even after the conversation. But luck sided with the crow, fox and leopard. The opposite happened in “The King’s choice”. Luck deserted the conspiring trio and the camel survived. This should demonstrate the importance, however limited, of luck, in the success of a deception.

Image credit – “The Camel who was beguiled by his companions” from “Panchatantra: Crows and Owls and other stories” published by Amar Chitra Katha

Image credit – “The King’s Choice” from Tinkle Comics 294

Mine is a blog about the martial arts (specifically the Bujinkan) and all things Indian. So, let me now bring in some information from the Bujinkan. I have heard from several senior practitioners of the Bujinkan that Soke (Grandmaster) Hatsumi Masaaki has emphasized on the importance of luck several times over the course of many years. He is supposed to have stated that luck is more important than skill, when it comes to saving one’s life. In military history, Napoleon is supposed to have said that he preferred lucky generals to skillful or good generals4. This is supposedly a reiteration of a statement from a 17th century Cardinal who was Prime Minister of France5, who is supposed to have said that one should ask if a General was lucky and not if a General was skillful. The same statement is also attributed to Dwight Eisenhower6, former US President and Allied Commander in Europe during WW2. Apparently, Eisenhower was so lucky in his career that it was called “Eisenhower’s luck”7.

This is not to say that the person who is lucky has nothing else going for her or him. Nor does it mean that the person has no skill. It is just an advantage that is being referred to. One senior practitioner in the Bujinkan system of martial arts once told me, “To be lucky, one needs to do something uncomfortable”. I think this statement sums it up brilliantly. Doing something uncomfortable is about putting in the effort and being in a situation where one needs luck (in case something goes wrong). This is when luck can manifest.

Effort is the key, effort is the king, in this context. I will elaborate on this with the structure of stories as the context, for this entire article is about stories. Consider storytelling in movies and then think of action movies. One part of action movies that everyone loves is the TRAINING MONTAGE, especially if it is accompanied by memorable and rousing music. Of course, I include the “preparing for war” segments as “training montage” because it is the final step before the fight, and had a lot of training behind it. It is that part of the movie that is watched over and over again. Remember the Rocky (Stallone) training montage? Remember the segment when Dutch (Arnold) readies himself to take on the Predator all alone?

The training montage is also a very short part of the film. Training and preparation is a lot of effort over a very long time. It is a process with incremental steps. And it is really boring to show in real time or even to make the primary focus of the movie. Hence, the montage is a great setup for an awesome climax fight. It is also a great outcome of the character motivations that were setup. After all, movies are about character actions, motivations and emotions, in flow and with action.

It is this slow, long and incremental effort and process of the same that leads to the manifestation of luck. This is what a martial artist thrives on. It is this effort that makes a martial artist akin to a scholar, a researcher or an academic, working on oneself and studying flow. This effort and its process is the lifeblood of the arts and what an artist really looks forward to.

It is this incredible effort that is uncomfortable more often than not, for it is in addition to everything else in life. It is an accepted burden, and this discomfort is what leads to luck. When “deception” is applied as a tool with practiced effort, “luck” is the final ingredient to iron out unforeseen variables. It is what adds the Brain to the Brawn, not just “over” it.

I will conclude this line of thought with one last reference to another set of stories. “Tantri the Mantri” is a beloved character from Tinkle Comics. He is a minister in the kingdom of Raja Hooja. Tantri wants to overthrow the king and become king himself. He makes elaborate plans, and fails every time. This makes Tantri a despicable yet funny character, something like the coyote in the roadrunner cartoon, with one crucial difference.

Image credit – “Tantri The Mantri” from several Tinkle Comics

Even though every plan of Tantri’s fails, the failure leads to Raja Hooja being saved by Tantri himself! So, every failed plan brings him closer to Hooja, who thinks of Tantri as his best friend and confidante, way more than just a minister. Perhaps this is the epitome in the play of luck we have discussed so far. Tantri is despicable, perhaps for this reason his luck deserts him, leading to Hooja being incredibly lucky. Tantri though puts in loads of effort, so he is always lucky in never being caught, and in being rewarded for efforts in the negative! Hooja is lucky because he puts in effort to appreciate Tantri and to also go out of his way to work with all of his suggestions. Tantri is always carrying out deception, which fail and work at the same time. He is incredibly lucky and unlucky at the same time! Stories of Tantri reinforce how effort leads to luck and luck is needed for a successful deception, for deception is a kind of brawn, where the brain takes centre stage.

This concludes this article, but there are a few points stemming from this and the previous article which I will delve into in a future article. They do not fit in here without breaking the flow. One of these points includes the complete absence of morality in many stories, for they are representative of reality, and are not just educational.

Notes:

1 https://mundanebudo.com/2024/02/18/deception-debates-martial-arts-courtly-challenges-tilakashta-mahisha-bandhana/

2 There is a beautiful story about luck written by Mark Twain, called “Thank you Mr. Shark” (I am not sure if this is the actual name or only the name of the adaptation of the story in Tinkle Comics). It does not involve a debate or a duel or a conflict. It just shows how one needs to act on the luck that has come one’s way. Indeed, this subsequent action is what shows that one was lucky, with the benefit of hindsight.

A young man in Australia catches a shark in Sydney and finds a London Newspaper in its belly, courtesy of a man it had devoured in England. This is in 1870 before the telegraph and when sharks swam a lot faster than steam ships. So, thanks to the shark and the newspaper, he is the only one in Australia who knows of the Franco-Prussian war of 1870.

He uses this information to buy Australian wool to trade in Europe, which is in high demand due to the war. So, before the newspapers in Australia can report the war in Europe, he has made a big profit for himself. Yes, there is conflict in the shape of the war in Europe, but a lucky Australian makes the most of it to further himself in life. 🙂

3 https://mundanebudo.com/2023/05/11/might-is-right-always/

4 https://www.azquotes.com/quote/1339632

5 https://www.warhistoryonline.com/instant-articles/famous-things-napoleon-said.html

6 https://www.azquotes.com/quote/568694

7 https://press.armywarcollege.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2542&context=parameters

Deception, Debates, Martial Arts & Courtly challenges – Tilakāshta Mahisha Bandhana

Vikram M R, , , , , , , , 3 Comments

Exactly a month ago, we celebrated the festival of Makara Sankranti. This is when the Sun transits into Capricorn. This is celebrated every year in January and doubles up as a harvest festival in India. This festival is known by different names in different parts of the country, Pongal, Magh Bihu, Lohri and Sankranti being a few. One important aspect of Sankranti is the use of sesame seeds. Sesame seeds along with jaggery, dry coconut (kobri), groundnut (peanut) and few other optional ingredients are shared as a mixture. This is a mixture specific to this festival alone. The mixture, in Kannada, is called “Yellu Bella”, sometimes spelled “Ellu Bella”. “Ellu” or “Yellu” is the sesame seeds and the “Bella” is the jaggery. Sesame in Hindi is called “Til”. The word “Til” is used in a famous story relating to Tenali Rama and that is the inspiration for this article. The inauguration of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya took up the spot I was supposed to post this article on and hence this comes a month later. 🙂

Anyone who practices any martial art in modern times would have used various social media platforms to watch practitioners of either the same or other martial art styles express their version/vision of the same. This leads to learning and the formation of opinions regarding the practitioners or the martial art style being demonstrated, irrespective of whether it is solo practice/performance or a sparring/training session or a competition.

The formation of opinions obviously leads to discussions and debates about the strengths/advantages and weaknesses/disadvantages of the different various systems of martial arts or aspects of the same. This inevitably leads to discussing the history, traditions and development of individual fighting arts. This is a stepping stone to talking about modern interpretations of the martial arts and the requirements there in. This means that practitioners discuss what martial arts offer in modern day living – “self-defence”, fitness, sports, spiritual development, personal growth etc.

All of this leads to opinions on “what works” and that means identifying specific situations and modern cultural contexts in which they are relevant. This entire process quite a few times leads to, “Which is the best martial art?”, “Which is the best martial art for me?” and of course, “Why this is not good enough or why this no longer works”. The focus on the first of these questions seems to be diminishing of late, and thankfully so.

One can call the discussions and debates about the various martial arts arguments, for they could become acrimonious at times. This aspect extends to both armed and unarmed (and armoured and unarmoured) martial arts. The great advantage of these discussions is that the martial arts are becoming more popular. Finer aspects of several of these art forms are brought to the fore in the discussions and the audience for these is made aware of the same. So, hopefully, more art forms and traditions will flourish thanks to the debates.

With the phenomenon that Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) has become, thanks to the various franchises like UFC, ONE, Cage Fighter, Bellator and the rest, the debate over “best martial art” and “what really works” is common place on social media platforms. This discussion extends, specifically while discussing historical/traditional martial arts, to which sword type or any other weapon is better in a given time frame and situation. Discussions also extend to armour, but to a lesser extent. The most common talking point is with respect to the use of any martial art in self-defence.

Videos are the medium best suited to demonstrating and discussing martial arts and hence they are most prevalent on YouTube. Instagram, as I see it, is more suited for demonstrations. Some YouTube channels that I know of, that not only share martial art related information but also discuss martial art effectiveness (the questions mentioned above) are Martial Arts Journey with Rokas, Hard2Hurt, English Martial Arts, Karate TV, Inside Fighting, Jesse Enkamp and of course, the podcast (and its snippets) by Joe Rogan, to mention just a few.

 Some channels that focus on armed martial arts are Scholagaldiatoria, Shadiversity, Skallagrim, Sanatan Shastra Vidya, Musha Shugyo, Weaponism and Let’s Ask Shogo/Seki Sensei. There are several others that I have watched from time to time and are very good as well. There are channels that focus on historical Japanese, Filipino, Indian, Chinese, Korean, Iranian (HIMA), African (HAMA) and European (HEMA) martial arts. There are also several channels that focus on modern day practices that include or focus exclusively on firearms. Discussions here include the effectiveness, modern day practicality and various other aspects. Consequently disagreements abound on quite a few of these channels.

I do not use the word “disagreements” in a negative sense here. Whether or not one agrees with the opinions and knowledge shared on these channels, they definitely further awareness about and interest regarding the martial arts and this is a great thing. But of course, disagreements lead to debate and discussions. This is the point of focus of this article.

Debates over the martial arts are nothing new. At least the need to identify if the style one practices is effective or if one is a good martial artist is not new. It has always existed. This is where the “Dojo Challenge” comes from. This is where the duels of Miyamoto Musashi come from. It is also, in the Indian context where the concept of a “court wrestler”* comes from. These “court wrestlers” were responsible for taking on challenges by wrestlers or fighters from within and without the country, in the latter case to protect the king or kingdom’s honour and show that the society in question can produce great fighters.

The concept of debates in India extends beyond the martial arts to settling differences related to philosophy, religion and perhaps many other aspects as well. From here on I will swivel between martial arts and other aspects while discussing the use of debates and discussion in the Indian context.

India over the millennia has a hoary tradition of having debates over various aspects of life. These are heard to this day as stories and many of them are well and truly historical, even if the finer points might not be totally accurate. These debates have, on occasion, led to massive socio-cultural and political changes in the landscape of Indian history. This love for debate, discussion and argument persists to this day in the modern Indian republic. Just have a look at the various forms to media to get an inkling of this&.

Seen below are some examples of some of these well-known debates/discussions from Indian history that I am aware of.

  • The Rishika Gārgi is supposed to have been instrumental in determining that the Rishi Yajnyavalkya was a great intellectual who could not be defeated in a debate based on her questioning of the latter, in the court of Janaka in Mithila. A link to the video describing the same is seen below. Watch between the 2 and 4 minute mark.
  • The discussion between the Indo-Greek king Menander I (Milinda) and the Buddhist monk Nāgasena is recorded in the ancient book “Milindapanha”. The king is supposed to have become a patron of Buddhism post this discussion.
  • The individual Ugra Tāpas lost a debate with a Buddhist Bhikshu and became a Bhikshu himself, with the name “Nava Bhikshu”. This person, is supposed to have later impressed the emperor Kanishka to become an ardent supporter of Buddhism with his expositions on the same. He earned the name Ashva Ghosha after this as his way with words was supposed to be able to mesmerize even horses. Seen below is a link to a video about governance during the Kushan era. Parts of this episode deal with the story of Ashva Ghosha.
  • Shankarācharya’s debate with Mandana Mishra where the latter’s wife was the judge is very well known. The debate as I recall was about the merits of the Karma mārga and the Jnana mārga. Shankarāchārya won the debate and Mandana Mishra became the disciple of the former. He even became his successor with the name Sureshwarāchārya at the Sringeri Mattha.
  • The debates of Rāmānujāchārya at the court of King Vishnuvardhana of the Hoysala dynasty is supposed to have convinced the king himself and several of the citizenry to convert from the practice of Jainism to that of Vaishnavism.

This practice of debates continued over the centuries. This is seen from the stories we hear as kids, specifically those of Tenāli Ramakrishna, Birbal and Gopal Bhand (of Krishna Nagar). One such story which I describe briefly is the inspiration behind this article. It appears that the courts of kingdoms had scholars, wrestlers, artists and other luminaries who added to the prestige of the court, king and kingdom. Scholars, wrestlers and artists apparently travelled around various courts to display their abilities, maybe challenge “court specialists” in their respective areas and earn awards or commissions for their achievements. Perhaps this was a way of living for at least a few.

The story goes that a scholar once came to the court of the king Krishnadevarāya of the Vijayanagara kingdom in the early 16th century. He set out a challenge for the scholars at court to debate with him over any scripture and win. He was extremely capable and everyone at court was sure they could not get the better of this individual. At this juncture, the Pandit Ramakrishna from Tenāli (in modern day Andhra Pradesh) took up the challenge and succeeded in defeating the traveling scholar. Tenāli Rama or Raman of Tenāli, as he is also called quite often is sometimes referred to as the “jester” of the court, but this seems a wrong description. From the little that I know, “Vidushaka” seems the right word.

Ramakrishna came to court on the day of the debate with a large bundle of manuscripts and told the challenger that he would like to begin with a discussion of the scripture called “Tilakāshta Mahisha Bandhana”. He added that this was scripture was a simple one and known to even the cowherds of Vijayanagara. There was in reality no such scripture and this was a ruse to trick the scholar from abroad. It worked and the scholar, having not heard of the scripture, thought he was outmatched, accepted defeat and left.

Image credit – “Raman, The Matchless Wit” published by Amar Chitra Katha in “Tales of Humour”

Thus, the “prestige” of the court was saved and Ramakrishna rewarded, following which the reality of “Tilakāshta Mahisha Bandhana” was revealed. Til is the word used to refer to sesame seeds. Tilakāshta refers to the stalk of the sesame plant. Mahisha means buffalo. Bandhana is a rope or “to tie”. Ramakrishna had tied together stalks of the sesame plant with rope used to tie buffaloes in place. Multiple such bundles were placed in a bag and the scholar mistook these to be manuscripts of scriptures. So, “Tilakāshta Mahisha Bandhana” was nothing but stalks of the sesame plant tied into bundles using rope used to secure buffaloes! TENALI RAMAKRISHNA USED DECEPTION TO WIN A DEBATE!

Image credit – “Raman, The Matchless Wit” published by Amar Chitra Katha in “Tales of Humour”

Debates are not restricted to areas where ideas are shared with words, in either the spoken or written format (debates can occur through articles and op-eds). They can occur in spheres where ideas are shared with physical actions. This includes debates over music, dance or of course, the martial arts. A debate about any of these would include both conversations and actual demonstrations of music or dance or the fighting arts.

In the case of the martial arts, demonstrations can transition into an actual duel or confrontation to drive home a point. This aspect of the martial arts lends itself into the tradition of the dojo challenge** or musha shugyo*** (only a part of it). These are situations where a practitioner of a specific martial art form challenges practitioners of the same style or a different one to identify who is a superior martial artist or which is a better art form. This is exactly like a debate where one side of a notion tries to prove its validity over the other.

I will share a few examples about debates in music or dance with examples from pop culture. These situations were written into fiction only because they are well known aspects of Indian culture and hence serve sufficiently as examples to illustrate the debate.

There is sequence in the old Hindi movie “Āmrapāli” (1966) where one dancer has to prove that the performance of another is flawed. She has to do this by performing the correction version. This is a case of a debate over which is the correct dance form.  A link to this sequence from the movie is seen below.

There is a Tamil movie “Vanjikottai Vāliban” (1958), which is supposedly based on “The Count of Monte Cristo”. Here two dancers are in contest to determine who is superior. Again, this is nothing other than a duel. The link to this sequence from the movie is seen below. This movie was remade in Hindi and called “Raj Tilak”.

There is another Tamil movie called “Tillana Mohanambal” (1968) where there is a sequence related to a debate/challenge around music. Here, an expert with the Nādaswaram has to demonstrate his ability to perform Western music with an Indian instrument, to establish that his art form is not limited in any way. A link to this sequence is from the movie is seen below (watch specifically beyond the 2:30 mark).

The above three cases are not different from the duels of Miyamoto Musashi. Musashi fought 61 duels and survived (won) all of them. The duels were against martial artists who practiced weapons and styles other than his own. His own style with two swords developed from these experiences. Considering that the life of Musashi and that of his opponent(s) was at stake in quite a few of these duels, he definitely employed aspects other that just physical martial skill in these. This is no different from Tenāli Rama using deception in his debate with “Tilakāshta Mahisha Bandhana”.

Consider Musashi’s most famous duel against Sasaki Kojiro. Kojiro was famed for his use of a very long blade (perhaps a nodachi or odachi?). To counter the reach of his opponent’s weapon Musashi is said to have used a very long bokken (a sword made of wood). He apparently carved this bokken out of a boat oar. He is also supposed to have come very late to the duel, long after the agreed time. This is supposed to have made Kojiro tired and irritated, and perhaps prone to errors due to the same. So, Musashi got the better of his opponent by changing the weapon he used and the timing of the duel to gain an advantage. This is akin to Tenāli Rama bringing a bag full of fake manuscripts.

A statue depicting the duel between Miyamoto Musashi and Sasaki Kojiro in Japan. Image credit – Wikpedia

In another earlier instance Musashi is supposed to have taken on several practitioners of the Yoshioka school of sword fighting. I am not sure if the following tale is historical, but is surely made popular by the Manga based on Musashi’s life. The Yoshioka came in large numbers to kill Musashi in a situation where the fight was supposed to be a duel. So, they chose to deceive him. But, Musashi had arrived much earlier at the agreed location. He attacked without any warning and from hiding before the Yoshioka had any inkling that he was already there. Musashi ended up surviving/winning this fight as well. In this case both sides used deception. Musashi by being early and using stealth and the Yoshioka as mentioned earlier. So, deception is a known feature even in a “martial debate”; perhaps it is something that is to be expected.

Whether or not deception is used in a “martial debate”, it is a healthy aspect that has led to development of the martial arts over centuries. Consider the different styles of Boxing (English and Mexican for example), Wrestling (Greco Roman and Freestyle), BJJ, Jujutsu, Kalari Payatt (Northern & Southern), Karate and the various animal related forms of Wushu (Kung Fu). Also consider the very many styles of sword, spear and other weapon schools that exist in the various parts of the world. Some of these came about as differences of opinion and differing points of view occurred in a given style, even if these were not really a “debate” in a conventional sense. Of course, different schools have merged under a single master as well when some martial lineages did not have an heir to carry it forward.

To extend the dojo challenge to a modern day context, consider the examples where masters in traditional Chinese fighting styles were challenged and defeated by a practitioner of MMA, Xu Xiaodong&&. Xu Xiaodong also supposedly faced flak from the authorities for demeaning the traditions of China. Beyond this, consider the innumerable discussions that happen online about the pros and cons of western and eastern swords, armour and the like. Of course, these started out in a stark adversarial manner but has over the years evolved to a useful exchange of information, knowledge and experience.

The most glaring examples are of how many western content creators (who also have martial arts experience) were deeply involved in debunking the superiority of the katana over western swords. But over the years, similarities with the art forms has also been recognized and a healthy space for experience sharing has emerged. What was once only a debate has transcended to be genuine discussion.

In a non-martial context, debates and discussion have led to great development. This is very well known; consider the 1927 Solvay Conference# as an example, where Quantum Physics as field of study took shape. But the use of deception is debates has been a constant as well. Consider any of the debates in any media platform. All of them use data selectively to further specific points of view and based on personal interpretations. This gets exacerbated since these days we have fake news and more recently, deep fakes. Fake news can be deliberately edited videos to suit a purpose or morphed images and of course, blatant lies with words. These can be used to create a deception or used unwittingly by a debating side, where the deception is perpetuated by dint of being deceived!

The use of deception is not new in the martial arts. Nor are debates about which martial art or martial artist is better. And deception is par for the course in debates that have nothing to with the martial arts either, as we saw earlier. When this is the case, can the use of deception to settle debates about the martial arts be wrong? Unlikely. Especially when these debates lead to actual physical contests, sometimes life and death duels.

There is one aspect about using deception that needs to be considered. This is “luck”. I will explore this in my next post.

Notes:

* I am not an expert on court traditions in different parts of India in the past and do not claim to know for certain of how these positions worked or even if they existed for certain in the various kingdoms that have come and gone in different parts of this ancient land. I am aware of some stories and am going the same.

**Dojo challenge – A situation where a martial artist challenges practitioners in a dojo to a fight to determine if their art form or skill set is as good as or better than her or his own.

***Musha shygyo – Martial journey, or journey of a martial artist (mainly physical over a geography, but could be spiritual or intellectual) which leads to growth and development of the individual’s martial abilities (and also personal development in general).

&& Seen below are links to 2 videos which share the story of Xu Xiaodong and his story

# Seen below is a link to a video which briefly explains the 1927 Solvay Conference and its relation to Quantum Physics

& The practice of debating is thriving in modern India too. It has expanded into television media, social media and print media apart from those that take place in the offices and homes of every citizen. These debates have even incorporated platforms beyond India as a tool to gain an advantage over their “opponents”. I am adding this point in the notes as it is not directly relevant to the article. Consider the opposition to the current central Government in India. There are several critics of the government who either reside or publish mostly in platforms outside India! A few names that come to mind doing this are Suraj Yengde, Kapil Komireddi and Rana Ayyub. On the other side, people who are sometimes critical and quite often supportive of the government are Kushal Mehra, Shambhav Sharma and Sree Iyer. All of them use YouTube effectively, which in reality is not an Indian platform. The conference “Dismantling Global Hindutva” has to take the cake though, for using foreign soil to reach an Indian audience 🙂 . I am not sure this is deception, but certainly seems like a flanking move or some new BVR missile equivalent, in the intellectual sense of course.

Constant Adaptation, Dynamic Equilibrium – Martial Arts & Modern Democratic Information Flows

Vikram M R, , , , , , , Leave a comment

In the Bujinkan system, the differences that exist in points of view, perceptions, paths of learning, methods of teaching and every other conceivable difference is to be accepted. Differences that occur over time are also be expected. Consistency is not something one assumes. Every situation is dealt with as a fresh one with no expectations or motives. This was the premise of the article I posted four weeks ago. A link to this post is seen in the notes below*.

Once we can accept that we need to deal with every situation and cannot wish for a favourable one, a lot becomes simple in the mind. We can accept that consistency is not to be expected of humans. Everyone responds to a situation in a given time and space. If we encounter a favourable situation, consider it luck, be happy and move on. Do not try to replicate or analyze it, in hopes of achieving the same again.

One aspect that the above understanding leads to, in my opinion, based on training, is that we become more like our uke (attacker/opponent) and the vice versa also holds true. If one is training with an aggressive uke (opponent), who does not see the threat to such actions and is unable to realize the points of vulnerability he or she is exposing oneself to, based on the move performed by the tori (defender), a change might be required to end the conflict. It might be necessary to expose the vulnerability/opening/suki by actually striking, locking or any other act that induces at least a little pain. This hopefully, will reveal the fault of the attack and mitigate the same. Of course, this might be an iterative process with a gradual or sudden increase in the pain imposed by the tori. This could be considered as the tori becoming aggressive and more like the uke, in comparison the earlier attitude of the same person. Similarly, once the uke experiences the pain and vulnerability, the attacks might reduce in speed, power and in general the person might become wary and less aggressive. This means that the uke has become a little more circumspect and “peace-loving” 🙂 , like the tori was to start with. So, the two fighters have become more like one another, absorbing each other’s attitude.

This is something that might happen in every exchange, over many months, years or over a lifetime, when people share the same space and time together, as practitioners, friends, family, colleagues and any other relationship one can consider. I have over the years experienced this. My fellow budoka (practitioners of budo), senpai (seniors) and kohai (juniors), have changed and become more like one another.

Individuals who started out wanting to be the best, being aggressive, have over time mellowed considerably and come to rely on movement and sensitivity over speed, power and aggression. They have also lost the need to be the best. Similarly, those that started out being timid and afraid to strike or cause any pain, have absorbed some of the aggressive nature of their peers. They have lost the need to hold back all the time, they use aggression when necessary, with no reservations, but not with impunity. So, a nice equilibrium is reached with years of training.

This is even seen with how people react to practitioners of other martial arts or to those who do not practice the martial arts. Some start out trying to convince others with a zeal of why the art they are practicing is awesome. They are trying hard to be good ambassadors, or marketers at least. Others start out hiding their practice altogether and if not that, do not share much information. This also changes over time. Everyone somehow settles down to a reasonable middle ground, knowing when and whom to discuss the martial arts with and when to not worry about what others think of the same.

I personally use the analogy of a pendulum to describe the change. The more a person was aggressive, the more he or she will become sensitive and averse to physical force, before being able to do either (or both) as required. The same is true of individuals who are averse to physical contact. They start out being timid, then become used to using more physical strength than needed, before achieving the equilibrium where he or she can avoid physical contact or use excessive strength, as called for by the situation.

Now, if we expand the lack of consistency and the change in people due to circumstances and life experiences, some more aspects of our lives hopefully become clear. All of us inherently know change occurs and will likely have used the adage “change is the only constant”. But all of us are also, at least miffed or annoyed to a greater extent, by change, especially in people and the world around us. The effort to adapt to changes is not always pleasant or predictable.

If we live in democracies, all of us humans are political, irrespective of how often and with how many people we discuss our opinions, preferences, ideas and inclinations. And all of these are influenced to varying degrees by all the information we are exposed to. Now consider the data we are all swimming through every day – social media, digital media, televised media, print media, and opinions of people we know and don’t know. It is also very likely that all the information is presented to further a motive, again irrespective of how benign or indifferent to influence, the creator or distributor of that information thinks it is. The lack of a motive is perhaps a motive by itself. Another word for the motive of the presentation of information in today’s world is “Narrative”. This means we are all swimming in strong currents of narratives every day, all day, day after day. These narratives, just like water currents mingle and develop lives of their own, which need not be under anyone’s control. In my understanding this is what defines a “zeitgeist” (overarching theme/mood) of a time frame, a decade or so.

We all live through multiple decades and through varying zeitgeist and narrative sets. This is also a change related to people. After all, narratives and the zeitgeist are driven by people. But, adapting to a new zeitgeist is much harder despite knowing that change is a constant. I opine that this is because a zeitgeist is always trying to build a cult, if not a religion. How often do we hear people fondly remember the way things were or being glad that those times are done? I suspect that if you live in a democracy, it is fairly often.

Is adaptation wrong? Never. It might be wrong to certain people and great to the rest. Both groups adapt in their own ways. But like the hysteresis curve** what we achieve with the adaptation is not what used to be achieved or an improvement of what is, it is always a bit of both added to the current situation, which is a different chimera altogether. This “chimera” will require adaption all over again, until the next and the next and the cycle goes on.

Hysteresis curve, Image credit – Encyclopedia Britannica

This concept of adaptation and becoming more like the other, holds for countries/nations, societies/civilizations and people as well. This is what I personally understand as one of either integration/assimilation or confrontation through adaptation. We see this all through history and in current affairs.

A primary driver that drives adaptation is technology. The use of the internet and all the platforms it has spawned is perhaps the latest tool that is being used to drive narratives. Narratives that are weapons used as potential equalizers whenever there is a considerable disparity in any other conventional weapon, either physical or psychological.

Left – Troops of the Madras Infantry (EIC soldiers), Right – Troops of Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s Fauj-i-khas. Both are modeled on Europeans armies.

Image credits – both images are from the book “Return of a King” by William Dalrymple

Based on my limited knowledge of history, this is something that has happened time and time again. In the 18th century, the East India Company (EIC) used mobile artillery and European military tactics to gain a great advantage over many Indian armies. This was overcome in a couple of decades by the local leaders hiring French military advisors to train their armies in the latest tactics and technologies. This led to the Fauj-i-khas and its guns, of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, the troops of the Holkar and Shinde factions of the Marathas and Tipu Sultan’s army. All of these troops held off the EIC successfully for decades.

Portrait of Mahadji Shinde (Scindia) by James Wales, Source – Wikipedia

The EIC gained an upper hand with better financial management and the exploitation local rivalries. This was overturned not with better management practices by the Indians. After almost a century of learning from the British, the Indian army turned against the colonial masters and forced their exit. This effort was on two fronts. One which incessantly tried to turn the army against its own masters and the other led by Mahatma Gandhi and the Indian National Congress (INC), which turned civilians against the British and broke the moral superiority the British gave themselves.

So, first, the Indian armies became more like the EIC and other European armies. Later, Indians learned to turn the learning from the British against themselves, which is what the British had used in the first place, popularly called “Divide and Rule”.

Around the dawn of the Common Era, India was invaded by the Greeks, Shakas, Kushans and Pahalavas, and a few centuries later by the Hunas. All of them eventually assimilated into the existing native culture, religion and became locals; some even propagated Indian culture as it existed at the time to Central and East Asia, Persia, all the way to Greece. In other words, the invaders became one with the populace they attacked.

In the second millennium of the Common Era, this changed, when Islamic and Christian invaders tried to make the locals assimilate into their culture. Islamic armies that invaded had superior cavalry due to their origins in Central Asia. Indian forces over time became superior cavalry troops themselves and added guerrilla tactics to eventually break Islamic domination. This is seen in the armies of the Rajputs and the Marathas. Christian forces represented by the EIC and the British were defeated as mentioned earlier. So, the trend holds, one becomes more like the enemy to survive and overcome the same.

Left – Statue of Maharana Pratap, Image credit – The image is from the book “Maharanas” by Dr. Omendra Ratnu

Right – Statue of Peshwa Baji Rao I in front of the Shaniwar Wada in Pune, Image credit – Wikipedia

Fast forward to the Indian Republic and this pattern continues. The example now truly moves into the realm of narratives. Indian social sciences were taken over in the late 60s and through the 70s by a Leftist strain of thought. This led to the Hindu religion facing a lot of negative coverage the world over due to the narrative set in educational institutions, media and pop culture. This sway was broken with the coming of the internet. People who are not academic historians, from all walks of life, reset the narrative with new research and by digging up the works of historians of the past who were side-lined by the Leftist way of thought.

A Marketing Professor of mine from MBA used to say that one should never leave any subject to just the experts. He used to suggest that HR should never be left to HR professionals, Finance to Finance experts, Engineering to Engineers and so on. While studying Engineering, we had a subject called “Engineering System Design” (ESD). ESD said that while trying to solve an engineering problem one should always have an expert from a different domain. For example have a biologist while trying to solve an engineering problem.

It is this approach that has changed the narrative about the Hindu religion and Indian history over the last 15 odd years. People took narrative building ideas from Social Science professionals, added their own experience from other walks of life and used the internet to circumvent the academic strangle hold of the Leftists. Now, the Leftists and their kind in media are taking to social media to counter this, as television media has been lost to them. How this plays out in the future is yet to be seen.

Another change that is happening is in the way Ahimsa is viewed in India. Ahimsa was considered the ONLY reason for Indian Independence during my school years. This is now changing to show how the Revolutionary movement was as vital a component of the Freedom Struggle as the Ahimsa led movement was. But the Ahimsa fervour added with the negative narrative about Hinduism led to the creation of Caste and Religion based vote banks in the country. This left many feeling dissatisfied and unable to openly air their concerns about the same.

Again, the internet came as a disruption. It gave a new avenue for venting these grievances. It also led to Indians reconnecting with the past beyond Ahimsa, a past of physical conflict and valour. This has made Indians more aggressive and proud as a people. Nothing is without consequences and the fallout of this is yet to be seen. The beneficiaries of the vote bank politics were belligerent for a few decades. But the passive population has become more like them and is showing signs of aggression. In the same vein, those no longer benefiting from the old narrative have taken to the passive protests based on Ahimsa, to achieve a moral high ground. This was seen in the anti-CAA protests and the protests against the Farm Laws, at least until violence undermined both, specifically the anti-CAA protests. So, the pendulum has swung to the other extreme; those that were raised on Ahimsa narratives are now realizing forms of power other than morality, while those who formed a part of the dominant narrative are now taking to the moral capacity of Ahimsa. Again, the opponents have become like one another.

If we consider the current events in India, the Prāna Pratishta of the Rama temple occurred a few days ago. This event is widely seen as a defining moment for Indic or Dharmic or Bharatiya civilization, in a hugely positive light. But there is a sizeable opposition to the focus on the event, especially about the involvement of the Central Government. It is a criticism of the Government for being right wing, and an adherent of “Hindutva”. Hindutva is the political zeitgeist in India as I see it. It has been so since 2014 for sure and maybe since a few years before then.

In an interview on the YouTube channel of “The Wire”, the criticism is very interesting. The Wire is considered a leading “liberal”, “leftist” media outlet. The interview is of Ramachandra Guha, by Karan Thapar. Both Mr. Guha and Mr. Thapar are regular critics of the current Indian Central Government. In the interview, Mr. Guha says that the focus on the Ram temple at Ayodhya is an attempt to convert Hinduism into a congregational religion, which it never was. And this attempt is just to benefit the political party in power.

This criticism is very interesting. It suggests that Hinduism should not change from what it was in the past! Despite Hinduism being in a process of constant change! Hinduism went from being a Yajna based religion with no temples, to a religion (it is way more than a religion, but I am using this word here for simplicity) centred on temples. It also went from a ritualistic one to adding a plethora of philosophies. It has now gone from a religion focused purely on the sub-continent to one looking outward. This change has occurred over the millennia, by its acquiring influences from communities all over the Indian sub-continent. Hinduism has led to Buddhism, maybe Jainism, Sikhism and also consists of the now extinct Charvaka and Ajivija ways of thinking. Hinduism has also been changed by these religions and the several local and tribal faiths that exist in the various parts of India. This aspect of Hinduism is so pervasive that invaders adopted one or more of the Indic systems and changed their names even (look at names of later Kushans, Hunas, Indo-Greeks etc), until the invasion of the practitioners of Islam and Christianity.

So, Mr. Guha bemoans the change in Hinduism (if it really is happening) despite it being a religion of change at all times of its existence! What we can consider is that the Abrahamic religions are congregational religions and if Hinduism adopts congregational aspects that are very pervasive, it might become more like the Abrahamic faiths. This is yet to happen, if it does at all. But if it does, it would be another case of a local religion adopting facets of a faith system that is perhaps a challenge to its existence. A link to the interview I am referring to, is seen in the notes below1.

There are many other conversations happening within Hinduism relating to rediscovering its past and positives, the freedom of its temples, caste segregation and the like. There is no way to say how all of these will result in the evolution of the Dharmic systems in India and abroad. Hinduism is not yet a proselytizing religion, while its offshoot Buddhism is. Will this also change in the future as result of learning from “opponents”? There is no way to know as yet. Narratives always come up against lived experiences and face hurdles there. How the two interact defines the future of both. This is a whole different topic I am not very aware of and hence will not delve into it further.

Now for a view from the other side. Many of the people critical of the current Indian Government used to be superstars of television journalism. Now these channels are seen to be pro-government. A lot of these former superstars are no longer associated with the big media channels. They have all shifted to YouTube and use Instagram quite a bit to put out the “other side of the story”.

It was the political party currently in power that first used social media and internet platforms to reach out to citizens, during a time when the superstars still reigned. But now people supporting and criticizing the government use internet platforms and social media successfully. So, the critics of the government have learnt from and become more like those supporting it! 🙂 Seen in the notes below is an article which highlights the efforts of these critics in a positive light and obviously, goes on share how freedoms and democracy in India under threat. This article also mentions, obviously again, India’s ranking  ranking in the World Press Freedom Index. 🙂 A link to this article is seen in the notes below2. I had discussed narratives and such articles, and how they are weapons that act over time in a previous article of mine. A link to this article is also seen in the notes below3.

This change is playing out the world over. We are all citizens of Planet Earth, despite our national, communal, regional and tribal identities. Modern communication means we all have a stake in all that happens everywhere, not just our own states or countries. Also, happenings in far-away parts of the world influence the manner in which we react to local issues. This is a new Chimera we are all dealing with.

The Ukraine war was fought on digital and social media as much as on the financial and actual military fronts, at least in the initial months. Similarly, the current war in Gaza is being fought on social media, television debates, YouTube podcasts and on University campuses. University campuses that are not in Israel or even in West Asia. The fronts and non-combat participants who try to influence these wars with narratives might have no truck in the actual conflict on the ground at all! This is evidence that we are all global citizens, no matter what our identification documents state. It also shows how we are all becoming more like one another, especially if we consider someone an “opponent” or worse still, an “enemy”.

Even in the past, there are examples of this outside India. Native Americans learnt the use of horses and guns very fast when faced with the Europeans. Similarly, Texas Rangers had to learn the ways of the Natives to face the Comanche tribes. In Africa as well, troops of white colonizers in Zimbabwe and South Africa had to learn the ways of the locals to fight their resistance. In Vietnam, the local troops led by the legendary leader Vo Nguyen Giap destroyed the French at Dien Bien Phu, after learning the ways of modern warfare and communism from European colonizers. The examples are endless, enemies learn about and from each other and become like each other. Not the same, never, but a dynamic equilibrium is certainly reached where the two sides are similar enough to force a mitigation of the conflict, unless there is another disruption one of the two sides can exploit.

The world we live in is defined by conflicts, be they military, economic or ideological. Nationalism, Populism v Leftism, Supposed liberalism; Hindutva v Secularism; Immigration v Refugees; Anti-Semitism v Anti Zionism; Islamism v Modernity; Institutional democracy v Electoral/Authoritarian democracy, Israel v Palestine, Ukraine v Russia – the list goes on.

These days, all of these are fought on the narrative level as well. But be they narrative, financial or military, everyone is learning from everyone else all the time, in this super-connected world. And we will likely become more like one another, even if we learn what we consider “bad traits” of each other. This will lead to a lull in the conflicts, until a disruption, mostly technological, comes along, and things will flare up again. This is, at least for now, the way things are. But knowing that we will become more like each other, is that not a cause for hope? Because it means there is something to take away from the interaction with the “other” that we want to add to ourselves, as an improvement, or at least a protective mechanism. Can we use this aspect as means to manage conflicts? Or are we doing it already? Perhaps both. Either way, it is just a prospect for not giving into despair. Maybe the constant in the zeitgeist of every time is polarization, with an undercurrent of adaptation and disruption.

Notes:

* https://mundanebudo.com/2024/01/04/a-myriad-of-methods/

** The Hysteresis curve shows how a force might cause a displacement, but when the force reduces to zero the displacement does not go back to zero. A force in the opposite direction is needed to make that happen.

This is like a disruption causing a change in society, but the removal of that disruption (when it is no longer a disruption and has become normal) does not make society go back to its original state, which is a new normal. A different adaptation will be needed for that to happen. This adaptation will move society in a new direction beyond what was planned and that change needs a new adaptation or disruption to attempt a return to the new normal. But that in turn causes more change, and this goes on and on.

This is like the negative force causing a displacement in the opposite direction beyond the original zero. And the reversal of that causes the curve seen in the image seen earlier.

1 The interview between Mr. Guha and Mr. Thapar – the point about congregational religions is made around the 15 minute mark in the video.

2 https://restofworld.org/2023/india-youtube-journalism/?utm_source=pocket-newtab-en-intl

3 https://mundanebudo.com/2023/10/15/missile-long-range-weapon-narrative-long-time-weapon/

Maryāda Purushotham Rama and the Martial Arts – Control is the key

Vikram M R, , , , , , 2 Comments

Above is a representational of the Ram temple at Ayodhya. Art created by Adarsh Jadhav.

The Prāna Pratishta (consecration) of the new Rama Mandir at Ayodhya will happen on 22nd January, 2023. This is 4 days from now, on the coming Monday. As everyone in India and anybody who is interested in India knows, this event is extremely important for a very large number of Indians. The importance is magnified for Hindus, whether or not they are devout. The importance is spiritual, social, cultural, religious, historical and most definitely, political. And for this reason, the very presence of this devālaya (mandir/temple) has its opponents, both in India and abroad. But whether they are celebrating this event or are disheartened by it, no one can ignore it or write down its significance for Modern India, or Bharat.

Lord Rama is one of the most revered Gods for Hindus. In my opinion, Rama’s character is of key significance to practitioners of the martial arts, especially the Bujinkan system of martial arts. This is revealed by one of the adjectives used for Lord Rama. Lord Rama is very often called “Maryāda Purushotham Rama”. The words “Maryāda Purushotham” are an adjective. But as far as I know, they are used ONLY for Lord Rama. Hence, they are almost an alternative name for Rama. In India if you say “Maryāda Purushotham”, no one will have any doubt regarding who you are referring to. This name/adjective of Lord Rama is where his significance for the martial arts stems from. This of course is my opinion. People are free to disagree or have other ideas.

The word “Purushotham” is formed by the sandhi (combination) of the words “Purusha” and “Uttama”. “Purusha” is “man” and Uttama is “the best”. Uttama can also be referred to as “the highest level”. Purusha is not necessarily only “man”, as in the male gender. It can also be “human”. There is another word, “Purushārtha”. This is formed by the words “Purusha” and “Artha”. The four “Purushārtha” are “Dharma”, “Artha”, “Kāma” and “Moksha”**. These are the aspects a human being pursues over the course of a lifetime. These are true for all humans, irrespective of whether they are male or female. Of course, these days, it can include any other gender one chooses to consider. Hence, “Purushothama” when used in reference to Lord Rama, means “the best human”, or “a human of the highest level/order”.

The word “Maryāda” has multiple meanings based on the context of its usage. “Maryada” is the pronunciation in Hindi. In Kannada, we say, “Maryāde”. Maryāda can mean honour or respect. In Kannada, we say, “Avarige maryāde kodu/torisu”. This means, “Show/give them respect”. We also say in Kannada, “Avaru maryādastharu”. This means “They are honourable or respected/respectable people”. So, in this context, “Maryāde” can mean honour or respect. It is generally used when referring to decent, good folk, based on one’s opinion. There is however, another meaning for the word “Maryāda”, which is more relevant to this article.

During the late 80s or early 90s, I remember hearing the following dialogue in a Hindi film; “Apni Maryāda mein raho”. Of course, it could have been “Apni Maryāda mat bhoolo” or something similar, I do not recall exactly. I suspect it was from one of the family-oriented films with actor Kader Khan in the cast, maybe “Ghar ho to aisa” or “Biwi ho to aisi”. I could be wrong, but my brain associated this dialogue with either one of these films or with a film of this genre. These were films that preached how the roles and behaviours of people in model Indian families should be.

This dialogue threw my original definition of “Maryāda” off kilter. The dialogue “Apni Maryāda mein raho” or “Apni Maryāda mat bholo” was used in a heated exchange between two characters, typically one espousing traditional values (an older individual) and another yearning for change due to the suffocation of traditions (obviously a younger individual). It was very clear while watching these movies, that these dialogues meant “Stay within your limits” or “Don’t forget your limits” respectively. So, how could “maryāda” mean “Stay within your respect/honour” or “Don’t forget your respect/honour” in the context being presented? 😀 It made no sense.

It was later that I realized that the word “Maryāda” also meant “Limit”. Apparently, this was the original meaning of the word! It was overtime also used to denote “Respect/Honour”. When maryāda can be used to be mean “limit”, it could also be to denote “boundaries, as used when we say, “do not cross boundaries”.

I suspect this could be because one deserves respect for knowing one’s limits or more appropriately not overstepping one’s limits. Of course, the limits are usually defined by social or age-based constraints. And because one has learnt to limit oneself, perhaps by being content with one’s lot, one deserves respect. So, by setting limits for oneself and following the same diligently, one earns respect. So, the same word came to be used for the two. This purely my speculation and I could be wrong about this.

So, when I was younger, when I heard “Maryāda Purushotham Rama”, I used to think “Rama, the most respected and best among humans”. But I have realized that this means “Rama, the best person who limits oneself”. It could also be, “Rama, the best person, who stays within his own boundaries”. It is as I understand it, “Rama limits himself and hence he is the greatest or first among humans”. This makes sense. Every aspect of the life Rama led can be considered exemplary. He strove to live up to his responsibilities, always keep his word and most importantly remembered that all the rules and laws that applied to his people also applied to himself. This last aspect was of paramount importance.

Rama was a king and hence above everyone else, at least in his own kingdom. So, he could have had a different set of rules for himself or exemptions to the same when compared with those for the citizenry. But he never allowed this. Further, and even more importantly, Rama was an avatāra of Lord Vishnu. This made him a God walking among mortals. So, he could have held himself above everyone else on Earth, even beyond his own kingdom. But he never let his Godliness or divine attributes show. He never used this to any advantage in the course of his life. So, Lord Rama restrained himself from using either his privileges as a king or his powers as a God to his benefit. He lived like any other mortal, going through all the trials and tribulations, if not more.

Thus, Rama LIMITED himself. He set limits on himself; from ever using his powers as king or God, except for the welfare of other people. He never succumbed to arrogance or pride. His self-imposed limits not only prevented his using his powers and abilities to his own advantage over his fellow humans, but also limited him from ever giving into extreme emotions, barring a few rare instances. Even these instances exemplify his being mortal and limiting his own abilities as either God or king. So, he is indeed the very personification of a person who has limited his own excessive use of abilities, because he decided that they would not suit the world he lived in. It was not the purpose of the avatāra either. Hence, Lord Rama is absolutely the one and only “Maryāda Purushotham”!

Above is a photo of Lord Rama from our pooja room. As far as I know, it is a framed copy of an original by Raja Ravi Verma. Many homes have this photo in their respective pooja rooms.

Rama was a God and had all the powers that earlier avatāras like Varāha, Narasimha, Vāmana or Parashurama or the later avatāra of Krishna wielded. But he did not resort to these abilities. How did Lord Rama achieve this? I opine that the answer is “Control”, and more specifically, “Self-Control”. Rama could control his emotions and his abilities. Since he could control his abilities, he could limit his use of the same. Similarly, since he could control his emotions, he could prevent extreme emotional situations that would result in his unleashing his powers. So, it was CONTROL through and through. Through SELF-CONTROL he remained just an ordinary human in his acts and this in turn led him to be able to perform extraordinary acts, demonstrating that he could also CONTROL solutions to issues facing him and those around him, at all times.

Rama lived in the forest, united a divided Vānara kingdom, gained the trust and support of Vānaras in looking for his wife Sita and later in attacking he powerful Asura Rāvana. He achieved the defeat of Rāvana, gained the support of Rāvana’a brother, caused no damage beyond necessary and eventually regained his throne. He suffered quite a bit after this as well. He was separated from his wife, never saw his twin sons in their early childhood and eventually when his children came back into his life, he lost his wife forever. So, his was a life of great achievements accompanied by extraordinary tragedy. Despite it all, he was successful in all his endeavours and remained a mere mortal. This is why he is perhaps the paragon of SELF-CONTROL and being able to find solutions to varied problems, however unsuitable they may be. This is being in CONTROL of the situation and given environments as best as a human can! It is this virtue of “CONTROL” and “SELF-CONTROL” that relates the example of Lord Rama to the Martial Arts.

Sensei Hatsumi Masaaki, the Soke of the Bujinkan focused on Muto Dori since around 2014-15 all the way till the global disruption in 2020. Muto Dori is defined with many variations by many senior practitioners. It is also interpreted with quite a few variations based on what the focus is on, in any given training session. But a common thread is that one should focus on oneself and have control of one’s own motivations and emotions in a combat situation, even while training in class.

The objective was that one should train like one is unarmed even when the opponent is armed. This is even if one has access to weapons. There could also be situations where there are multiple opponents. This is not to say that this training ensures survival in a real situation. But it demonstrates that one has no control over the initial actions of opponents, only on oneself. So, the focus is to control oneself in the best possible manner. This control hopefully allows one a modicum of control over the fight, which will allow one to survive the situation. The control over the conflict situation will vary over time as the opponent(s) are also continuously adapting.

This focus on control is exemplified by a statement that is made by my teacher every now and then, “focus on your breathing”. This statement is used to help a practitioner begin the process of self-control. One is encouraged to actively focus on, and think, of her or his breathing while in a fight, during training. This takes the mind off the other things in a fight. These include, what the opponent might do, what one can do to the opponent, what one’s objective in the fight is, how one wants it to end, what technique is working or not, worry about whether what one is doing is correct or effective, and the like. All of this is mitigated by turning inward. Hopefully, once this happens, the practitioner only moves to survive and makes the opponent do all the work.

In such a situation, if the opponent is not focusing on self-control, hopefully an opening or opportunity will present itself in due course. This opportunity can be used to end the fight. If the opponent is also exercising great self-control, the fight might just end as both (or more) are only trying to survive and not looking to fight at all. Thus, the situation is controlled either way.

A mentor of my teacher’s suggests that control is a vital aspect of the Bujinkan. He is a very large and strong individual (think WWE wrestler large) with several years of experience. He is someone who can use his strength and size to overcome most opponents. But he chooses not to, and this is enabled by his training and the skills developed to achieve control in a physical combat situation. He further emphasizes that this is NOT LIMITED to a physical fight, but to all aspects of life.

The objective is to achieve control of the situation, there need be no doubt regarding that. Control of the SELF is the starting point of the same. The result of this control is, favourable outcomes in every step and stage of life (what is needed but not what is desired). Control of the self leads to control of the situation and control of the situation has consequences which needs control of the self again. It is cyclical or maybe a spiral.

A student of a friend recently trained in Japan with this mentor. I am sharing the statement this student used to share his learning. It was a quote which I am repeating here. It is something Soke Hatsumi apparently mentioned in the past. It goes, “Nothing is supposed to work for you, the goal is control”. This statement encapsulates the importance of control. Control the self, control the situation, control everything.

I had written an article late in December 2022, describing the “Ashta Siddhi” or eight achievements mentioned in Hindu tradition. One of the last and highest of these Siddhi is “Vashitva”. This can be considered to be hypnosis. But in a more mundane situation, I consider this as “control of a situation” when performed by a highly experienced martial artist or maybe a warrior in a real fight. A link to this article is seen in the notes below*. Do refer this article for more exploration of control and its nuances.

When we say self-control, this is not a new idea. In the Arthashāstra by Kautilya (Chanakya), there is sutra which describes the root of happiness/a good life. It consists of four lines. These are seen below. The actual Sanskrit lines along with what they mean, as I understand them, are mentioned. Other cultures might have similar ideas. I am not aware of specific examples. If anyone any, please do share the same.

Sukhasya moolam dharmaha – The root of happiness/a good life is Dharma (the right actions/sustainable actions)

Dharmasya moolam arthaha – The root of Dharma is wealth/good economic condition

Arthasya moolam rājyam – The root of wealth/good economic condition is the State (well governed State)

Rājyasya moolam indriyānam vijayaha – The root of the well governed State are leaders who have conquered (have control over) their senses

Motivations and desires and emotional responses are triggered by the senses. Controlling one’s senses is what we call self-control. It is expected that a ruler or leader or administrator is one who has achieved the same. If and only if this has been achieved can a leader be expected to be able to control all the situations that affect a State. And this control of the situation is where good administration originates. It is thus the same thing as taught in the Bujinkan, even if the latter is more focused on the individual and not on the State or rulers/administrators of the same.

The path is the same; control the self, control the situation. Do this all the time to control every situation, end up with control over everything. This is the objective, not a guarantee. This brings us full circle to Lord Rama. Maryāda is “to limit/limit”, but “Control” is the key. There can be no Maryāda without control. And thus, with control our civilization got Purushothama! And “Control” is what we still strive to achieve.

JAI SHREE RAM!

Above is a photo of an interpretation of Rama by artist Varun Ram, made in 2008. I bought a copy of this artwork in the Bangalore Comic Con 2012 (the first one in Bangalore). It is not a traditional representation of Rama, but one that I greatly appreciate.

Notes:

* https://mundanebudo.com/2022/12/22/the-ashta-siddhi-and-budo/

** “Dharma”, “Artha”, “Kāma” and “Moksha” – “Right actions”, “Wealth”, “Desires”, “Liberation”