Today is “World Lizard Day” (August 14th). Tomorrow is the Independence Day in India (August 15th). So, the two were connected (in my head) with a nice little legend from Indian history and I felt like sharing the same. This is unlike my usual posts where I explore the intersections between Hindu/Indian culture and the martial arts (mainly the Bujinkan system of martial arts). I had no idea that there was a day to celebrate lizards! I was told that today was Word Lizard Day by Windows and this new learning triggered this article. There is no specific link between this article and the Bujinkan or any other martial art. But I will definitely make a stretch and try to connect this legend with the martial arts. 😛
In India we share space with a species of monitor lizard called the “Common Indian Monitor”, also called the “Bengal Monitor” (Varanus Bengalensis). It is seen in almost all parts of the country. Along the east coast of India there is another larger species called the Asian Water Monitor (Varanus Salvator). The Common Monitor lizard grows to be between 5 and 7 kg and grows to a length of around 4 feet or a little more. The Water Monitor is almost one and a half times larger in size.
Image credit – someone from my family
The Common Monitor eats small birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians and eggs of all of these. It is in turn eaten by many species including humans, especially when it is young or in its juvenile years. Young monitors have spots while adults are more a uniform grey. It is not a threat to humans. The largest extant monitor lizard is the Komodo Dragon that inhabits a few islands of Indonesia. The largest ever monitor to have existed, as known today is the Megalania, which once inhabited Australia, but is long extinct (early humans who entered Australia are likely to have encountered this monster).
The Indian Independence Day is celebrated to mark the occasion when the British left our country after nearly two centuries. But the notion of Independence is older as I have learnt it, as India has been invaded by outsiders several times over the last 2,500 years. Most of the invaders assimilated into the existing society and culture after capturing parts of the geography. But some over the last thousand years did not and tried to impose external culture, ideas and ways of life on the existing society. And there has always been an attempt to restore self-rule or uproot the invading powers.
During the time when the Maratha empire was being established, as modern history and popular consciousness teaches us, there was a notion of Swaraj or Swarajya, (I have heard it sometimes referred to as Hindavi Swarajya) which means self-rule or more appropriately as I understand it, “our own rule or our own kingdom”. This notion was to ensure that the lands where the Maratha lived were free from the rule of the Mughal empire and some of the Deccan sultanates. Both the Mughals (Turco-Mongol Timurids) and the Deccan sultanates were of foreign origin and Islamic in nature. The Deccan sultanates were far less foreign, but were defeated and supplanted by the Mughals and the Nizam of Hyderabad (a vassal of the Mughals, who later became independent).
The Marathas fought all these powers over several decades and emerged victorious, supplanting or at least subduing all of them. They were the pre-eminent power in India when the British East India Company started having ambitions of power and grandeur. The idea of Swaraj that the Marathas aspired to is the one I am referring to in the title of this article.
One of the great generals of the Marathas was Tanhaji Malusare, about whom a popular and successful Hindi movie was produced in 2020. He, along with his troops captured the fortress of Kondhana, but Tanhaji lost his life in this battle. The fortress is called Sinhagad today in honour of Tanhaji (he was a lion, which is a Sinh and hence Sinhgad, fortress of the lion). This battle was very hard and the Marathas scaled the sheer walls at night, an act of great daring, before defeating the garrison to take fortress.
There is a legend that Tanhaji and his troops used a monitor lizard to scale fortress walls. I am not sure if this legend is specific to the battle of Sinhgad or if they are supposed to have done so in general, in other campaigns. A monitor lizard has very powerful claws and are good climbers. This is a known fact. So, the Marathas are supposed to have tied a rope to a pet monitor (monitors are kept as pets even to this day in many parts of the world), which then scaled the fortress wall and with its strong claws held on as some soldiers scaled the walls and then helped the rest of the troops do the same. The monitor was, in essence, used as a living, trained grappling hook.
Of course, this is a legend and not real history. I have even seen a name that the pet monitor is supposed to have had! A monitor lizard is called a “Ghorpad” in Marathi. Ghorpade is also a last name used in Maharashtra to this day, and obviously it is used in other parts of India as well with migration over the last few centuries. So, from what I have learnt, it is likely that there was a group of people from the Ghorpade community, who were expert rock climbers/boulderers. This team of climbers scaled the fortress first and led the rest up. The climbers were so good that either they were compared to a monitor, or vice versa. This is an explanation for the legend. Considering that the Marathas were successful in achieving Swaraj, the legend of the monitor lizard is inextricably linked to the creation of the same 🙂 . This is the connection between “Swaraj and the lizard”.
The martial arts of the Bujinkan system are sometimes referred to as “Ninjutsu”. “Nin” refers to “perseverance”. So Ninjutsu is “the art of perseverance (or persevering)”. The Marathas, all through their existence as a power centre in India, from being a small one in the mid-17th century all the way till their fall in the early 19th century, fought in different terrain and against all odds. They mastered guerrilla warfare apart from fighting pitched battles and fighting in the forests and mountains. They also developed a very effective navy.
During the time when Mughal emperor Aurangzeb fought them for twenty six years, most of which he spent in the south, the Marathas fought a running war. Many of their commanders were examples of “living in the saddle”. To fight a numerically superior force, they were extremely mobile and fought as light cavalry, leaving behind their artillery. The Marathas eventually wore down and defeated the Mughal invasion.
There is a wonderful book called “Battles of the Maratha Empire” by Aneesh Gokhale*. In the appendix of this book, Mr. Gokhale lists the battles fought against Aurangzeb. The battles fought were from central India all the way to Tamil Nadu. The Maratha troops literally rode across peninsular India to fight battles. They did this week after week, all their lives, for multiple generations. This is the very DEFINITION of perseverance. Add to this their ability to fight in different terrain and different foes, from the Deccan sultans to the British, each in a different manner, and across two centuries, they are the very picture of the “art of persevering”. So, purely as the definition goes, they were true practitioners of Ninjutsu. Of course, this is only with the benefit of hindsight, but the concept holds as far I am concerned.
Now, I have one last point, on a lighter note. The popular image of the Ninja is that of a black clad warrior who is doing secretive activities like a spy or Special Forces operatives. The ninja is seen in a solitary manner or in small groups. One tool that is fairly often associated with the ninja is the “kagi nawa”. The kagi nawa is a rope with a hook, a grappling hook, used to scale castle walls in Japan (or elsewhere in modern movies). This tool also doubles up as a weapon if the situation demands.
Considering that this article is about a grappling hook (!) albeit a legendary live one in the form of a lizard and an oft represented ninja tool/weapon is the grappling hook (kagi nawa) as well, just revisiting a legend of how a lizard aided in the formation of Swaraj, turns the Marathas into Ninjas! 🙂 Of course, as already stated, this last bit is in a lighter vein and should only be considered inasmuch that it brings one to smile.
I usually post on alternate Thursdays. But considering the Independence Day tomorrow, I am making an exception and posting on a Tuesday, two days before schedule. I will revert to the usual Thursday posts from 31st August.
Some absurdity – If I had to stretch the connections above further, I would link the monitor lizards to martial arts as well. Monitor lizards are found in most of Africa, West Asia, the Indian Subcontinent, South East Asia, East Asia and in Australia as well. Many Monitor species, when they need to establish a pecking order or fight over mating rights, wrestle each other. They grapple while standing on their hind legs with support from their tails. Across almost all the territories they inhabit, humans also have strong traditions of the martial arts, if not specifically unarmed wrestling itself! So, the lizards are as martial as the humans. 😀
Nahusha was an ancestor of the Pandavas, who are the victors of the Kurukshetra War described in the Mahabharata. The Pandavas are something like the twenty second generation after Nahusha in the Chandravamsha++ (Lunar dynasty). Nahusha is one of the well-known ancestors of the Pandavas and an illustrious king during his time. He lived a storied life which involved great achievements, succumbing to ego, enduring a curse for long years followed by eventual redemption and an ascension to Heaven (Indra’s abode).
One of the stories related to Nahusha is about the Boon* (Vara) he received from Lord Brahma. This Boon made Nahusha incredibly powerful and pretty much undefeatable by anyone he could see or was anywhere in his field of vision. The Boon bestowed on Nahusha the ability to cow anyone he laid his eyes upon if they had any ill intent towards him. When Nahusha looked at them, they would be sapped of their strength and abilities, literally their “energy”, and they would come under his sway.
Image credit – “Nahusha”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
So, in simpler terms, if anyone had any intent to harm Nahusha in anyway, he just had to look at them to end that threat. The individuals having the ill intent would be rendered powerless and also be under the control of Nahusha as soon as they entered his field of vision. This included conspirators, not just people who would attack him physically. It is a highly desirable and badass ability even by modern standards. It is something like having drones everywhere, which know everyone’s intentions and this information can be used to control them, whether or not they know it; a very rogue AI meets 1984 type of scenario!
This Vara is bestowed on Nahusha when he is temporarily asked to be the king of Heaven (Swarga, the abode of Indra and the other Devas). This happens when Indra has lost his abilities and vitality, at a time when Nahusha is the greatest among the kings of Men (humans). This kingship of Swarga and the Vara are a reward for the virtuous life he has led until then. The Vara is a tool he can employ in his protective duties towards his kingdom and Swarga.
But like in many other cases, the great achievements and recognition goes to his head and Nahusha becomes a tyrant, turning his “Gaze” on the Devas, the great Rishis (Sages and Seers) and everyone else. He makes slaves of great people, making them do menial jobs for him simply to humiliate them and rub in the fact that they are powerless against their Lord. All these Devas and other great people are incapable of deposing Nahusha or even resisting his behaviour.
Image credit – “Nahusha”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
But, over time, a counter is devised to the “Gaze of Nahusha”. Maharishi Brighu hides in the matted locks of Maharishi Agastya, and curses Nahusha to turn into a snake and live on Earth. This causes Nahusha to lose his human form, kingship and the ability to rule. But while serving out the curse on Earth (the mortal realm) he retains the abilities of his “Gaze”. Of course, while we can think of one Rishi hiding in the locks of another as an element of fantasy, this is an ability that is possessed by great Rishis and the two Rishis involved in defeating Nahusha are two of the greatest ever. But in a more mundane situation, we can consider that the curse on Nahusha could be pronounced from any hiding place, which would keep the person uttering the curse out of sight of Nahusha.
Credits for the two images above – “Nahusha”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
In the Bujinkan system of martial arts, there used to be yearly themes. These themes were concepts or forms or systems of movement and fighting that the Grandmaster used to suggest, which used to be the focus for the duration of that year apart from other general training that practitioners of this system went through. The Soke (Grandmaster, though the word means “Inheritor”), Sensei Hatsumi Masaaki, announced these themes all the way from the early nineties till the onset of the pandemic.
The theme of the year, back in 2007, was “Kuki Taishou”. This means, “Smile of the Ninth Demon”. The “Ninth Demon” referred to, is the highest of the demons with incredible martial ability. This Demon, as I recall is not evil, but more of a guardian deity, who protects sacred spaces. Any attempt to violate the Demon or what he protects will almost certainly end in the destruction of the attacker.
The Demon will not attack, only protect. Any attacker, once she or he or they (multiple attackers), see the Demon, are dissuaded from going further with the attack or even beginning the same. This is because the abilities of the Demon are obvious at a glance, as is their own defeat. So, the fight is over before it begins. This is protection because, THERE WAS NO FIGHT.
I have also heard it said by my mentors, that the Demon just looks at the potential attackers and smiles. He is just standing or sitting nonchalantly allowing them to decide the next course of action. His smile on seeing the attacker(s) and the nonchalance exudes an extraordinary confidence and demonstrates his abilities without having to do anything. This overall experience in the presence of the Demon makes the attacker(s) realize that they stand no chance and hence the situation is diffused.
In this sense, in my opinion, the “Gaze of Nahusha” and “Kuki Taishou” are very similar, if not the same. In both cases, a person just looking at another individual or set of individuals, cows the other into submission, or at least dissuades them from initiating any violent conflict (physical conflict at least).
In the case of the Gaze, it has an element of magic as it is a Boon bestowed on an individual. In the case of the Demon, he has extraordinary martial abilities, but this could also have magical overtones as he is a Demon after all. I am not aware if the Ninth Demon became a Demon because of the martial abilities that were developed. In the latter case, “Demon” would be more a title than an entity/species denomination.
If we remove the Divine and magical aspects of these abilities, they still work, just not as elegantly or simply, as in the stories. Also, the path to achieve even a semblance of these abilities takes years of practice and experience through continuous training.
If we consider usual modern-day training in the traditional martial arts, it is one on one for the most part, with a little training against multiple opponents (just 2 or 3 opponents most of the time). The training against multiple opponents is done to understand how difficult it is to survive this situation. When we train one on one, even if one is just a beginner or is doing so for the first time, one “gets a feel” of which opponent is more dangerous, more skilled, stronger or faster. Of course, with greater experience, this feel of an opponent (what I described as “Shatrubodha** in a previous article) becomes clearer and occurs even before a physical exchange. With lesser experience, this feeling might occur after one or a few physical exchanges or maybe after an interaction (I am considering an interaction as involving multiple exchanges) or two. This ability to gain a sense of the opponent, even develops based on seeing the opponent in action against others, in videos and based on reputation, or what one has heard of her or him. This “feel of an opponent” helps us avoid injury and is a very important part of the martial arts. This reading of the opponent is what is happening in the gaps in a fight, when fighters are sizing each other up and trying to understand an opponent.
The feeling of Kuki Taishou is this ability amplified. A martial artist or fighter with great ability or strength or both, refined by lots of experience, has a natural nonchalance that comes about as a result of this experience. This is something that is grasped by others, more so by other martial artists and to a lesser extent by those that are not practitioners of the martial arts. This extends further when a martial artist is seen with one’s favourite weapon on the fighting area of one’s choice.
When this non-physical interaction occurs, the urge of the one who senses greater prowess in the other, is to mitigate the risk to oneself and it might lead to a shorter fight or hopefully a lack of a fight. This situation is true in both one against many or many against one scenarios. If the one comes off as very dangerous, even the many might choose to NOT take her or him on, and of course if one is taking on many, it is just prudent to walk away intact.
Beyond the martial arts, this is also true in other aspects of life. We know that there are experts in all fields. Based on our interaction with these experts, we know when to not argue with them on specific topics. We also accept the suggestions and guidance of certain persons more readily over those of others, whether at work or in matters relating to relationships, or anything else.
This concept of avoiding conflict with specific people due to Kuki Taishou, can also be expanded to processes. There can be processes put in place to identify root causes for failures at work. If these processes are very stringent and require a lot of effort, they succeed in making people avoid failures just to not interact with the RCA (root cause analysis) process. This perhaps makes people diligent at work. There could also be a very cumbersome visa provision process put in place by some countries vis-a vis some other nations, just to discourage visitors from specific countries. If the process is very troublesome, people might just choose to visit a different country. This could be in cases where people from a specific country might be known to overstay and violate visa guidelines.
So, making another person(s) realize that an interaction, specifically one that leads to conflict, physical or otherwise, is not worth it, with respect to another individual or a group of the same, is Kuki Taishou. The “Gaze of Nahusha” did the same, thus protecting him and as an extension, his kingdom and subjects.
Kuki Taishou and the “Gaze” are specifically tools that are preventive in nature, even though the ability to gain the same is through practice of both defensive and offensive movements (even Nahusha had several battlefield victories BEFORE he was bestowed the boon of the Gaze). This preventive aspect is what gives it its association with a guardian (like the Demon) or a protector (like Nahusha). But this does not mean that someone who has developed the ability of Kuki Taishou cannot be overcome.
Kuki Taishou is preventive because it gives pause to the opponent, who realizes that an attack is inimical to herself or himself and hence is to be avoided altogether. This pause occurs only as long as the ability of the opponent is vastly greater than that of the opponent. If ever there is a slacking in the training and the gap in the abilities or strength of the defender (demon equivalent) and attacker reduces to manageable levels, Kuki Taishou is greatly diminished or lost altogether. This will result in the attacker(s) going through with the attack. The attacker might even reverse Kuki Taishou through training and development of her or his own, when the defender is the one that needs to run to not face the attack!
Lastly, Kuki Taishou as discussed above is useful mainly in a melee like situation. This means when individuals or groups of the same face off either without weapons or with weapons that are not ranged weapons, like bows and arrows, crossbows, javelins, slingshots, chakra and the like. In Bharatiya terms, Kuki Taishou is relevant when the confrontation is with Shastra and not Astra. The same is true with the Gaze of Nahusha, which would only be effective if the person he wished to subdue was in range of and in the field of his vision.
Due to this detail, countermeasures will be developed for Kuki Taishou, just as one was developed to overcome the Gaze of Nahusha. Like all boons, there was a loophole in the abilities of this one as well. And to nullify the advantage of Kuki Taishou, subterfuge and guerrilla tactics can be employed. This includes the use of Astra, or ranged weapons, which do not allow the Demon or equivalent adversary to bring to bear their superior close quarter martial arts skills. Arrows, darts and the like could even be shot by individuals from concealment (this is exactly what was done to Nahusha, albeit with a curse and not a physical weapon – a curse could qualify as a mystical weapon). Or opponents could simply overwhelm individuals with large numbers of attackers. Subterfuge includes the use of poisoned food, accidents through engineering architectural elements to fail, and the like. Alternatively, as already discussed, opponents can put off an attack and train until the advantage is nullified and then attack, when Kuki Taishou is no longer relevant due to the absence of a gap in the abilities of the adversary.
In conclusion, Kuki Taishou, in my opinion, is very like the “Gaze of Nahusha”. It is extremely useful, specifically in (perhaps only in) a close quarters combat situation, with Shastra and not Astra. Maintenance of Kuki Taishou needs continuous training, which leads to improvement and refinement of one’s martial abilities. Of course, when this concept is applied in conflict management that is not physical in nature, like we all face at work and in life, the principles are the same and work as effectively, with the added advantage that distance does not matter, as communication through any media can lead to Kuki Taishou being apparent, though after an interaction or two, as the gut feel apparent due to physical presence might be absent.
Kuki Taishou will lead to the creation of counter measures to itself if used either indiscriminately or in ways that only serve one’s ego. This is just like the “Gaze”, and cannot be rested on as the ONE laurel that it is. The ability to use it in creative ways to overcome the inevitable counter measures that are developed is vital. This was something Nahusha in his pride failed to do and paid the price for the same.
The “Gaze” and likewise the attributes of Kuki Taishou are not an ironclad insurance against an attack. They are a mitigation mechanism and protection, not unlike a great fortress or a great set of armour. Nor are they the highest level of the martial arts; they are a stepping stone that could lead to a realization that conflict management is the most important thing to avert great injury or destruction due to violent conflict, physical or otherwise. It is not a one time achievement either. Kuki Taishou is a realization after years of training and the refinement of the same. Even its retention requires continuous training, all through one’s life, while considering the abilities gained, lost, added to and diminished with age, as one’s life progresses.
One last point regarding Kuki Taishou that strikes me is this. We learn that during the Cold War years, there was this doctrine called “MAD” or “Mutually Assured Destruction”. This was specifically applied in the context of Nuclear War, where any attack by one side would lead to retaliation by the other and both would certainly face complete destruction. Is this a situation where both sides, having equal abilities exude Kuki Taishou at each other all the time? And is this why neither side wanted to turn the cold war into a hot war? And is the “Arms Race” a consequence of having to nullify the Kuki Taishou of the other side? Perhaps it is, but I do not have a certain answer. It might not be Kuki Taishou, as one thing I have heard is that “nonchalance” is a very important aspect of the concept, and the deployment of nuclear weapons does not display nonchalance+ as I see it. And if economics is what ended the cold war, was that the countermeasure to the Kuki Taishou of one side by the other? Perhaps, again, I only have the question, not the answer.
The test for the fifth dan in the Bujinkan is also called the “Sakki” test. Sakki here generally refers to “intuitive ability”. For those that are not a part of the Bujinkan, I am describing the test. The test involves two people, one administering the test and another who is being tested. There are other people around who determine if the person passed the test or not. The person administering the test and those determining if the test was a pass or not are all holders of the 15th dan, which is the highest rank in the Bujinkan system (there are a couple of other higher administrative ranks).
The person taking the test sits in an approximation of the Vajrasana and the person administering the test stands behind her or him. Both the individuals have their eyes closed for the duration of the test. The person in Vajrasana is hopefully in a meditative state. The person standing behind her or him cuts down at her or his head with a padded/training sword. The expectation is that the person in Vajrasana should sense the attack based on the intent of the person cutting and move out of the way just in time (not too early either). If he or she moves in time and does not get hit, the test is a pass, else it is a fail, and the person has to try again. When it is said “move”, it could be a roll, break fall, getting up in time, or anything else. The “pass or failure” in the test is determined by the other 15h Dans who are observing the test or by the Soke, Hatsumi Sensei himself.
The key for this test is to “sense the intent of the cut”. The intent is present before the action of cut and hence the person will always survive being hit if he or she moves in response to the intent and not in response to any other of the five senses. The stimulus from these five might not allow time enough to get out of the way of the sword.
From my teacher and all my seniors and mentors, who have greater experience with the Sakki test, I am given to understand that the test is for both the person cutting and the one evading the cut. While the person who passes the test is the one who evades the cut, the true challenge apparently is for the one cutting. It is the responsibility of the person cutting to establish a connection with the one taking the test. If they can establish the connection, they are also successful in transferring the intent to the person, which triggers the movement. So, the test is more to allow the person being tested to realize that he or she has the intuitive ability and can trust the same, it is not to test the extent or timing of the same. This in turn puts the responsibility of the passing or failing on the person delivering the cut. So, if the person fails, it could mean that the person cutting did not have the connection with the person taking the cut. And this is perhaps why many people who have given many cuts to different people think it is a responsibility to “give a good cut”. I have seen people tell each other that they are sorry that they could not give a good cut as well. There are a lot of videos of the Sakki Test on YouTube, which one can look for to get a sense of the same. I am not going to link any as it is impossible to decide which one is the best representation of the same. 😊
The challenge in the test is that all external disturbances which could distract one from the task at hand, the test, is removed, as are all other stimuli like sound, sight, smell and touch. Pure instinct might be triggered if one is not thinking of the same, but just thinking about it makes it very hard and the removal of the five conventional senses acts in the same way.
Thus, the key to the entire 5th dan test is the “connection” between the tester and the tested. And this important aspect of the test led to this article. I will hopefully elucidate this key concept with what has been normal behaviour in Hindu culture over a very long period of time.
Anyone who has watched even a few episodes of the many “Mythological” serials on the various TV channels would have seen one character or the other seeking the Aashirwada (or Aashirwad) of many others. An Aashirwada can be considered a “Blessing”. The act as seen on TV would generally involve one character who is either younger by age or achievements or abilities, touch the feet of another character or perform a prostrated namaskaara at the feet of the other, either in greeting, farewell or to specifically seek the blessing of the other person. The other person obviously has greater experience or wisdom in any of the attributes just mentioned and offers blessings.
Credit for the images (left to right) – From “Enter Drona”, Mahabharata – 5 & “Hanuman to the rescue”, both published by Amar Chitra Katha
Some of the oft uttered blessings we see are (this is a very small sample set) –
Aayushmaan / Aayushmati Bhava – Have a long life
Vijayee Bhava – Be victorious
Yashaswi Bhava – Be successful
Keertiman / Keertimati Bhava – Be well known / achieve fame
These examples are from Hindi. But the same can uttered in any of the many languages in India. Most importantly, this is not an act just seen on TV or web series. Seeking the blessings/aashirwaada is an ancient practice that all of us continue with to this day. We specifically seek the blessings of elders and gurus. As we get on in our years, we might have to bless the youngsters in the family, and this need to be ready to pass on the blessings is what prompted this article.
Are the blessings just words that are uttered? Like wishing someone well? Or can they genuinely have a beneficial impact on the person who has received the blessings? And if the effect has to manifest in reality, what are the requirements on the part of the one giving the blessing and the one receiving the blessings? These are questions I do not have answers to, and any answers for the same would be welcome. But I do have some thoughts on the matter which I shall share. These are purely opinions based on personal experience, observation, and martial training.
Blessings are important to different people to varying degrees, depending on their upbringing, life experiences, association with specific individuals, association with places and objects linked to individuals and associations of many other types that people can think of. Places are considered sacred or blessed based on their association with Divinities or events that are associated with the same. Sites of old family homes are also considered blessed due to association with one’s own grandparents and ancestors. In these cases, the effort put into the journey to get to these places itself becomes achievement of an “experiential blessing”, where the experience of the journey is part of the blessing.
Either way, whether the blessing is from a person or due to a journey or a location, the connection is key. Belief is a connection, or at least the “option of giving a connection a chance”. Based on this observation, in my opinion, the blessing is no different than the ability to transmit intent in the sakki test, with the “connect” being the key aspect in both. In a conventional setting, the “intent” is the good will or desire for success of the one seeking the blessing. I opine that just as one can transmit intent in the Sakki test, the good will can be transmitted if the “connection” between the one blessing and the one seeking the same is strong. And just as the intent in the test can move a person, the will of the person blessing, can positively impact the one being blessed. This will be explored further below, with boons and curses.
Blessings of a more specific nature and perhaps of a more powerful variety can be called “Boons” and the opposite of “Boons” are “Curses”. Blessings are much simpler and seen in all human interactions where elders and teachers “wish for” or “bless” their wards, students and juniors, a favourable outcome in life. Let us consider “Boons” and “Curses” for a further exploration of connection and control.
Once again, anyone who has read stories from Hindu culture will surely have noticed the following two things. People meditate and perform penance(s) to earn “Boons” that grant them abilities beyond those of normal humans, and make the ones earning the boons almost equivalent to Gods. On the other side of the same, great Sages “Curse” people and even the Devas and Gandharvas for their indiscretions and mistakes, the consequences of which are dire and painful, and have to be endured for long periods of time.
A Boon is called a Vara in Kannada or maybe Var (if the language is closer to Hindi than to South Indian languages). Varadaana or Vardaan is the granting of a boon. A Vara is more than a Blessing in the stories. It grants the one receiving the same special abilities. These could include very long life spans, protection from harm from all but a few forms of attack, great knowledge or wisdom, incredible strength beyond that imaginable by any mortal human, or the ability to possess, use and retrieve weapons of unimaginably destructive potential.
Obtaining a Vara is no easy task. Firstly, one needs to demonstrate the eligibility to request a Vara and then also demonstrate the traits needed to wield the ability granted by the Vara. One requests the granting of a Vara by great beings that are not human or are superhuman; Varas are granted by the Devas or Lord Brahma or Lord Shiva. Even earning their presence requires expending great effort over long periods of time. Getting these divine beings to appear before one where the request for the Vara can be made is the demonstration of eligibility to ask for a Boon.
A common feature we see in many stories is that the means to request the presence of a divine being is meditation, also referred to as penance. This is shown as meditating on the God whose presence is being requested with singular focus for long durations of time, with no breaks. In the case of Arjuna when he was on a quest to acquire the Paashupataastra, Lord Shiva tested him by appearing in human form and forcing him to fight, and thus reveal his abilities, apart from just the meditation. Based on my understanding, the qualities that are demonstrated while performing Tapas (meditation) are, perseverance, dedication, focus, drive, resistance to pain, self-control and most importantly, letting go of the self **.
If the God whose presence is desired is impressed or convinced by the qualities seen, she or he appears to the person performing the meditation and grants them the opportunity to request a Vara of their choice. The letting go of the self is shown in some stories to be so complete that anthills or trees grow on the person, as if they were just a rock and not a sentient being anymore. There are also cases where there are multiple tests like with Arjuna that have to be overcome, apart from the meditation; these could be as diversions or disturbances to the meditation or something that needs to be endured in one’s life (the duration may vary).1
Image credit – “Dashaavatara”, published by Amar Chitra Katha (Kindle edition)
Many individuals request immortality and are denied the same as it goes against the natural order of things, and are told to request something else that will aid in the ambitions of their lives. A miniscule sample of Varas requested by individuals are mentioned below. Observe that these Boons could be granted to extraordinary individuals who went on to become “villains” in their lifetimes due to tremendous ego post the acquisition of the Vara.
Taarakaasura requesting Lord Brahma to be unkillable by anything other than a son of Lord Shiva (when Lord Shiva a widower and in deep meditation for ages).
Arjuna requesting Lord Shiva to grant him the ability to use the Paashupataastra.
Hiranyakashipu requesting Lord Brahma to be unkillable by any human, animal, weapon, during the day, at night, inside or outside any structure.
Mahishaasura requesting Lord Brahma to be unkillable by any male.
Credit for the images (left to right) – “Prahlada” and “Arjuna’s quest for weapons”, “Mahabharatha – 20”, both published by Amar Chitra Katha
A Curse is the opposite of a Boon. A Curse is a called a “Shaapa” in Kannada and Shraap or Shaap in Hindi. While a Vara bestows a specific ability or protection to an individual, a Shaapa or Curse causes a specific & severe problem to the individual who has been cursed. Many a time, once the curse is uttered, the person who is cursed is penitent and begs for forgiveness. When this happens, the person who has uttered the curse also states a remedy to the same. But there is definitely a long period of suffering involved before the curse is lifted.
Credit for the images – “Yayati” published by Amar Chitra Katha
In this last aspect a Shaapa is like a Vara; in one case it takes a long time of repentance with inconvenience to serve out the time of the curse and in the other, one needs to endure a long time of inconvenience to be eligible to ask for a Boon. So, in either case the qualities one must acquire and demonstrate are the same, even if the origin of the demonstration is opposite in nature. Surviving a curse has a root cause beyond oneself while the effort to gain a boon lies within oneself. In a way a curse is surviving an uke’s (opponent’s) attack while a boon is being a tori (defender), voluntarily against an uke. Striving for a boon also has an aspect of the Musha Shyugyo (warrior’s journey) in that the journey begins voluntarily and the person who ends the journey is much changed from the one who started the same, due to the trials and hardships endured during the same.
From my recollection of stories from Hindu culture, curses are uttered by great Sages or Maharishis who have several years’ worth of Saadhana (practice in the right rituals, meditation and scripture) and knowledge. They utter the curse due to a grave indiscretion or blunder on the part of the person who is being cursed. These mistakes generally stem from an inflated ego after great achievement and this mistake then messes with the natural order, or rhythm of goings on in the universe. A tiny sample set of curses are mentioned below.
Durvasa cursing Indra to lose his strength, ability and “Tejas” (radiance or vitality)
Agastya cursing Nahusha to live on Earth as a snake until he is relived of the same
Shukracharya cursing Yayati to perpetual old age unless one of his sons is willing to exchange his youth with him
Apsaras and Gandharvas are cursed on many occasions for losing a sense of space and propriety while performing the arts in the presence of others
Ahalya & Indra being cursed by Rishi Gautama for their infidelity
Credit for the images (left to right) – “Nahusha”, “Hanuman to the rescue”, both published by Amar Chitra Katha
A curse has consequences for both the person who utters the same and the one who is cursed. Perhaps this is true in the case of a boon as well, but may not be apparent in the stories as the entities bestowing the Vara are divine and there is no comparing such a being to a human, and so consequences are hard to identify. However, a curse, even when uttered by a Maharishi, is still by a human being acting against another human, even though the one uttering the curse is a highly evolved and accomplished human.
A case of the person cursing another and paying for the same is seen in the story of Rishi Brighu cursing Lord Vishnu for not receiving him as a good host should, when he visited Vaikunta (Lord Vishnu’s abode). Rishi Brighu, in his arrogance cursed a God! One of the Trimurthy no less! Lord Vishnu accepted the curse and touched the feet of the Rishi, but while doing so, he blinded the eye that existed in the foot of Brighu. This eye had allowed the Rishi to walk fast and almost float on the ground while not having to use his two normal eyes while moving about. But after this incident, he was forever slowed down and a great deal of his arrogance went with his extra eye.
Image credit – “Venkateshwara Taanada Chitragalu”, published by Pioneer Publications – above image depicts Lord Vishnu accepting the curse by Rishi Brighu as described earlier
I have not heard of any stories other than this one that explicitly mention the consequences of uttering a curse or bestowing a boon on anyone, for the person who delivers either the boon or the curse. When I mean consequence in this case, I refer to the ability or skill or strength that is expended in making the boon or a curse a reality. But this can be inferred from the story of the great sage Vishwamitra.
Before he became the Brahmarishi Vishwamitra, he was the king Kaushika. The king Kaushika wanted to become a Brahmarishi who would be considered an equal to the Brahmarishi Vasistha. So, he performed severe penance and meditated for years to achieve the abilities of a Brahmarishi, one of which was a complete control of one’s senses and desires. On three occasions, after developing great abilities on the path to becoming a Brahmarishi, he had to expend the gained abilities to succeed in activities he indulged in.
Once, his meditative focus was broken by the extremely beautiful Apsara, Menaka, which whom he later had a daughter. This was a case of not having mastered his senses and desires. Next, after achieving great prowess through meditation, he expended the same in creating a second Swarga (roughly translated as Heaven or the abode of Lord Indra) for the King Trishanku who wanted to enter Swarga without first dying. On the third occasion, he expended the abilities developed through austere meditative penance in trying to show low, the King Harishchandra, whose values he wanted to see broken (Vishwamitra failed and Harishchandra never strayed from his values).
In all three situations, Vishwamitra lost the abilities already developed and had to start with a great deficit on the path to becoming a Brahmarishi. He eventually did succeed, but the concept is quite clear. Acting on a boon or a curse, if we can consider the creation of a second Swarga as a boon and causing hardships to Harishchandra as a curse, results in the great Sage expending abilities developed over many years. It takes equally long to develop the same abilities again. I personally think a good analogy here could be an accident endured by a sportsperson or a martial artist. A lot of time is spent in recovering from the injury first and then even more time is spent is training the body and mind back to the peak they had once scaled, if this is at all possible.
Alternatively, it can be considered as the effort one has to spend in achieving a successful attack, like a flurry of punches and kicks at great speed or relentless grappling, both of which require a vast investment in money, time and effort to execute in the first place, and then to survive with successful execution; then there is the risk of injury and failure, which require more time and energy to overcome and try again later, if necessary. In a modern context, it is like investing in an expensive weapons platform like a drone swarm; losing it in a failed mission and then having to invest in a better platform and further resource expenditure in creating or refining doctrines for the usage of the new platform.
So, the boon or the curse, requires the person who bestows either to have already achieved complete control over the self and several other aspects of the universe. An extraordinary example of this would be the boon given by Maharishi Durvasa to Kunti. He was pleased with her attention to duty when she was in charge of his hospitality when he visited her father Kunti Bhoja. So, he granted her a boon which allowed her to summon the Deva of her choice to bestow a child on her, and she could do this 5 times! So, Maharishi Durvasa could grant the ability to summon a Deva to a human being! This means that we cannot even begin to comprehend the abilities that Durvasa possessed!
Image credit – “Bheeshma’s vow”, “Mahabharata – 2”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
This example brings into focus another aspect of a boon or a curse. The person bestowing either, on another individual, can actually control multiple aspects of the universe and get them to behave differently for specific individuals for several years at a time. This of course is impossible for mortals and the examples from the stories are all of extraordinary humans who are on par with the Gods or the Gods themselves, when they are uttering the boon or the curse.
But let us look at this from a more mundane everyday aspect. But before we consider examples from our everyday life, I share an opinion of mine. Boons, curses and blessings are transactional in nature. These are received in response to specific actions. The person receiving any of these will have performed a series of actions for a duration of time, which results in the person towards whom these actions were directed, bestowing the boon, curse or blessing. But there is a difference between blessings (aashirwaada) and boons (vara). The shaapa is not something one works towards but is the result of an indiscretion and perhaps a result of not letting go of one’s ego and NOT working correctly towards whatever the objective was.
A Vara is something specific that a person wants and can be granted by a superior or divine entity. In order to gain an audience and demonstrate eligibility for the vara, she or he performs the requisite actions, which can be physical or meditative in nature. But a blessing need not be something that is specifically worked towards. One performs one’s duties or responsibilities with complete focus and attention to detail. This is a demonstration of great self-control and management of one’s reaction to given surroundings. The individual(s) who are on the receiving end of this diligent activity are greatly pleased by the same. This results in the impressed person offering a blessing as a reward in return for the services or whatever else was received.
So, an aashirwaada need not be sought after, but is received as a reaction to a job or an activity well done, where as a vara is something that is sought after and activities are performed towards that objective. Consider this, the boon bestowed on Kunti was actually a blessing. Her hospitality towards Maharishi Durvasa was not with the objective of a boon, but just a job well done. In response to this, she was blessed by Durvasa with the boon. Now consider the Tapasya performed by any great Asura, say Hiranyakashipu, this was with the specific objective of achieving a boon which bestowed great abilities on him, which would in turn allow him to defeat the Devas.
A simpler example of a blessing would be an elder blessing someone younger with a long life, when the younger person touches her or his feet. The blessing in this case is a reward for remembering that this is the right way for a youngster to greet an elder. This system is also a good positive reinforcement in preserving one’s culture and way of life.
With the above observation, we can consider a few situations from daily life, which could represent boons, blessings and curses. We have all experienced appreciations and rewards at work. These range from appreciative emails to merchandise to pictures on a “wall of fame”. These are more common compared to promotions and pay hikes. They are handed out more often as they are less expensive to organizations and also reinforce (hopefully) behaviour that is preferred. We also tip generously depending on the quality of service we receive at hotels and restaurants. These, in my opinion, are analogous to blessings as they are in response to an impressive activity.
Now consider promotions and pay hikes. These are much harder to come by and are objectives which require a plan and set activities that demonstrate eligibility. An individual spends a few years understanding what the parameters needed for either of these are, and working towards the same. It requires networking, measurable achievements and the sheer effort to achieve visible experience. So, the pay hike or promotion here is a vara/boon and the activities are the tapasya or saadhana that goes into achieving the same. This is because it is a specific objective that is worked towards.
What about shaapa and curses? The explicit situations that define these are cases where one has to leave a job or bear the cost of activity or behaviour that lead to integrity issues. These can be one misusing client data or accepting bribes at work to alter expected decisions. It is a negative consequence of errors at work. When these are inadvertent, the curse could be very minor, like a mail with an apology which smooths things over.
But a curse could also be invisible and long term, which is also realized much later. These could be situations where one’s relationships are broken due to too much self-indulgence in career related objectives, or a sportsperson suffering debilitating injury due to not enough breaks or insufficient detraining time. This is akin to the statement “the path to hell is paved with good intentions”.
A last point regarding blessings here. Many of us would have experienced situations where we receive appreciation mails or certificates and don’t really care for them and are definitely not motivated to either repeat the same kind of hard work or keep up the level of effort that resulted in the appreciation in the first place. This happens for many reasons, especially if there is a statement like “we need to do even better the next time”, which makes the appreciation more of an expectation setting. This could also be as there are blessings given when one is working towards a boon (appreciation instead of a pay hike). Why would this kind of mismatch occur? I opine that this is due to what we discussed initially about blessings, boons and curses. A distinct lack of “Connect”. Individuals know when the appreciations are just a matter of course after some time and also when they come from senior leadership who have no visible impact on their work lives. All they do is append a signature to a set of words composed by someone else. So, there is an attempt at a blessing, but the lack of connect, renders it empty of any effect. This connect I am referring to is the rapport that any leadership develops with its teams and how it is nurtured through trials and tribulations at work.
Having considered how blessings can be rendered pointless, we need to consider cases even from the stories in Hindu culture where boons could end up being curses. Remember the blessing that became a boon to Kunti by Maharishi Durvasa? Kunti after the rishi had departed, either in innocence or curiosity invoked the boon, with Lord Surya, before she was married. This resulted in the birth of her son Karna, whose life was partially responsible for the great carnage in the battle of Kurukshetra apart from being an extraordinary tragedy on a personal level. So, a blessing was a boon, the use of which with no negative intentions still became a curse not only for Kunti but for entire kingdoms!
Image credit – “Bheeshma’s vow”, “Mahabharata – 2”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
Similarly, Ashwatthama is cursed by Lord Krishna at the end of the Kurukshetra war. He is denied the release of death and is functionally immortal for the rest of the Yuga cycle. An additional point is that a wound in his forehead caused by removing a jewel that was present there would never heal. This was a jewel that always granted him good health. If one recalls, all the great Asuras asked for immortality from Brahma to compensate for the Amrita the Devas had. But when the same was not an achievable boon, they asked for other great abilities that enabled them to subjugate the Devas despite the Amrita. So, Ashwatthama was granted immortality, which was considered a desired vara by many, as a curse! An extension of this could be that the boons achieved by the great Asuras always resulted in incredible pain and hardship as a result of the wars they unleashed. So, a boon for them became a curse for many others. And this resulted in the many avataaras of Lord Vishnu to slay these Asuras. So, the line between a boon and a curse is thin, but not invisible.
The means to assuage this problem also returns to the twin concepts of connection and control. One needs to continue with the self-control one possessed before receiving the boon after the act, perhaps to a greater degree. This is because the person enhanced by the boon possesses a far greater potential to cause damage to the universe around her or him. In other words, her or his ability to control the surroundings requires an equal increase in self-control to prevent her or his boon from becoming a curse for others! And in order to keep the control of others benevolent or at least less harmful, the ability to connect with others and better feel or empathize with their motivation and desires is vitally important. So, a boon or a blessing, degenerates into a curse over time with a lack of connection and control.
A modern-day example of a boon tending towards a curse is international monetary aid. We hear terms in the media of some countries being “addicted to monetary aid from the IMF (International Monetary Fund)”. In Indian media this is used in the context of countries like Pakistan and Sri Lanka. In the case of Pakistan, the country has never developed a governance system that allows the country’s economy to expand and its populace to prosper. It has approached the IMF multiple times, every few years, to save it from economic defaults. The aid package from the IMF is a boon which is used with no connect with the needs of the country and its populace, and becomes an addiction, and this is a curse.
This observation can be expanded to the economic and military aid the USA provided to the various dictators in South and Central America, Africa and the Middle East during the Cold War years. The aid allowed friendship between the dictator (not the country) and the government of the USA, but this allowed the USA to control the dictator keep the socialist and communist rebels at bay. However, this control did not allow prevention of atrocities on the population of the countries. So, the boon of aid led to “control through benevolence”, of the dictator, but the same became a curse in the long term for the populations of several countries. This is not unlike blessings from fake spiritual Gurus who are basically conmen. They have wonderful words and can connect with people, but their intent can only generate empty blessings which are definitely not boons but could be curses, as they have no control over anything, not even themselves.
The converse of this could be true as well. And we can consider something I have heard from a very senior practitioner of the Bujinkan as an example of this. My mentor says that in all your interactions with people, try to connect with them, get a sense of their requirements, what makes them happy, what really troubles them and the like. This connect is to be done in earnest, not with an objective of studying them, like one might study bird behaviour. This kind of connection could turn to a good rapport or friendship and lead to us providing really useful suggestions while not seeming superior or overbearing. This leads to them remembering the connection and might result in their feeling responsible for helping us when we need the same. This is “control through gratitude, camaraderie and responsibility”*. The words used are the same as those used in the earlier paragraph, but the context is entirely different! My mentor says that this is an objective of all Bujinkan practitioners and should be a key goal of training. He says that one should be able to control rooms full of people with this ability to connect. But of course, a connection on this level is really hard to achieve and requires self-control abilities that sometimes seem to be just wishful thinking. 😛
One last point regarding control here, at a level simpler than the one mentioned in the previous paragraph. From being generous with tips to approving promotions to enforcing a separation from a job to sending appreciation mails, all these instances stem from a connection, but can only be enacted when there is control over multiple aspects to ensure the desired outcome, be it the situation (appreciation mails), budget (pay hikes), seniority or responsibility (promotion or separation) in organizations. When this control is employed, it could lead more connect and even better control, like a virtuous cycle.
The appreciation mail that is not of any motivational value is a case of control without connect, control of the situation where one is aware of the outcome that warrants the appreciation and the ability to send the same, but no connect that adds value to the words of appreciation.
This aspect of control is also true in the martial arts. I have discussed connect and control with respect to the martial arts in greater detail in my previous article, the link to which is seen in the notes below***.
In conclusion, it seems quite clear that the concept of self-control and connecting to others and one’s surroundings as a precursor to control over others and the environment, even in a benevolent manner is something that humans have considered and chased after for a very long time. It is something that never ends and requires perpetual reinforcement, in the form of case studies which are what the stories from Hindu culture are. And their application spans everything from fighting and conflict management to daily life.
Notes:
*One of the Gojo we are taught in the Bujinkan states “Fumetsu no fusei”. This roughly means “give and give” or “endless giving”. It could mean that one thinks of giving and not the return on investment. This is one of the paths perhaps to the point mentioned above. But then, there is also a concept called “Sente” which is roughly “not making the first move” because one might then become the Uke or attacker and present openings to the opponent/defender. These two points appear to be contradictory, but they depend on the context in which they are used. So, the intent – whether it is benevolence or malice – becomes the key factor while deciding whether “fumetsu no fusei” or “sente” is in action. I have discussed the Gojo in an earlier article, the link to which is seen below.
An interesting connection between Budo and Bharatiya tradition
There are two concepts that are taught in the Bujinkan system of martial arts which are very simple to state but extremely difficult to express and achieve. The two concepts are “Connect” and “Control”. These concepts are mentioned to everyone practicing in the Bujinkan from their early days as practitioners and fairly often. But they are only expected to be practiced in earnest after several years of experience. Let me attempt to express what these concepts mean (at least to me), how they are intended to be understood and the context for the same.
I will start with the concept of “Connect”. There are four other concepts that have been shared as part of the training in the Bujinkan over the last seven or eight years. I have heard these from my teacher and mentors who in turn have heard the same from Soke Hatsumi Sensei back in Japan. These concepts are,
Do not use strength (Chikara Janai)
Do not fight (Tatakai wa Janai)
Match the Uke/opponent (Awaseru)
Do not sever the connection (En no Kirinai)
The original Japanese phrases that convey the idea are also mentioned above. There are several practitioners with vastly greater experience than I that have written about and explain each in detail. I would encourage everyone to read the same. I am not going into the etymology of the same and will stick to learning from my own personal training and experience.
When the statements “do not use strength” and “do not fight” are mentioned, they do not in any way denote or promote pacifism. They are referring to how one should not have an ego driving their actions in the fight. Using one’s physical strength might win an individual some fights. But it will not necessarily win all fights. One will always face opponents who possess greater physical strength. In a situation where there are multiple opponents, it is highly unlikely that one’s physical strength will match up to the combined strength of the opponents. Further, physical strength will wane to varying degrees for individuals with age. The well-known and obvious solution to this is the development of skill through a lot of training. Martial skills developed through training augment existing strength and also help overcome the strength of the opponent. It is also a means to reduce one’s own dependence on strength.
With the development of “skill” and a drop in the reliance on strength, one aspect that usually comes up in many martial arts, including the Bujinkan is to “use the opponent’s strength or intention against herself/himself”. This leads into the notion of “not fighting the opponent”. There are also statements that state, “Do not trouble the Uke (opponent)”, “Don’t do anything the opponent does not want to do”, “Let the opponent fight herself/himself”. All of these lead to the same aspect relating to a physical conflict; “even when in a fight, do not fight”. So, what does this mean?
Based on what I have understood, this refers more to one’s state of mind in a fight than the physical actions in a fight. It has more to do with not looking to do violence against an opponent and not refraining from the same. I have delved deeper into this aspect in my older article, “Ahimsa and the Martial Arts – Part 1”, the link to which is present in the notes to this article, seen below. Not fighting an opponent, in simple terms, means that causing harm to the opponent should not be the objective, surviving the fight with as little damage to oneself is.
The moment the objective relates to the opponent, like “causing harm to the attacker” or “winning against the uke”, the ego takes over and becomes a motive which leads one to focus on a specific outcome. This is because winning or getting the opponent to fall or be locked or hit or get injured have specific definitions which need a series of actions, all of which the opponent will also strive to counter while trying to cause harm to the defender (tori). Getting these actions right is very difficult and leads to a slippery slope which might not be possible to overcome.
However, if survival is the only objective, one only needs to focus on not letting the attack succeed. This makes a lot more space available in a fight. Also, the attacker needs to do all the work, while the defender only needs to get into a safe space, albeit continuously. This moving to a safe position opens up the opportunity to gradually move in a way that causes the opponent to just wear out and stop the attacks or lose the ability to do so, which could be due to losing her or his balance, getting hit due to being open while attacking and the like. Either way, the danger due to the attack is mitigated. In short, while only the uke was attacking, the defender (tori) was only staying alive and not fighting, even if it does not appear so to an outside observer. It was all in the state of mind.
Thus, not using strength is about using skill in a conflict and not fighting is about not having an objective vis-a-vis the opponent, but instead moving to stay in the safest possible space during a conflict. Thus, the skills to develop are, to move oneself physically to a safe place and to not have malice towards the opponent.
There are two parts to developing the ability to move in a manner that allows one to be safe. The first of course, is a lot of training, years of practice and experimentation with different people of varying levels of experience in physical conflicts. This includes armed and unarmed fights with and without armour, depending on what is available. In the Bujinkan, this generally does not include modern day firearms and historical weapons which are discharged. But there are other martial arts that do include these, based on the little that I know of these artforms.
The second aspect is to move exactly when necessary and neither too early nor too late. Moving too early means the opponent can correct or change the attack and moving too late means facing the brunt of the attack. Moving at the right time, or more practically, moving as close to the right time as possible, depends on realizing when the attack is coming and having a sense of what the attack is aiming to do. This knowledge of course, is not exact and the prediction of the same is not a precise science. It is a feeling one gets by being in a conflict and over time becomes a “gut feel” or “intuition”. Thus, knowing the timing and danger of any attack is about being aware of the opponent with the experience of having been mindful of many other opponents in the past.
All of this, in concert, means that one should be able to get a read on the opponent while being in the fight. In simpler terms, one needs to be able to “connect” with the opponent to be able to identify when to move and where to move, to stay safe during a physical conflict. If one can largely be able to connect with the opponent and move as required to stay safe, one will have matched the movement of the opponent and thus mitigated the threat posed by one. This is what is meant by the third concept above, which is “Awaseru”, or, to match the opponent.
If one does achieve Awaseru, the next harder concept reveals itself. This is to keep the connection and not lose it. This concept of keeping the connection is called “En no kirinai”, which roughly translates to “do not sever the connection”. If one can connect with the opponent and match her or his movement, the realization of the same, as soon as it occurs, triggers the possibility of breaking the connection as well.
Awaseru, when it does happen, allows one to reduce risk to oneself while the opponent is expending efforts to reverse this and in all likelihood exposing herself or himself to an attack. This might happen over the course of two or three attacks. Once an opening is exposed, there are two possible situations. The first is to exploit the opening to end the fight if possible. But then, this exploitation of an opening might not work as expected because the opponent is very good or too tenacious. In either case, the fight might not end. This is the second situation.
When the fight does not end, the defender should not press the attack unless there is another clear option to do so. If the attack is pressed without a certainty of success (which is very difficult) the uke and tori have switched roles and the opponent can now exploit openings the defender offers. So, not only has the connection been lost, but the opponent can now apply awaseru!
So, if the opponent continues the fight despite realizing one is exploiting openings he or she is revealing, the connection needs to be maintained, matching needs to continue, until a time when the fight logically ends. The realization of awaseru being successful leads to a heady feeling and a possible superiority complex of being able to carry out a successful counterattack. This needs to be guarded against and awaseru needs to hold firm. This, is En no Kirinai in practice. Of course, all this is easy to put into words, but much harder to practice, for identifying when a fight starts or ends is entirely subjective and depends on the fighters and the situation (space and time) the fight is occurring in. The fight only ends when the combatants genuinely are no longer trying to cause physical harm to each other. The connection with the opponent needs to continue until this happens and even possibly after, to ensure that the lull in the fight is not the opponent regrouping for another attack.
This continuous connect with the opponent is Shatrubodha. And Shatrubodha allows control of various kinds, both on the self and the opponent(s). This is good segue to explore the concept of Shatrubodha in greater detail. A last observation before we switch though.
The first two concepts of not using strength and not fighting are not relevant in the context of sport combat. A fight as part of a sport has many rules to protect the fighters, like time limits, a referee, a scoring system, a defined space for the fight, emergency personnel on standby and most importantly weight categories and segregation between the fighters on the basis of gender*. So, the use of strength is completely valid and fighting is the objective. These aspects relate only to a situation where there are no rules protecting individuals. Of course, this does not preclude using skill in conjunction with strength and this happens all the time. The other two concepts of matching the opponent and keeping the connection is valid irrespective of whether the fight is a sport or not. Great sportspersons use these concepts to achieve great heights in their respective fields. These concepts are useful even in non-combat sports, like cricket, badminton, tennis etc, where matching with the opponent and realizing what they might do, due a connection, helps a great deal.
Shatrubodha is a word I have heard from time to time in India over the last year or so. It is generally used by the non-left way of thinking. I heard it on YouTube first and then saw it on a few sites online. It is said by some that it was used by Chanakya in his exposition on statecraft. But I am not sure of this and have not researched if he really used it as part of his work, the Arthashastra. Nor have I spent time verifying if there is anyone who has firmly linked this concept of Shatrubodha to Chanakya.
Shatrubodha, or Shatrubodh (as it might be pronounced by speakers of Hindi) means “a sense of the enemy”. “Shatru” means enemy and “Bodh” is a little harder to translate. It could mean “a sense of”, but I have also seen it translated as “knowledge” or “perception” or even as “information”. Based on these, I opine that “Shatrubodha” could be considered as “knowing the enemy”. It could also be worded as “having a perception of the enemy” or “being aware of the enemy”.
When Shatrubodha is used in the context of an enemy of a nation or a culture or a civilization, it is used to mean that one should always keep an eye on the enemy however possible. It also means that one should study and research the enemy in all possibly ways, irrespective of whether the enemy is an individual, a group of people, another country, an organization or even just a value system or way of thinking that is inimical to one’s own culture and way of life.
From the perspective of martial arts practice, based on my personal experience with the Bujinkan, “Shatrubodha” is the same as having a feeling for what attack might originate from the opponent and when the same might happen. This is what allows us to practice the angle or distance to use and timing to apply in any movement that is made in defence or to protect against any attack. Over time this is what manifests as “Sakkijutsu” (intuitive ability) in martial movements.
Apart from the timing and distance, one other thing that is used in the martial arts is “rhythm”. Any training session or a fight between individuals or between groups has a rhythm. This is visible even in sport fighting and non-combat sports as well. There are intervals when the fight or action on the field is intense and at other times, it is visibly tentative when the two sides are probing and testing each other. There are times when one fighter is aggressive when she or he senses fatigue or confusion in the other and this could lead to an end of the fight or a change of pace if the aggression fails and the other fighter also senses the change in rhythm and changes tack.
This rhythm is keenly influenced by an awareness of the opponent, by having a perception of her or his intentions and by the experience of what she or he can throw at the defender. This sense of the opponent is Shatrubodha and is a vital part of the martial arts. It could even be expanded to say that this is very important in all conflict management situations, even if it is not related to physical conflicts, like a contentious business meeting, a dispute between relatives or friends and the like.
The “sense of the opponent” is something that needs to be obtained by being open to the opponent, her or his movement, rhythm, intentions and like. This being open to the opponent is nothing but the “connection” or “connect with the opponent” that we discussed earlier. It is not being open to the attack without any protection and thus being open to physical injury or worse.
Also, like we discussed earlier with the concept of “En no Kirinai”, this connection or Shatrubodha has to be incessant, or at least until a given fight or conflict is mitigated to an extent where the probability of any physical or other harm is miniscule. Further, being able to connect also requires not having an intention of hurting the opponent, in other words having no intention of fighting or employing strength and being able to match the opponent. So, Shatrubodha is not about defeating an enemy, but about being aware of the enemy at all times and ensuring self-protection.
We can now consider the other aspect that is key in the Bujinkan system of martial arts, which is “Control”. And “Control” begins with “Self-control”. The concepts of not fighting the opponent and not using strength against the same, is about exercising self-control. Further, matching the opponent and connecting with her or him or them while they try to do one harm is self-control that is very difficult to achieve. The urge to fight back to cause the opponent harm is extremely difficult to overcome. Hence, the need for self-control. The ability to achieve this self-control being very difficult is the reason why it is referred to as an important concept. It is a concept that one chases all through one’s training life and comes close to achieving but never does do consistently to one’s own satisfaction. This last bit is based on personal experience and there might be practitioners out there for whom this is child’s play.
Extending this a little further, the advantage of self-control and connecting with the opponent is that one is supposed to be able to nullify a fight with minimal effort, as against using strength or violence against the opponent. This is not to say that one should desist from violence even if that can save one’s life and is the only option that seems to be available. In such a situation one is of course free to adopt that approach and survive. The objective is simply that, to the extent possible one should try to minimize effort in a conflict by avoiding a fight and strength. Instead try to connect with the opponent and get the conflict to dissolve (this is not the same as defeating the opponent).
So, by controlling oneself, one gains the opportunity to achieve the first concept of “connect with the opponent”. Connecting with the opponent in turn leads to the advantages discussed earlier. A little extension here with regard to “self-control”. In order to control oneself, one needs to know one’s own desires and the need to act at certain triggers. This is the origin of deciding where one needs to control one’s actions and motivations. This act of knowing oneself is called “Swyambodha” or “Swayambodh”. This is the opposite of Shatrubodha. It means “knowing oneself” or “being aware of oneself”. So, Swayambodha and Shatrubodha lead to one another. Awareness of oneself allows self-control which allows connection with the opponent which leads to Shatrubodha, which leads to control of the conflict and hopefully its mitigation.
Like we discussed earlier, when one can match the opponent by connecting with her or him or them, one can move in a manner that minimizes the potential harm to oneself. If this can be done in a dynamic and consistent manner, the opponent has to expend a lot of effort in trying to cause harm to the defender. This effort on the part of the opponent reveals openings that can be exploited. Over time and multiple moves, this danger becomes apparent to the opponent as does the lack of success in the expended effort and hopefully leads to a diminishing of the motivation to press on with the attack. Of course, there is also the option of attacking the openings that are revealed and ending the fight. So, by connecting to the opponent, one can stay safe while making the opponent work hard and unsuccessfully. This is achieving control of the conflict situation; where one is safe and can create opportunities to end the conflict. Connection leads to control and this leads to an even better connect. So, it is a virtuous cycle.
If one has heard many individuals and researchers associated with think tanks or evocative retired personnel from the defence services in India, they all emphasize on one thing. This is that people in defence planning need to, from time to time, research and document all the threats, both internal and external, to the country. Based on this assessment, they need to plan and devise strategies to counter each of these threats over time. Considering that these identified threats evolve continuously, one needs to cultivate and work with experts on each of these identified and potential threats. This is nothing but connecting with the enemies of the country to control the threats and identify ways to mitigate the same. The identification of the threat is Swyambodha here and gathering information about the threats, Shatrubodha. The fact that one studies the threats is the act of connecting with the opponent and devising mitigation plans is the control of the risk posed.
While the above is more of a strategic activity, practicing the same in one-on-one (maybe many-on-one) martial arts training sessions is tactical in nature. Of course, in the latter scenario, it has to happen during a fight while the former takes much longer and might last years or decades. The learning from the martial arts can be expanded to conflicts one faces in life, where it is well known that one should try putting oneself in the shoes of the other, to mitigate the conflict and this starts with a realization of one’s ego.
So, in conclusion, based on the above discussion,
Connect, Control = Shatrubodha (with Swayambodha as a precursor)
Notes:
As part of Bujinkan tradition, we have a Kamidana in the dojo. The Kamidana is an equivalent of the “Mantapa” which many Hindus have in their Pooja Rooms at home. In the Kamidana is kept a mirror, the Japanese word for which is “Kagame”. One of the reasons for this mirror being present is to remind oneself when one bows to the Kagame at the beginning of every training session, that one is bowing to oneself, as the superior warrior (or at least the spirit of one) resides within and the attempt is always to reveal and express the abilities/qualities of that warrior.
A SWOT analysis is similar to Swyambodha with a bit of Shatrubodha thrown in (The “T” in SWOT), while the model of Porter’s 5 Forces could be mainly Shatruboda with an element of Swayambodha thrown in (the aspects internal to the industry or the organization).
*There are of course mixed gender events these days, though they are far fewer than segregated events.
Some senior Budoka I have trained with feel that “self-control” is the only real control there is, for one can never control anything in this universe other than oneself.
A couple of interesting observations relating to Shatrubodha that I have seen in works of fiction are mentioned below.
In the final book of the expansive Fantasy series, “The Wheel of Time”, called “A Memory of Light”, one of the main characters, called Matrim Cauthon tells another character that he needs to go out into the battlefield and be in the thick of things to get a sense of the fighting. Matrim Cauton is the finest General in the land and he says this as he feels that he needs to understand the flow of the battle to identify the best moves to be made. This is as good a depiction of “Shatrubodha in flow” as I have ever seen. This could be because the author of the series, Robert Jordan (pen name of James Rigney Jr.) was a veteran himself.
In a book written by Fredrick Forsyth, I currently cannot recall which one, a character states something on the lines of Israel’s foreign policy being that there are no countries that are friends, only enemy states and neutral states, and so they will spy on everyone. This is a wonderful expression of always having a keen focus on Shatrubodha!
If one has heard Mr. Rajiv Malhotra (search his name on YouTube and Amazon to have a look at his vast body of work) speak, he often refers to how incredible the Shatrubodha of the USA is. He says that at any time, there are universities and think tanks in the US, which are generating what he calls “disaster literature” regarding other nations and cultures. Here, he refers to how closely institutions in the US study societies and nations other than themselves. They use these observations to generate data regarding the negatives of that civilization which can then be used for information and narrative warfare as and when needed, to further US interests. The above is perhaps similar to how the British back during the days of British Raj studied Indian culture with great interest and used that information not just to govern the country but also to control the populace, by dividing and ruling when necessary and by setting up narratives that showed British culture in a superior light compared to native traditions.
Apologies for the wordiness of this article and repeating the same ideas over and over. The flow of a fight and the objectives therein were too important to not emphasize with repetition.
Training with knives is scary. It is scarier than training with swords or spears or sticks. I am of course referring to traditional martial arts and not considering fire arms or even historic projectile weapons like bows and arrows, crossbows, slings and other thrown/discharged weapons. In other words, using Bharatiya terms, I mean while training with shastra and not astra.
The knife is not scarier because a knife is more dangerous than the other weapons. It is scary because, one, it can be invisible until after the attack is complete, and two, because being a close quarters weapon, a knife, even when detected gives very little time to defend or protect oneself against.
I have been told by mentors with far greater experience than I in the martial arts, and some with practical experience in fighting with and defending against knives, that the numbers bear testimony to the fear of knives.
I am going to add the numbers that I have heard, as part of the notes below. This is because I have not personally done any analysis of knife attacks. I have only read articles about the research and heard people who have done the same share their knowledge. So, what I have is secondary or tertiary knowledge at best, about the numbers and statistics related to knife attacks. Also, my personal experience is more with traditional martial arts and larger weapons that I referred to earlier in this article. Add to this the fact that there are varying views about knife attacks, and surviving the same, and that these sometimes disagree with each other, I do not want to subscribe to any one view. That decision is personal for everyone, because it involves physical injury and trauma. I apologize for this inconvenience, and also request readers to do a little back and forth scrolling while reading this article.
Another worry with knives is that a slashing attack might look ghastly but not be fatal, while a stab shows a smaller wound but is far more likely to be fatal. So, to repeat myself, knives are dangerous as everyone knows, and are scary to train with, even when they are fake (because the knowledge of the danger is real).
The numbers seen in the notes below, show that there is no clear, sure shot defence against a knife attack. So, it is a situation with no solution. What does one do in a situation like this?
What I have heard from people with knowledge and experience with the problem of the knife, state that the best solutions are one of the following. One, avoid the fight or get away from the fight, in other words, retreat and get away from the space where the knife is a threat. A large distance between the knife wielder and the potential victim is a safe solution to survive the knife. There is a drawback to this solution though. Based on what I have understood, the chances that a knife attack begins only when the assailant is very close is very high, and hence, the opportunity to either run away or put a lot of distance between oneself and the attacker might not always present itself.
The second solution is not a different one, but more an extension of the first. It is to not be in the space where a knife attack might occur. This is similar to (though may not be exactly the same) what is also called “situational awareness” by some martial art systems. Yes, this might sound philosophical. But it is based on primeval intuitive abilities of human beings, which helped avoid predators (human and otherwise).
This is not something new either. Anyone who has traveled alone and late, in the dark, will know how one’s senses and ability to expect threats are heightened. This same feeling can be accepted and hence practiced in situations that do not exude an explicit threat with atmospherics (like a pub or a festival gathering where attacks are not expected). This could also be made mundane by saying, trust your feeling and do not go someplace you do not feel like going, even if the not wanting to go is not due to a threat perception. It could be unease manifesting as fatigue, lethargy or any other “I don’t feel like going there”.
The above alternative is about trusting one’s intuition and not being afraid to retreat. It can further be said that trust in intuition is very important, not just during knife defence, but also in staying away from a situation where defence against a knife is necessary. This might seem a cop out to some because it reduces the emphasis on practice to survive against a knife. They are not wrong. Practice is perhaps the best defence. But then, several people do not have the time to expend on the requisite practice, unlike those imparting the training or those in the police, armed services and other security services.
When practice and training time is a premium for most people, focus on the ability to avoid a fight is vitally important. Also, this is not surprising, in my opinion, for this is how we deal with most problems at work as well. And work is a very important part of all our lives, while self-defence training might not be.
Consider how much all of us rely on intuition to solve problems at work. All of us, when we are applying or developing any solution to any problem at work have a “gut feel” about how difficult the development will be or how long the same will take. All planning and estimation works on this. Also, the need to be on the lookout for problems after applying said solution is also based on estimations, which are driven by intuition. After all, intuition is experience plus a sense of the context/situation/atmospherics around a problem. Hence, we know when to apply a temporary fix as against a permanent solution as well.
The use of intuition at work from what I stated above, is about not just solving problems but also about being aware of the consequences of a solution as well. Thus, we are not only working to solve a problem, but also trying to protect ourselves from the consequences of further problems that might come up due to the solution, especially if it is a temporary fix. The key phrase here is “protect ourselves”. This is using intuition and stepping back to protect oneself; not defend against a situation, but to stay protected at all times. This is akin to wearing a helmet whenever you ride a two wheeler and not only when you are on a bad road or in heavy traffic.
This is the same as trusting one’s felling about a place or situation and also about retreating when faced with a situation where there is no good defence, like against a knife. Thus, protecting oneself is as important as, if not more important than a good defence. This rings truer still when a defence might be designed with a set of assumptions (which is always the case when defensive training is based on specific situations). In other words, protecting oneself starts with trusting one’s gut feeling and the ability to retreat before the need to apply a defence.
There might be no measure to check how many times one protected oneself by not being in a place or situation where a defence against a knife might have been necessary. But then, that is the best defence anyway.
On a lighter note, at least for us Indians, retreating to protect either oneself or ones dear to any individual should come naturally. After all, one of the many names of one of our favourite Gods, Lord Krishna, is “Ranchod Das”. It means one who runs away from a battlefield. This was anathema to the warrior code of the Kshatriyas (as is common in many warrior cultures around the world). I will not go into the story here, but Krishna chose the insulting moniker over fighting an impossible battle (against Kaala Yavana). He of course, survived and won the battle as a consequence of the retreat; but the name stuck.
In conclusion then, training survival against a knife has to include training to retreat (run away) and trusting one’s intuition until a defensive solution can be found (an offensive solution might also be possible, but hurting another person brings with it a host of other problems to consider after the act).
Notes:
I have been told that if an unarmed individual is attacked by a knife wielding assailant, and the person being attacked knows of the attacker’s knife, the probability of surviving the attack unharmed is between 0 and 0.5%. This is if the person being attacked has no training in defence against a knife. If the person being attacked is trained in defence against a knife, the probability of surviving unharmed apparently goes up to around 2%. So, the probability of surviving unharmed against a knife is 2% AT MOST, with specific training to defend against the same. This is of course, supposedly not considering body armour to protect an individual against knife attacks. This number is undoubtedly low but 4 TIMES greater than with no training. Nonetheless, the number reinforces the worry about training with knives. Little wonder that knife training is done with fake knives only! 😛
A 1988 book by Don Pentecost called Put’em down, take’em out! Knife fighting from Folsom prison. – I have heard that this book is supposedly contentious and should perhaps be considered as another source of information and not as gospel truth. Also, I have not read this book myself and have only seen references to it.
Some interesting articles I have read online on the topic of knife attacks and protection against the same are mentioned below. These articles refer to the book mentioned above.
There are many YouTube videos referring to knife attacks and what one can do in such a situation. I cannot specifically recommend any, but leave it to interested viewers to decide on the information they find most useful.
There are also people who opine that even screaming for help or running away need to be learnt and practiced. These two might seem to be common sense, but in a stressful situation like a physical assault, they will not manifest automatically. Practice and conditioning are what a person falls back on in such a situation and hence this suggestion. This is beyond the fact that a knife attack might not allow for the option of running away.
Knife training can be used for life lessons, but the vice versa need not be entirely true. This obviously, is because, a threat to life and limb is very real in a knife fight, while the same is not true at work or in others aspects of life that are not physical combat. In life and at work, the risk could be financial, to one’s health and one’s reputation. The opportunities available to fix these, can be greater for everyone, when compared with a short and intense knife fight. Hence, what I have opined here is a perspective more relevant for individuals that are not martial arts’ practitioners or students who have just begun martial arts’ training. If this was looked at from the perspective of someone who is a regular student of the martial arts, I would opine that the learnings from training the knife and protection against it, including the aspect of intuition, should be a take away to be applied in life and work.
One thing that all martial artists would have experienced in their training lives is having people ask them to show “something” of what they train or have learnt. This, if I am not wrong, is more often in the early part of one’s training life when you are an oddball, for being a part of something that is not common, in one’s family or social groups. When people start associating you with martial arts over the years, this reduces, with older social groups and also with older people. But one still does get asked for a demonstration, by younger people one interacts with and newer members of one’s social and familial circles. This request is also more likely with younger folk who are possibly familiar with the more popular martial arts forms like MMA or what they have seen in movies, on OTT or in video games. It is also likely that this is a situation that comes up with folks who frequent the gym regularly; of course, the older folk at the gym might again not be the ones who make this request.
The interesting part is what a practitioner of the Bujinkan should demonstrate when asked to show “something” of what he or she knows or has learnt. I am speaking here predominantly from an Indian perspective. The answer to this can be split into two parts with two segments within each. These are as seen below.
Beginner is demonstrating to
People with no experience in the martial arts or any other physical activity (like working out at a gym, regular sports, running, dance, yoga* etc.)
People with experience in either martial arts (any art form) or any other physical activity
An experienced Budoka is demonstrating to
People with no experience in the martial arts or any other physical activity
People with experience in either martial arts (any art form) or any other physical activity
The table below shows the same a bit better.
Demonstrator
Audience
Audience
Beginner
No experience in martial arts or physical activity
Experienced in martial arts or physical activity
Experienced Budoka
No experience in martial arts or physical activity
Experienced in martial arts or physical activity
Before looking at the answer for any of the above four subsets, let me lay some groundwork for how I might arrive at the answer.
In the Bujinkan, we study the Ten Chi Jin to learn all the fundamentals. We next study the 6 styles of fighting through the study of 6 different schools respectively. The Ten Chi Jin has concepts, kata and waza originating from the schools put together to allow practitioners to learn and familiarize themselves with various important concepts and movement requirements. Also, we study the weapons in the Buki Waza part of the Ten Chi Jin. We also study weapons from mainly the Kukishinden Ryu and some other schools.
In all this training, there is one common thread. In all the forms we study, there is a defined attack. Later, when we have many years of experience, we move to studying concepts and unlearn the set forms to be able to survive with attack, which need not be defined or expected. But for the initial years, for safety and to understand the martial art and our own movement, there are set forms and these set forms have defined attacks. The attacks are taught as part of the training. Even the techniques as written, from the schools have as their first line, a statement of how Uke attacks the Tori. So, first there is an Uke (attacker, for simplicity) and then there a Tori (defender, for simplicity). If there is no Uke in these forms, there is no need for a Tori (of course, there are exceptions which will referred to later).
Perhaps because we are graded as Tori and not as Uke, we think what we have learnt is the response or reaction to an attack; after all, that is what the names and forms refer to. And hence, when asked to show something or demonstrate what we know, we default to being a Tori and here begins the problem. With this background, we can get back to the four subsets defined earlier.
Let us start with a beginner demonstrating what they know. As a beginner, one might not be very comfortable with the waza or kata. This problem might be exacerbated with attacks that one is not yet familiar with. So, if the demonstration is for or on someone who is not familiar with the attacks that have been used to train the basics, one might have to end up showing someone from outside the Bujinkan, how to attack. This leads down the rabbit hole of endless “what happens if” questions regarding attacks that are not being demonstrated. And this might lead to a situation one is not sure of being able to handle.
One solution to his situation is to stop being the Tori in the demonstration and start being the Uke. We learn a plethora of attacks, ranging from punches to kicks to throws to chokes (there is a cornucopia called the Hi Ken Juroppo). Attack them and show them that this is how you can attack effectively. One does not have to be violent with the attack, it just needs to be shown that a threatening situation can be created. Also remember, the attack need not be from the front, a choke from behind or a side kick are completely legitimate, as are the kyusho points including stomping of toes and attacks to fingertips. This is a demonstration all by itself!
If this can be done, the demonstration can be switched around. You can tell the other person to respond to your attack and you can offer to attack at low speeds. Of course, make sure that there is no malice in the attack. Now, we can differentiate between the two types of audiences we considered earlier, for the demonstration of what has been learnt.
If the person you are demonstrating to or on, has no background in the martial arts or in any other physical activity, you can show them how the attack can be received and go on to show one of the simple basic waza. This is experiential demonstration. And since they cannot generally get it, you can then ask them to attack as you did and show how the waza works. You have now overcome the issue of unexpected attacks and also set the context for a waza in the demonstration by starting with and controlling the attack.
If the person you are demonstrating to has experience in a different martial art the onus is now on that person who asked for a demonstration to defend effectively against your attack. This attack will be the unexpected attack for that person and the opportunity to go with multiple attacks is open for you. You can go with the “what happens if the attack changes” conversation with that person and shift the onus for a successful demonstration onto that person. If that martial artist has specific rules about how not to attack, then the conversation moves onto the context of the attack and you can go with explaining how the Bujinkan is a battlefield martial art and has no rules. This then, can allow you to repeat what you did with the person with no martial arts background. Show the other person how to defend and demonstrate the waza in that way. All of this also can lead to a good conversation about the heritage (history, geography, technology) of different martial arts and better understanding in that way of the Bujinkan, maybe more than the waza demonstration itself.
If the other person is not a martial artist but has experience in some other form of physical activity, the way to demonstrate the waza by starting with attacking that person will fall somewhere between the method used for a fellow martial artist and someone who is not into physical activities.
If as a beginner, one has learnt the use of weapons, specifically the smaller weapons like the knife or jutte or kunai, movements with those weapons can also be considered as a valid attack to demonstrate as well. We also have the concept of kakushi buki (hidden weapons) that can be used for setting a context here. Keys and key chains are good magnification devices for boshi ken (thumb knuckle strike) and a lot of house hold devices like pens and spoons act as yawara sticks or tanbo to magnify basic shutos. And kunai movements can be wonderfully replicated with kitchen implements like rolling pins, pans, skillets and the like. On the defensive side, a bag, a helmet or a biking jacket helps reduce the effectiveness of attack, akin to armour studied in the Bujinkan. This is also a good aspect to use in an attack, by either changing the direction of attack to account for the presence of one or using these objects as additional hand holds for a choke or grabbing attack.
While being the Uke and using an attack as the initiation of a demonstration, one needs to identify and keep in mind the attitude of the person who wants the demonstration. This is apart from the martial arts background of the people who might be asking for a demonstration. The different types of people who might ask for a demonstration, based on attitude, that come to mind, are seen below.
It could be someone who carries fear due to some unfortunate experience, who wants to know how to defend herself or himself (telling them that self-protection is more important would be preferable to any demonstration).
It could be people who want to check you out, maybe people who are larger than you or just people with big egos, might be looking at the demonstration as an interview or an interrogation.
It could be people who like the theory and concepts from the martial arts.
It could be people with no ego issues and have no intention of training, but are genuinely interested in something they have no idea about; these people are glad to have someone who might be able to satisfy their curiosity.
In all of these cases except the second one above, the attack needs to be actively non-threatening and without any malice. The person consuming the demonstration should be absolutely sure that there is no risk of any injury. In the second case, the one demonstrating should be aware of protecting herself or himself.
Apart from the above, one also needs to consider the gender, size and age of the person who wants to see a demonstration. The attack, and specifically its speed, needs to be tailored based on whether the person interested is a woman, a kid, an older person, a person who is differently abled or a person physically smaller than the demonstrator.
There is one other advantage of choosing to begin a demonstration by being the Uke. There is a prevalent notion among quite a few that martial arts are all about defence. There is also a notion that martial arts are about honour. By choosing to attack first and maybe from an unexpected angle and using deception while doing the same dispels both these notions. This is a great opening to start a conversation about how the Bujinkan is a battlefield (“battlefield” can be defined in many ways) martial art and has no explicit rules, except ones based on common sense for protection in the dojo. This also helps elucidate why sport martial arts have strong rules for protection of the participating martial artists.
This in turn helps explain why self-protection is a good concept to adopt over self-defence, since the former is self-centred and perpetual while the latter tends to be more reactive and situational. It also helps explain how it is reflective of real life, where there are no rules either. Any deception you might demonstrate in an attack is how real fights and wars happen. One only needs to search about 4th generation warfare, stand-off weapons and such to see the similarities between modern warfare and deception. Deception is a concept we train called Kyojitsu. This concept brings us to the situation where an experienced Budoka demonstrates the Bujinkan to either of the two audiences defined earlier.
When an experienced Budoka is requested to demonstrate knowledge from the Bujinkan, she or he can choose to be Uke or Tori. The experience will likely guide this decision. All the above points are still valid, but the added experience gives a lot of leeway in doing something different. If one chooses to be the Tori and there is an unexpected attack/situation the same will have to be dealt with however possible. In case the Budoka faces injury, she or he can only blame herself or himself. The reason for this and the solution are the same, Sakkijutsu.
Sakkijutsu refers to intuitive abilities. This is perhaps the most important concept to study, train, learn and experience in the Bujinkan, after years of basic training. So, if a Budoka is able to access and apply Sakkijutsu, the risk of injury due to unexpected situations while being a Tori is supposed to be mitigated. This is because using Sakkijutsu is all about being able to move to achieve safety due to an intuitive understanding of the situation. Experience also allows a demonstration to happen without a defined waza or kata. Any movement can be used to explain aspects of the Bujinkan.
Another reason an experienced Budoka can start as Tori is because he or she is expected to also be able to use Kyojitsu to achieve a favourable outcome in a demonstration. Kyojitsu is about being able to use deception in movements and intents. This also allows switching between Uke and Tori as they are not roles set in stone. Thus, Kyojitsu with Sakkijutsu is a potent mix when applied by an experienced Budoka that allows her or him to demonstrate effectively with safety to the one demonstrating and the one being demonstrated on, or to.
There are techniques in some of the schools we study, like the Takagi Yoshin Ryu and Koto Ryu, where the attacker is just walking past or just coming towards you. There is no explicit attack. You still take them down. These are techniques used when one is supposed to know that the person is the enemy or Sakkijutsu suggests there is a threat from that person. Here, the Tori is Uke because he or she initiates the movement set, and Uke is Uke just by existing! In these cases, Kyojitsu can also be applied to confuse the person being taken down to create an opening that can be exploited. Also, these are cases where the attack is the kata and there is no need for an Uke doing an expected attack for a demonstration. So, this is an option even beginners can use if they know the kata.
One final point about Kyojitsu. The very fact that even a beginner can choose to be Uke to become Tori is already an application of Kyojitsu, for by switching the onus of defence onto the person requesting the demonstration, you have already created confusion in the person, who might have expected to see you perform the same. So, becoming the Uke in the situation itself is an act of deception, which leads to great conversations as we already looked at earlier.
This is all I have on this topic at the moment. Hope I have conveyed why being an Uke, when someone asks you to “show something you have learnt in the Bujinkan”, is a good start, especially if you are not experienced and unsure of how to go about the same.
Notes:
*Here I am referring to Yoga mainly as the physical activity and not all the other aspects that are a part of it.
Early in the Mahabharata, there is an incident that occurs at the ashrama of Guru Dronacharya. He sets up a test for all his students, essentially all the Kuru princes. He has a model of a bird set up on a tree and tests the ability of the students to shoot an arrow at the eye of the bird.
To even be eligible to shoot the arrow, he asks them a set of questions to check their focus on the target. He asks each student what they see, when they have nocked an arrow and drawn the bow. He is checking if they see anything other than the eye of the bird or at least, just the bird. If they say that they see anything else, he tells them that they cannot strike the target and should withdraw.
Eventually of course, only Arjuna succeeds in the test. But what is important here is the response from Yudishtira. He can see everything even while trying to shoot the target, from the bird to the tree, its nest, the leaves and the insects on the tree (the entire ecosystem on the tree) and how he needs to be aware of all that he sees while shooting the arrow, as the action could lead to repercussions that affect these. Guru Drona, while telling him that he will not be able to strike the target with the arrow, is mighty impressed with how complete his vision is, at how he can see everything, in other words, the big picture. This was Yudishtira’s primary ability.
I am not sure if Drona being impressed with Yudishtira seeing everything is part of the original Vyasa Mahabharata or any other version. I have seen this on the Star Plus version of the Mahabharata. I am not sure if they made this up for the series or if it is taken from any original source material either. But the observations of a young Yudishtira is not a fake in any case and suffices for the purposes of this article. The link to the episode where the described event takes place is seen in the notes below1.
Yudishtira was raised to be a king, as was Duryodhana, simply because they were the oldest kids of their respective fathers. The ability to see every aspect of any situation and thus to gauge the ecosystem, is a fantastic ability for a king, who needs to be able to provide prosperity generating administration to a kingdom, and to see through the reasoning and motivations behind the suggestions of the high council (samiti).
Now, a primary difference between Yudishtira and Duryodhana is that the former is always known for his adherence to Dharma (hence the epithet Dharmaraja or Dharmaraya, raya & raja being synonyms) while is the latter is primarily a great warrior, one of the greatest ever.
The thing with Dharma is that it is not an objective quantity. It is a highly subjective thing. It can be broadly defined, at least with respect to a king, as doing that which is right for the kingdom, or society in general. And this “doing right” has to be towards upholding the natural order that permits life to survive and prosper. This includes rights, duties, laws, righteous conduct and so on.
Here, Yudishtira has what is quite literally, a superpower. From his ability to see everything even when he has to focus on the bird’s eye, it is clear that he always can look at the whole picture. Add to this, his yearning, perhaps due to his upbringing, to achieve the ideals of Dharma with every decision he makes, he really is perfectly suited to be a king.
From the Mahabharata itself, we see several instances where Yudishtira reaches out to other learned people when has a query regarding his actions and morals and their adherence to Dharma. This makes him additionally suited to kingship, because he is open to suggestions when a course of action is not really clear, a hallmark of someone who is not a tyrant.
At the same time, Yudishtira never absolved himself from the consequences of his decisions, because he was the one who always took responsibility for it, irrespective of who suggested the course of action, and how justified the ends were. This is demonstrated from his visit to Bheeshma to ask how to fell him and the lie he uttered to kill Drona during the war.
Yudishtira was the best charioteer among the Kuru princes. He was also the best spearman, and perhaps a good player of dice (what we call pagade in the vernacular). All three of these provide more evidence to his ability to be “mindful” and grasp all information about a situation, completely. Observe each of these 3 traits individually.
A good charioteer has to be able to navigate the terrain, his vehicle and the horses; an ability to be aware of one’s environment. A spear is a long range weapon, whether used in a formation of soldiers or individually. In both cases, the wielder needs to be aware of one’s surroundings. To use the weapon effectively, awareness is needed of one’s fellow troops so as not to hurt them and of the space available to effectively use the long weapon. Similarly, with a chariot, the comfort and safety (especially in a war) of the person in the chariot is something a charioteer needs to be mindful of apart from the other things. This is perhaps why great charioteers are remembered by name (Daruka, Shalya, Matali etc.)
Lastly, consider the game of dice, or pagade. This is not unlike a game of cards. You have no control over the value thrown up by the dice. But you use what is given to do the best you can to try and win the game. In other words, you need to be a fine tactician which hopefully translates to strategy when a king does the same with a kingdom. The fact that these games involve gambling does not take away from the skills needed to succeed.
Yudishtira’s skill with the chariot is not really known because there are other great charioteers in the epic, the greatest being Krishna himself. Plus, he was a king and perhaps did not drive chariots around at much himself. His ability with the spear however, is pretty well known.
Yudishtira’s skill with the dice is a tricky one. His loss twice to Shakuni surely suggests he was not very good at it, and Shakuni even says that he is not very good at it. But there is information contrary to this. During the 13th year of their exile, when they are to remain hidden from the Kauravas, Yudishtira hides in the court of King Virata of the Matsya kingdom. He takes the identity of a Brahmin named Kanka. The interesting part of this is that he joins Virata’s court as someone who can instruct Virata in the game of dice! He does indeed instruct Virata and is never caught as someone who is poor at it. Does this not mean that he was good at pagade, but just not as good as Shakuni? Or was everyone else at Virata’s court so bad at pagade that they never realized Yudishtira was bad at it as well? Considering that Kshatriyas did indulge in dice, this may perhaps not be the case. Shakini taunts Yudishtira asking him if he is scared to play during their original match. Could this taunt be effective if it was not expected that a Kshatriya participate in dice without any worry? Is it not likely that this was even uttered only because all Kshatriyas used to play pagade often? I opine this is the case. Yudishtira just came up against the greatest player of that age in Shakuni and hence lost. Hence, just as he was upstaged by Krishna as a charioteer, he was no match for Shakuni at dice and hence is considered a bad player, even if he was in fact a good one. Also, perhaps Shakuni had supernatural advantages, or was very good at cheating and getting away with it (maybe he used loaded dice?).
Image credit – Amar Chitra Katha Mahabharata – Chapter 25 – The Pandavas at Virata’s Palace
Yudishtira’s greatest failure is that he gambled his wife away like an asset. He also gambles away his kingdom and his brothers. His losing his brothers is perhaps the lesser of these evils because they were willing participants in the same game of dice. The gambling away of his kingdom and his wife are equally vile. He was sworn to protect and work towards the prosperity of both. This outcome also enhances the belief that Yudishtira was a bad player of the game of dice irrespective of his skills.
Do we also see the Kryptonite to Yudishtira’s superpower in the very same abilities? If he could see everything including the grey areas clearly, did the fact that he could see it all clearly, prevent him at times from doing the right thing? Let us look at the details.
Why exactly did Yudishtira not walk out of the game of dice? Why did he not fight using arms on the spot? Why did he even place his brothers and wife as objects to be gambled away when he had already lost his kingdom? Let us see if we can arrive at reasons to explain this behaviour of his.
Yudishtira had completed the Rajasooya Yajna successfully a short while before the game of dice. This Yagna had been performed with active support and positive participation by the sons of Dhritarashtra and all the elders of Hastinapura. This list included Shakuni. Did their participation make him believe they no longer held ill will towards the Pandavas? And did he believe that this put an end to the saga of the house of Lac from their youth? Perhaps he did.
In order to perform the Rajasooya Yajna, the Pandavas had carried out military ventures in all four directions. During these, they had militarily defeated many other kingdoms and if not, at least collected tributes from all of them. This wealth was used to perform the Yajna. During this time, Hastinapura had not taken the opportunity to cause them trouble or invade Indraprastha. This despite the land on which Indraprastha stood, was originally Khandavaprastha, a part of the kingdom of Hastinapura. The Kauravas had not attempted to reclaim a now prosperous kingdom when its greatest warriors and armies were occupied elsewhere. Could this fact also have bolstered Yudishtira’s belief in a lack of malice on the part of the Kauravas? Also, perhaps after the military success before the Yajna and the victory over Jarasandha, did he feel Indraprastha was as powerful as Hastinapura? Both the beliefs seem valid based on the facts.
Vidura, an extremely wise man, and prime minister of Hastinapura was the messenger who invited Yudishtira and the Pandavas to Hastinapura for the game of dice. He did warn Yudishtira of the plan by Shakuni to win Indraprastha as a wager in a game of dice, instead of using military might to do the same. So, Yudishtira knew of the ill will and the plan to circumvent any equivalence between the two kingdoms in military capabilities. But the invitation was from Dritharashtra, Yudishtira’s uncle and father figure. Plus there were other elders at the Hastinapura court who were capable of reigning in Duryodhana and Shakuni. So, weighed against Vidura’s warning, his recent experience, and faith in the elders could have suggested to him to adhere to Dharma. And this was very important to him as we have seen. His Dharma was to neither reject the invitation to dice and lose face as a coward nor to disrespect the invitation from his father figure and be seen as one who disrespects his elders (the one who gave him half a kingdom in this case, despite the circumstances at that time).
This overall reasoning could have led him to accepting the invitation to Hastinapura and to his participation in the game of dice. Once there, he was conscious of his duties as an adherent of Dharma to hold to his word. Hence, he stayed at the game while losing everything he never had a real right to lose (at least by modern standards), lest he be considered one who fails to stay at the game, as he had given his word to do.
Now, there could be a more mundane explanation for this. At the time of the game of dice, Indraprastha was a young kingdom, which was prosperous due to the Rajasooya Yagna. Jarasandha had been defeated, and his young son Sahadeva (not to be confused with the Pandava brother) was an ally of the Pandavas. But he was only a new king and not renowned like his father. The Matsya kingdom was not an ally of the Pandavas as yet. Manipur, whose princess Arjuna has married and had a son with, was not an actual ally as there were not relations between them and Indraprastha, and Arjuna’s son there was considered an heir to Manipur, not a prince of Indraprastha. Similarly, Arjuna’s other wife among the Nagas had not earned them an ally, as there was no relation between the Nagas and Indraprastha, and Arjuna had only spent a very short time with his Naga wife Uloopi! Also, we do not know how the other kingdoms the Pandavas had confronted militarily (extracted tribute from) during the Yagna felt towards the Indraprashta. Would they not jump at the first chance to throw off the yoke of the new emperor Yudishtira? The Pandavas had saved 84 kings from certain death when they had defeated Jarasandha, but their payback had been limited to supporting the Rajasooya Yajna, not fighting Hastinapura. So, the Pandavas had no allies to rely on immediately, when they were in the heart of Kaurava power. Add to this, the Kauravas had considerable military allies of their own.
But most importantly, all of this was before Arjuna acquired the vast array of divine weapons. That happened when the Pandavas were in exile. Arjuna acquired the Paashupatastra from Lord Shiva and a host of other weapons from all the Devas while in Devaloka assisting them in the fight against the Kaalakeyas and the Nivatakavachas. Hence, the Pandavas were not really as powerful as they would later be.
So, if Yudishtira had decided to pull out of the game of dice or decided to fight the forces of Hastinapura without any army of his own at his back in a hall full of Hastinapura forces, would they have survived, let alone prevailed? It certainly is doubtful. This could perhaps be the same reason for which they did not fight back right after the events of the House of lac, when they were weaker still, with not even Panchala as an ally. Futher, we do not know if Yudishtira had sufficient troops to help him at that point in Hastinapura. Also, if a king loses a kingdom in a wager, is his army still his own or does it now belong to the victor in the game of dice? We have no idea. But considering that even the venerable Bheeshma is uncertain of what Draupadi can expect when Yudishtira is a slave of Duryodhana’s after having lost, such a doubt is warranted regarding the army of Indraprastha as well.
Thus perhaps, Yudishtira did see everything clearly and while becoming vilified down the ages, made the right decisions to survive, while putting faith in the elders of the Hastinapura court. And his faith turned out to be correct! It was the intervention of Vidura and Gandhari that saved them all. The famous elders like Bheeshma, Drona and Kripa failed to protect the Pandavas, but the women saved them. Draupadi’s conduct in the face of the worst atrocity and the strength of character of Gandhari saved the Pandavas their lives, and even got all their losses, including their freedom and kigdom restored to them! So, Yudishtira’s big picture analysis was correct. The women of his household saved them all. It was just that their rescuers were not the individuals everyone expected, a different set of people who no one imagined would be able to do it. But the fact that they, especially Draupadi, went through the worst of atrocities, is by modern standards, unforgivable. Also, it was such a close thing, that this correctness borders on luck and enduring it can be attributed to stupidity. But is the adherence to Dharma not supposed to protect one from adversity? And is it not said that steadfast practice of Dharma incredibly difficult and it is in especially hard times that its practice is really noticeable? These are questions that everyone has to answer for themselves. But the evidence for Yudishtira’s “big picture” ability does hold forth. It was his superpower and his greatest weakness at the same time, for he and the Pandavas went through the worst of times due to the same big picture reasoning of his.
This then raises the next question of why he agreed to the next game of dice. All the points mentioned in relation to the strategic situation of Indraprastha vis-a-vis Hastinapura still hold. But there are differences. He had his kingdom, its wealth, armed forces and ability to plan for a conflict. Also, the fact that the loser of the second game would have to endure an exile of 13 years (12 in the forest and the last in hiding) was established. After this, the kingdom would be returned to the losing side, if they could escape detection in the 13th year. If they were discovered, the cycle would repeat. So, the Pandavas would be divested of their kingdom and resources if they lost. So, why agree to the game?
There is no clear answer to this. But let us consider a few details. Is it again a case where a Kshatriya once invited to a game of dice cannot decline for fear of being branded a coward? Is this more of a concern for an Emperor than for a king? Yudishtira was considered an emperor after the successful completion of the Rajasooya. So, was this concern great enough to overcome the “once bitten twice shy” learning from the previous game of pagade?
The invitation for the second game was again from Dhritarashtra. We know of the relationship between Yudishtira and his uncle. Was he indebted to him for having been responsible in returning the kingdom after the first game? So, was he obliged to play as a way to repay the favour and show respect to his benefactor? Add to this the fact that this time the game was supposed to be “fair” unlike the last time, when the game was set up for the Pandavas to lose. Was this an opportunity to avenge the defeat from last time in a like manner, an offer that Yudishtira could not refuse? Was he overestimating his ability with pagade to think he could beat a master like Shakuni this time round? Perhaps it was all of these, or maybe not. But without the benefit of hindsight, imagine what would have happened if the Pandavas had won. The Kauravas would be banished to the forest for 12 years. This means a sworn enemy is taken off the board for 12 years during which to strengthen themselves. A tempting proposition, isn’t it!?
Let is now look at the episode of the two games of dice through the lens of Budo. This might reveal some interesting explanations for the same. In the Bujinkan system of martial arts, there are two very important concepts that are drilled into all practitioners from the very beginning, and are revisited all through one’s lifetime in the martial art. These two concepts are Ukemi and Uke Nagashi.
Ukemi is the ability to “receive the ground” when one is thrown or has a fall. It is all about rolls and break-falls in simplistic terms. Uke Nagashi is about receiving an attack by an enemy in different ways. This could be simplistically called parrying an attack. But these concepts go beyond the simplistic physical practice. I remember once being told of a statement by Soke Hatsumi Masaaki made in relation to Ukemi in one of his classes. This statement by Soke said that running away and hiding are also Ukemi. I would posit that if one is protecting oneself from the elements, like saying hiding indoors from the rain or running away from working in the burning summer sun, this is Ukemi. However, I further suggest that running away from a fight or hiding from an enemy would be Uke Nagashi.
So, if Yudishtira chose to survive by not fighting and expecting someone else to save them in the case of the first game of pagade, is it not instinctive Uke Nagashi on his part? Yes, it seems wrong and cowardly in hindsight, but his being mindful and aware of the big picture as we discussed earlier did save their lives and kingdom in the end, which means the Uke Nagashi paid off. Is this not like surrendering against insurmountable odds while waiting for a favourable opportunity to escape?
Now let us consider the second game of dice. Nagato Sensei, one of the senior most teachers in the Bujinkan system has a famous saying, where he states, “Leave no opening”. This is again in reference to Uke Nagashi. Based on my experience of this statement, what he means is that when you receive an attack, your position with reference to the opponent should not only mitigate the attack that was launched, but also ensure that no second attack is possible in that instant as there is no opening for the opponent to exploit. This part is a precursor to the defender being able to negatively affect the attacker due to being a safe position from where to exploit the attacker’s openings which are exposed as a result of the first attack.
Sensei also expands by adding that one needs to lead with Sakkijutsu. Sakkijutsu is the intuitive ability to sense an attack and move to a safe position before the attack lands. This is a continuous process until the attack (not attacker) ceases to exist. So, one should be aware or mindful of one’s situation and hence be able to feel/sense/intuitively know of an attack and move to a position where one is safe from the current and future attacks and then exploit possible openings revealed in the opponent.
If we look at the situation before the second game of dice with this knowledge, things change a little. If a king has to “leave no openings” while responding to an attack against his kingdom, what does that mean? Does it mean find a safe position for himself and his family or a safe situation for his kingdom? I would suggest that it is the latter, considering that Yudishtira was Dharmaraya, who put his duty to his kingdom first.
If Yudishtira’s objective is to protect his kingdom, is it not correct to accept the invitation to dice again? If he has won the same, his greatest enemy would be out of the picture for 13 years with no cost to his armed forces and no economic cost to Indraprashta. If he lost, the negative consequences were only for the royal family of the Pandavas. The Pandavas had reaped the greatest rewards from the establishment of Indraprastha. So is it not only right that they be ready to bear the greatest cost? Perhaps yes.
Next, there is no evidence that Duryodhana was a bad ruler or a tyrant who harmed the citizens of his kingdom. He had many negative qualities, but not as a bad administrator. We will consider the negatives in Duryodhana later in this article. But considering Indraprastha would not be significantly worse off under Duryodhana, if the Pandavas lost the game of pagade, is that not a better Uke Nagashi a king should consider for the sake of his kingdom? If Yudishtira had not accepted the invitation and a war had started right then, the cost to Indraprasta would be much greater.
Also consider this. If the Pandavas were exiled for 13 years, they would have 12 years to increase their strength, plan the defeat of their cousins and retrieve their kingdom, while causing least harm to their citizens. In hindsight, only a part of this happened. Indraprastha was saved at that time, but after 13 years, the Kurukshetra war that ensued was apocalyptic. The rejuvenation of Hastinapura and Indraprastha took the investments of an Ashwamedha Yajna after the war. But without the benefit of hindsight, was Yudishtira not employing his powers of being mindful and seeing the big picture to the best possible use of Indraprastha, even if not the Pandavas? It might have seemed so at the time. The fact that Yudishtira faced up to the consequences of the Kurukshetra war much later is also testament to his being willing to live with his failures and face the consequences.
Consider this; is this whole idea of protecting people until he was able to confidently fight back militarily not similar to retreating in the face of a greater enemy until one finds favourable terrain and weather to harm the enemy with minimal cost to one’s own forces? Is this not something that Wellesley used against Napoleon at Waterloo and was this not the same tactic that resulted in the defeat of Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna of Mexico at the hands of Sam Houston of the Republic of Texas? It is not the same tactic in a battle, but it does seem a similar strategy when applied to nations a whole. So, Yudishtira might have failed in his strategy (if it was that) when he accepted the invitation to the second game of dice, but based on his abilities, it might not have seemed a set result at that time.
While discussing the actions of Yudishtira, there is one aspect that we need to consider. This is more generic, with respect to the actions of all the heroes of the Mahabharatha and all their failings. This is not central to this article and not something we can go into in great detail. But it has to be acknowledged to get an idea about their perspectives, to the extent possible. This relates to the conditioning of people in positions of power during the Mahabharata age. Let us begin with Yudishtira himself.
Was Yudishtira not aware of something called “Aapat Dharma”? The rules (or lack thereof) that come into picture when one’s life and means to survival are threatened. This would have allowed him to not participate in at least the second game of dice. From the little that I know, “Aapat Dharma” or “Aapadharma” suggests that what is “Dharma” or “what is the correct thing to do” changes from when there is no threat to life and means of livelihood to when one is desperately trying to stay alive or save one’s family and means of livelihood.
When things are not life threatening, one needs to follow rules one accepts as Dharma more stringently. When one is under threat, these can be done away with, until “normalcy” is restored. Of course, definitions of “normalcy”, “threat to life” and even “Dharma” itself are subjective and change over time and geography and also with life experiences. It is just that there are some regular practices can be let go of when there is a dire situation. As an example, one might choose to be a vegetarian in one’s own civilized state/place of existence. When this civilized state is taken away, the choice can change with no guilt attached to the same. If one is stuck in a place where there is no opportunity to find vegetarian food, for a duration beyond what one can manage with less or no food, there need be no guilt associated with consuming meat. The same goes if a meat can cure one of a terminal disease.
Was the situation the Pandavas faced during the first game of dice and while reacting to the invitation to the second one not worthy of being considered commensurate with violating Dharma and invoking the escape clause of “Aapat Dharma”? At least from our modern perspective, it would seem that the answer is a resounding YES. The fact that Yudishtira did not and none of the other Pandavas did, suggests that either the situation was not “dire enough” for them to consider putting in abeyance their personal definitions of Dharma. Or, the consequences of the loss of reputation one faced by taking recourse to “Aapat Dharma” was too much to even contemplate the same.
Consider this same situation with a few other venerable characters from the Mahabharata. Bheeshma refused to break his vow of celibacy when he knew he was the best candidate to take over the throne after his half-brothers were dead without any progeny. This was despite his step mother, Satyavati, herself asking him to do so. And Satyavati was the reason for his taking the oath in the first place!
Drona fought for Hastinapura as they helped him earn half the kingdom of Panchaala. Even before this they gave him a job when he was down on his fortunes. Kripa, Drona’s brother-in-law, stuck to Hastinapura’s side in the Kurukshetra was, due to loyalty. Neither Kripa nor Drona was bound by any oath.
Lastly, Karna stuck with Duryodhana because he had stood by him when he was insulted in the demonstration arena by the Pandavas. Even after he was told that he was the eldest Pandava in secret, and this meant he could end the war before it started did not convince him to change sides. He fought the war and died without ever revealing this fact to those who mattered in the war. Also consider another event with Karna. He was known to donate anything anyone asked for after his morning Sandhyavandana. The fact that he never refused anyone at this time was very important to his reputation and he was called “Daanashoora” Karna due to his generous nature. Indra, the king of the Devas, used this firm and predictable behaviour of Karna’s to ask him for the Kavacha (armour) and Kundala (ear rings). The Kavacha and Kundala of Karna’s were divine in origin, coming from Surya, the Sun God. These made Karna impervious to any weapon. He was undefeatable as long as he possessed these. If he had not given these away, it was very likely that the Pandavas would have lost the Kurukshetra war. Yes, he gave them away as his reputation was more important. Of course, he believed he could turn the war without the same and he also believed the Kauravas would win the war. Hence his being revealed as a Pandava was likely more trouble after the victory. But with the benefit of hindsight – he died, the Kauravas lost and he passed on the chance to stop the Kurukshetra war from happening. A lot of human misery followed.
Kunti, the mother of the Pandavas and Karna, did not reveal the truth of his birth to prevent the war either. She did this as Karna asked her not to. They had another agreement which is not very important for this discussion. Similarly, Krishna knew of this secret as well and chose to not reveal the same. He only urged Kunti and Karna to do so. Of course, Krishna is divine and made choices for which he and his clan paid, through the curse of Gandhari, many years after the great war. His thinking is not something one can attempt to decipher.
There is one common thread in all of this. All these folk are terrified of breaking an oath, or a decision, once taken, even if their choice serves something terrible about to transpire. This is because they were all obsessed with their legacies. Their reputation was more important that the consequences to millions of other common folk because of their choices. This issue is seen in Greek mythology as well, where Achilles decided to participate in the Trojan war to build his legacy and fame despite being certain that he would meet his doom there.
This is an aspect Krishna demonstrates as not really Dharmic. One needs to learn to accept vilification if that serves the greater good. He chose to be called “Ranchod”, one who runs away from a battlefield, in order to defeat Kaala Yavana. He also chose to leave his city of Mathura and relocate with the entire populace to Dwaraka. This was to protect his people from Jarasandha’s wrath. He also chose to accept the curse from Gandhari as punishment for not preventing the war. He definitely tried to make people change their thoughts and ways, but did not use his divine abilities to do so. This is apparently to let things take their course with just human actions.
In the Bujinkan, we are taught a concept called “Jokin Hansha”. This refers to “weakness due to a conditioned response”. As an example, consider the fact that we do not do something even in if we realize it to be the right thing to do. This is likely because we “think twice” and decide it is wrong as it goes against what we are expected to do or is tradition (or something similar). This could lead to an adverse outcome. This is the consequence of “Jokin Hansha”. Consider a simplistic example. You do not want to shake hands with someone. Yet if that person extends a hand, we take it. We do not do a “Namaskaara” because we assume the other person might be offended. Conditioning is as pervasive as this and Jokin Hansha refers to negative consequences that occur from actions even as simple as this. Breaking conditioning and doing what one wants to in an environment where conditioned responses rule, has consequences we may not be ready to face. This, on a grander scale is what the heroes of the Mahabharta faced and failed at.
Now, we have considered the strengths of Yudishtira, his weaknesses and potential reasons for those. His adherence to Dharma, his consultative vein and abilities are demonstrated. While all this explains his actions before the war, what makes him a better candidate to be a king as compared to Duryodhana? We shall try to explore this in the following section.
As mentioned earlier, while Yudishtira was more of an introspective person focused on the big picture and adherence to Dharma, Duryodhana was primarily a warrior, who also wanted to be king. There is no indication that Duryodhana was a bad administrator. So, where is the difference between the two?
Duryodhana had one advisor in Shakuni. Duhshasana and Karna were more members of his coterie or mutual admiration society. They were not relevant to dissuading him in any action and did not specifically point out his flaws. Shakuni’s advice was driven by a motive to destroy the Kurus from the inside in order to avenge what he saw as injustice to his sister and his kingdom of Gandhara. Moreover, from what I know, Duryodhana never considered any advice that clashed with his own world view, from any of the other elders in Hastinapura. This shows that his perspectives were not as considered as those of Yuishtira’s. They were what he wanted them to be. He also had never seen the world like Yudishtira had on multiple occasions, while living among the common folk in his early childhood and after the events of the house of lac. He had not endured the hardships of the forest like the Pandavas either.
So, Duryodhana’s vision of Dharma was not exactly based on a “big picture” but what he wanted it to be. This made him a potential agent of chaos. Also, his ego prevented the chances of his ever changing his ways. The man held grudges over a long time, and was single minded in trying to achieve his objectives. While being driven towards one’s objectives is an admirable quality, a king might not have this luxury. His drive could be dangerous to those around him and the country as a whole.
It was Duryodhana’s desire to obtain Indraprastha, subjugate and humiliate the Pandavas and not return the kingdom after 13 years that was the root cause of the destruction of a very large number of lives from several kingdoms during the Kurukshetra war. Of course, it can be said that his being laughed at in the magical hall built by Mayasura in Indraprastha was the reason he wanted to take everything away from the Pandavas. But are the cause and effect commensurate? In modern thinking they are not. But, even by the standards of the day, when personal reputation was above all else, was it warranted? Even if we assume it was, his ability to not adapt to the changing scenario of the situation and being unmindful of the consequences was disastrous. This of course was due to his not being consultative. So, he was never a big picture guy, and thus, could never put his kingdom first, and thus never put Dharma first either.
Lastly, Durypdhana had no ability to “let go”. Something we are taught as martial artists is the ability to let go of anything that is not “worth it”. This can be a position, a technique or a concept we are trying to apply to any fight. An example here might be the following. If strength is not working against an opponent, let go of applying the same and try to take her or his balance with a better position. This is true in any conflict management situation. If negotiation is not working in a conflict between nations, they will let that course of action go and consider covert application of force or an overt display of forces to nudge the negotiation back on track. There need be no guilt associated with letting go of a course of action to pursue something else which has a higher probability of ending a conflict. This was something Duryodhana never could do, while Yudishtira did it all the time.
An example that comes to me vividly about this from recent history is as follows. I remember reading an article a long time ago. I think it was in the early part of the 2000s. I think it was in the newspaper, The Hindu, but I could be wrong. It was about the LTTE failing at negotiations with the Lankan government because it was beholden to the past. Apparently some members of the LTTE felt a negotiated settlement would betray their dead and their sacrifice would be shamed by the same.
In conclusion, Duryodhana, while not being a bad administrator, was a potential source for perpetual conflict. Also, his inability to consider contrarian points of view and ego mania made him an obstacle to any positive change. This is what made him an enemy of Dharma, which, in the epic, is all important. Hence a Dharma Yuddha, with Duryodhana as the antagonist. He was not a mustache twirling villain, or a specifically bad king, but a definite threat to Dharma.
Notes:
1 Mahabharat Ep 42 (watch between the 13 and 16 minute marks)
In the Bujinkan system of martial arts, one concept that we are taught every so often is “Kyojaku jyugo arubekarazu”. This roughly refers to how there is no hard or soft, and no strong or weak; in other words, it means that there is no duality to explicitly discern. This line is the first of a four line poem1. The entire poem explains how one should not focus on being hard or soft or strong or weak, but instead one should makes one’s body into nothing and replace one’s heart with air to understand enlightenment. This is in reference to a fight or a conflict in general and how one can respond to the same. It refers to the fact that one should not worry about classifying the situation or one’s response, but instead respond as required. In order to do this one should let go of one’s ego, as not doing the same might lead to motives and objectives taking centre stage and skewing what one NEEDS to do with what one HAS TO or WANTS TO do.
This is a wonderful concept. But it is also incredibly difficult to practice in life. There might be times when we all face situations where there are no good choices and hardship has to be endured, because there might be no other option. But is this not a good option by itself? Especially if it allows survival? When I say survival, I mean, not overcoming a challenge or winning over hardships being faced, but dealing with the problem by letting time solve the problem. It is impossible to agree or disagree with this and the answer depends on the actual situation one is facing.
This conundrum reminds one of the statement by the Greek historian Thucydides, “The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must”. This was supposedly in reference to a situation where the island of Melos suffered a massacre of all its men and the women and children were sold into slavery*. This was a case where the other option open to Melos was to surrender and agree to Athenian terms. Should they have taken it? Only the people making the decision at that time would know. The rest is all speculation with the advantage of hindsight.
When we refer to the strong and the weak in terms of nations, one aspect that is recognized is how geography is the key factor that determines the same. This concept was expounded in the book “Guns, Germs and Steel” by Jared Diamond published in 1998**. This concept has been expanded further by Ian Morris in his 2011 book “Why the west rules – For now”. There are YouTube videos with simpler explanations of both books, the links to which are seen below, where both authors explain their respective theories. In the video, Ian Morris explains how the geography that bestows an advantage to one nation or region changes over time with technological and social development. So, taken together, the might of a nation depends on the geography and the time period when the same is being considered, as that determines the technological and social level of a nation or civilization.
Once we consider technological prowess, it is obvious that it affects all conflict management in modern times. This includes both military/martial and non-military conflicts. Further, it does appear that “non-military” is itself difficult to define these days. We hear of how we live in the age of fourth generation warfare, where we never realize if a war has begun and if it has ended. It is supposedly a case where a state(s) are perpetually in a state of war, though not militarily, as understood in the conventional sense. This refers to information war that is waged to make a society weaken itself and lose without any need for actual military might being employed, or at least with minimal military effort being required.
This war is waged on multiple fronts, like trade and economic policies, disinformation and narrative warfare on social media and conventional media, social engineering and many others I am not qualified to expound on (there is a branch of economics called “Narrative Economics”!). This means that a new set of dualities is being created (technology, communication, economic ability), which must be recognized and somehow nullified, by doing what is needed (no duality remember! 😛 ).
The feeling from the above information made me consider how no real fight is ever fair. There is always a perpetual attempt to make any conflict as unfair as possible, so that one side gains the necessary advantage to move a conflict in one’s favour. This in turn leads to the aspect I am trying to explore further.
“Might is right”. This statement, many a time, is considered in a negative light. Like, “this is not how it should be! Even though it is”. But when we consider various aspects as we shall below, it is perhaps the ONLY bit of the human experience that is ETERNALLY TRUE.
What is “Might”? It is anything, an ability or technology that allows for superiority between any two objects that are being compared, mainly in the context of a conflict (a fight, for simplicity). When I say “ability” here, it could be physical, intellectual, emotional, financial, experiential (this could relate to both skill and physical ability due to experience or wisdom and knowledge due to experience) or spiritual. The objects we are comparing could be two humans, two groups of humans, multiple humans, multiple groups of humans, humans with any non-human lifeform (plant or animal), humans and technological replacements/alternatives for humans (automation enabling code or robots), two or more non-human lifeforms or two or more technologies. Also, we can comfortably, for the purposes of this article use the words “Might” and “Superiority” interchangeably.
From the list of abilities mentioned earlier, we can make a list of the different types of “Might” that can be discerned. Of course, this list can be expanded as necessary. A simplistic example accompanies each type of “Might” as seen below.
Physical might – The ability to beat up (or injure in any way) someone or threaten someone with physical violence
Intellectual might – The ability to prove someone wrong with a greater quantity or quality or knowledge or logic
Emotional might – The ability to withstand hardship better than another based on one’s upbringing or cultural antecedents
Financial might – The ability to achieve something better or faster than someone else by being able to pay others (human resource) or acquire technology (technological resource) to achieve said something
The Might of Experience (Experiential might) – The ability to either do something better than someone else due to having greater experience in the field of that something, OR simply being able to browbeat someone else by claiming greater experience (including academic antecedents like diplomas and certificates)
Spiritual Might – The ability to achieve a given goal by claiming or appearing to have greater spiritual achievements (like a guru with an initiate in a religious context)
Ethical or Moral Might – The ability to get a march over someone by claiming the moral or ethical high ground (like in a comparison between secularism and fascism)
Technological Might – The ability to be superior to someone by dint of having access to superior technology (like drones making the difference between Azerbaijan and Armenia)
Educational Might – The ability to get a march over someone by having greater knowledge due to a better education or using educational credentials to push one’s ideas through without scrutiny
Communication Might (oratory for example, or great writing ability) – The ability to communicate ideas and concepts with or without a twist so as to make them more appealing than the ideas of others
Might of the Network or Might of Association – This is how one can get ahead by virtue of knowing the right people in the right places (or just consider a trading guild of old)
Might of Numbers – The case where one side is superior simply because it has superior numbers compared to the other side
The Might of any other Skills – This is a catchall phrase for anything I might have missed!
A combination of any of the above types of “Might” – As an example, “technological might + communication might = might on social media” (I personally consider “Culture” in this category, as it is a combination of several factors)
Of course, there are a couple of points to consider when we look at the various kinds of “Might”.
Some of these “Might” could influence another type or be very similar. For example Ethical Might, Intellectual Might and Educational Might are closely related and inform one another, as one’s education and intellectual abilities might affect one’s ethical outlook.
There is the factor of LUCK that could override anyone of these “Might” and mitigate their use at a given time and space (and therefore all natural phenomena come into play as well).
Now that we have defined “Might” and its various manifestations (at least for now), let us consider how “Might” is applied.
Consider all the times that you went to a team mate with a problem at work because she/he very likely could help you solve a problem. The reason you went to your colleague is because she/he had the ability to help you solve the problem. She/he thus had a little more of the “Might” of knowledge (Intellectual Might) or experience (Experiential Might) as compared with you to solve the problem OR she/he added her/his ability (Might) to your own (Might of association or the Network) in order to resolve the problem.
Now consider all the times you went to a friend for help with anything, especially if you were new in a town where your friend was a long-time resident. Here you are using different kinds of “Might” of your friend which are greater than your own (Experience, Network, Intellect, maybe even Communication and Financial) to help yourself.
Lastly, consider how dependent a child is on the abilities of a parent, where the difference in all kinds of “Might” is too large to even consider.
In all the above cases, the ability or “Might” of one was used for the benefit of another. In almost all these cases, like in most cases in life, when we use the ability of others, it is with an implicit and unstated understanding that we will in future use our abilities to return the favour. Or it is possible that the favour, in other words the “loaning of ability (Might)” is a necessity simply to continue one’s association with the other. Either as part of a team or a family or a group of friends.
So, the key to all cases where we use each other’s abilities is, association with each other. By default if you are associated with a group of people you are not associated with some other groups. At best you are associated better with some groups and less well associated with some others.
This “association” with others is an essential trait of us humans. It is what we refer to when we routinely say, “Humans are a social creature/animal”. But since we associate more with some and less with others, we are not exactly “social creatures”. We are more “tribal creatures”. Humans are a “tribal animal” where we put some people, animals, plants, ideas, behaviours and technologies above certain others. This is how we form tribes or groups with whom we have “greater association” and by extension “greater affinity”.
Once tribes are extant, there is by default an “us and them”, just like with packs of wolves or prides of lions. Once there is an “us and them”, all the above abilities (Might) that were used for helping each other and furthering common goals for “us” will be also be used to cause trouble to and mitigate the goal achievement of the “them” or “Others”. Thus, enter CONFLICT.
Conflict is the main prism/lens through which we observe “Might”. “Conflict” as a term can be used to describe a whole host of situations. From a simple argument between two individuals to vast all-encompassing issues like man-animal conflict or wars – both military and for “hearts and minds” or to “preserve culture”. Whatever be the scale or scope of a conflict, it is decided by the “Might” of one of the participating parties overpowering the “Might” of the other.
This brings us to the crux of the hypothesis in this article, which is that “MIGHT IS ALWAYS RIGHT”. Put in other words, the mighty one is always right because that is how a conflict is decided. Also, one needs to keep in mind that “Might” is never applied fairly, like was mentioned earlier. And like (or “the same”) “Might” is not necessarily applied against the each other. For example, physical might could be met with physical might, but not necessarily. If fact, physical might is likely only met with physical might in a sport.
In almost all real world situations, it is a case of different types of “Might” applied against each other. For example in a military conflict, one side might choose to apply “Communication Might” with propaganda against the “Technological Might” of the other side(s). Hence the term “Asymmetric Warfare”, where the involved sides use different abilities to counter each other in a conflict. This is especially true when one of the sides in a conflict can bring to bear “disproportionate power” on the other side(s). This is when one side is vastly “Mightier” than the other in a specific “Might” (say conventional military strength or martial prowess).
Of course, conflicts are not always decided/resolved (they might eventually be), but for the most part they are managed; hence conflict management. A conflict might not be decided for years on end and in the interim they are only managed, where all parties involved in a conflict try to nudge it in a direction favourable to them. In this situation, “Might is Right” plays a key role, as we shall see further.
When one of the sides in a conflict (which could simply be a difference of opinion) chooses to use a said ability (Might) to nudge a conflict in a direction favourable to it, it almost always is done by ensuring that the ability it has a surplus of, is the factor that is used to further the conflict.
For example, consider a lot of the debates that happen on Television today. The conflict here is that one set of people speaks “for” a topic and the other set speaks “against” the same. The ability or “Might” that is supposed to be used by both sides is “Communication Might”, where the side that communicates its point of view better is supposed to be the winner. One cannot choose “Physical Might” against “Communication Might”. So one of the debaters cannot get irritated and beat up the other and thus win the debate as the other side is physically incapacitated to put forth a point of view.
So, by this setting of rules, it is clear that the side that carries the day is the one that can make its point of view seem correct or superior to that of the other side. Thus, even if the other side has better points or is actually correct, it loses the conflict simply because it could not communicate as effectively as the side that won. In other words, the “Communication Might” of the losing side was lower.
The example used here is of an artificial construct, much like an MMA bout, where no kicking the groin or gouging of the eyes is allowed (in a real street fight these rules do not hinder the fighters). Similarly, in the real world where people make up decisions on Government policies and performance, TV debates might not be last word, since the losing side there might be the one that gets accepted despite being low on “Communication Might”. It might get accepted because it was high on “Emotional Might” or “Might of Experience” wherein the audience connects better with the losing side at an emotional level or its experience might match more closely with the losing side as compared with the winning side. This is where the terms like “Silent Majority” and “Lack of connect” come from.
Consider debates on TV or even Social Media (Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Instagram) on Government policies, secularism, democracy etc. The point of view that wins on the debate might be the one with “Intellectual Might”. But the one that wins in an election might be the one with greater “Emotional Might”.
Here a large majority of the population might simply not care about secularism, due to past experience (Might of Experience) or a lack of knowledge (lack of “Intellectual Might”). Individuals from this side might never be able to take a considered stand on any fora of debate and discussion for lack of communicative ability that the other side with greater intellect can comprehend. But this side knows that it has the numbers and does not need to convince the other side in a discussion, it does not even need to participate in a discussion! Thus, the side with “Communication Might” and “Intellectual Might” will end up losing against the side with “Emotional Might”, “Might of Experience” and “Might of Numbers”.
Based on this, it is important to understand that while use of a given ability to manage a conflict favourably is important, it is even more important to determine if the ability or ”Might” being used is the right one.
One side in a conflict might choose to ensure only the ability it has an abundance of is used, but it needs to recognize that if this move fails, it has an option to fall back on temporarily or develop the other abilities needed to manage the conflict in its favour.
Consider this. We usually find a lot of umbrage on various fora about the use of violence in various parts of our country (remember all the lynching and our outrage at the same?). This violence is an expression of “Physical Might” and “Might of numbers”. The outrage against this is an expression of “Emotional Might”, “Intellectual Might”, “Communication Might”, “Technological Might” (social media platforms are technology). These latter forms of Might are unable to vanquish or even mitigate the expression of the former for an extended period of time.
This is because there is an asymmetric expression of abilities here and one set of abilities comes out on top of the other set of abilities. This is despite the sides that use the respective abilities being disproportionately superior in those specific abilities, to the other side. The mobs that perpetrate the lynching can never hope to match the communication or technological ability that the ones displaying outrage can. At the same time the ones wanting an end to mob violence can never match the physical might and numerical superiority of the mobs. In the “Emotional Might” and “Intellectual Might” areas there is no telling which side is superior, both can believe the same, but the greater numbers on one side might tilt these two “Might” in their favour.
This asymmetry comes forth due to the state of our society and state. In a democratic state like ours, violence is supposed to a monopoly of the state (police, defence forces, paramilitary forces etc.). And all grievances any individuals or groups have against one another are supposed to be sorted out through dialogue, within or outside a defined legal system. This precludes “Physical Might”, and incentivizes “Communication Might”, “Intellectual Might” and “Financial Might”. But the abilities of institutions of law and order and the legal system might not be able ensure that these incentives work. This becomes exaggerated if other institutions within a democracy are not fair and robust. Thus, “Physical Might” and the “Might of Numbers” never get mitigated.
These are problems in most democracies with large and diverse populations. The law and order machinery and the legal system cannot ensure a proportionate distribution of “Might” in any conflict management. Thus, individuals and groups resort to using any “Might” that can get them ahead.
There is one aspect we must consider specifically while using examples from a civilian and societal context and not a military one. This is the issue of EGO in conflict management. Almost all of us believe we are in the right when we consider an action or argument when it comes to conflict resolution. This is obvious in any debate on TV or social media. The belief in correctness is usually associated with a belief in having “Moral or Ethical Might”. Simply put, we believe, we have the moral or ethical high ground and hence we are right.
The concern is that even though I have listed Moral or Ethical superiority separately, it is really a combination of emotional, intellectual and experiential abilities at least. It might involve technological and financial abilities as well. All of these aspects inform the information we gather and how we process it to arrive at a specific argument or action, that we consider correct and of a superior moral/ethical quality.
Unfortunately, there never need be any agreement on who is right due to moral or ethical aspects. It is not even necessary to agree on who is right in legal aspects. There only needs to be a belief in being right. This belief leads to using other forms of “Might” to ensure this belief is sustained, if the belief has any advantage attached. These advantages could be material like class/caste privilege, subsidies, reservations, or any other.
When an individual or a like-minded group is threatened in their position of correctness or moral high ground by another, they will do anything to not let that happen, so as not to lose the other benefits associated with the previously held position (even if it is just the ability to congregate in a certain way or practice a religion in a certain way). When their belief system is threatened, their EGO is threatened and in order to protect it “Moral or Ethical Might” is always either substituted or supplanted by any other form of Might. Perhaps, Moral or Ethical aspects are altogether irrelevant and only the other abilities are brought to the fore.
Based on the above observation, perhaps the best way to manage a conflict is to be perpetually adaptable. Never fall in love with your favourite “Might”. Always know when it is not working and has to be replaced with a different one. Accept that disproportionate use of any Might is the norm and the response almost always has to be asymmetric, with a different type of “Might”. In other words, like any martial system teaches, learn to overcome EGO. This brings us full circle, back to “Kyojaku jyugo arubekarazu” and the following lines in that poem. Do what it takes, and let go of ego.
One cannot afford to disparage the “Might” that the other side is using even if one feels it is wrong or despicable. That “Might” is being used because it works. See if you can use the same in a “purified” manner (for example do not sermonize the opposition in a debate, treat them as equals even if they do not do the same). And always be ready to change the ability you are using. This might help survive an onslaught or move the conflict in one’s favour.
Lastly, all this means, “MIGHT IS RIGHT, ALWAYS. ONLY THE KIND OF MIGHT USED CAN VARY”.
Notes:
Guns, Germs & Steel – Part 1
Guns, Germs & Steel – Part 2
Guns, Germs & Steel – Part 3
Why the West Rules – For Now
*I am using a common form of this statement. It is very possible that people might have an opinion that the actual Greek statement is not so simply translated and has some nuance to it. But I am using this statement as is for the purposes of this article.
**There are many who do not agree with this theory as is and have specific criticisms of this theory. I am using the theory as I understand it, as it is presented. The criticisms, as far as I can understand do not affect what I am trying to express here by much.
1The entire poem and its translation is seen in the image below. Translation is courtesy of my teacher Shiva Subramanian and my buyu Priyadarshini Mahalingashetty. They in turn translated it from a calligraphy by Nagato Sensei, one of the foremost teachers in the Bujikan system and I was told that it was translated for them by Masako Kawai. Thanks to all of them!
There is a term that is used every now and then in the Bujinkan, called “Kami Waza”. Typically, this is something that is trained, and an understanding attempted, after many years of training in the Bujinkan system of martial arts. Kami Waza is something I had referred to in my article on “The Ashta Siddi and Budo”, in the part about the Siddhi “Eeshitva” (the link to this article is seen at the bottom).
“Kami” could be translated as “God” or “Gods”, but I opine that the word “Deva” or “Devata” which we Indians use is a more apt translation. “Waza” can be translated as “technique”. So, “Kami Waza” can be considered to be “technique of the Gods” or maybe “Godlike technique”. This might seem to suggest that there are martial techniques that are so difficult that being able to master the same makes one a God. It might also seem to mean that one somehow needs to have the skills or abilities of the Gods to be able to pull off the same. But it is neither. To give an extreme and tongue in cheek example from Hindu traditions, “Kami Waza” does not mean the ability to invoke the Brahmastra, or uproot trees like Bhima or fly while lifting mountains like Hanuman. 😛
Kami Waza is more an adjective for a movement after the same is already completed. The movement just completed is so incredible, or sublime or elegant that it seems like the person who just executed the same might have been guided by the Devas. Or maybe, the Budoka (practitioner of Budo) channelled the Devas to execute the movement. Or maybe even that the Budoka allowed a Deva(s) to possess them for the brief instant it took to execute the movement.
From my personal realization, Kami Waza is expressed when an experienced Budoka is not specifically looking to perform a defined waza or kata (a set of defined forms). Nor is the Budoka trying to achieve a set objective. The Budoka is moving freely with perhaps the only objective being to stay alive. Of course, the movement could have started as a kata or waza and might have had an objective, like throw the opponent or pin the opponent or plain old “win” against the opponent. But the movement that could be described as Kami Waza would have occurred when the Budoka has let go of the original intent and moved in flow, even if for a fleeting instant.
The identification of the Kami Waza would be by the opponent(s) and maybe an onlooker. The Budoka who executed Kami Waza may or may not realize the same. Also, the Waza expressed as Kami Waza might be at the beginning or end or somewhere during the interaction between two or more Budoka, or more loosely put, opponents. Further, the only reward for the expression of the Kami Waza is only that the Budoka is alive at the end of the conflict situation, or suffered minimal injury or just a lack of trouble compared with what she or he started with!
It is said by Budoka with far more experience than I that Kami Waza is expressed only when there is no motive or objective in the movement, except survival. This is also defined as “being empty”. This refers to a lack of ego. This in turn is because a lack of ego is supposed to mean that there is no objective to achieve a defined success or in other words, win. It also is a lack of ego when there is no concern with failure or defeat. Thus, if there is no ego and one is “empty”, there is an opportunity for the “emptiness” to be “filled” by Kami. Therefore, one is maybe transformed into something like a Kami. It could warily be termed as allowing oneself to be controlled by the Kami, like a puppet, or as a vessel for the essence of one. So, if one is hosting a Kami, the movement expressed becomes Kami Waza, as it was driven a Kami, albeit in the form of the Budoka under consideration.
This is not unlike what Hindus call, “Avashesha avataara”. “Avataara” is a manifestation and “avashesha” is “a vestige”. So, an avataara, where a vestige or an iota of the essence (amsha) of God is channelled in an earthly form, is an “Avashesha Avataara”. It is also sometimes called “Aavesha Avatara”, where “Aavesha” is like possession, but with a positive connotation. This only happens for a short duration for a specific objective (of the Gods, not the vessel). Once the objective is complete, the human or animal vessel reverts to being a normal being and is an Avataara no more. An example of this kind of Avataara is that of Lord Parashuraama.
A few words of caution here, again based on my personal experience and what I have heard from Budoka with a lot more experience than I. The first is that, the moment the Budoka realizes the awesomeness of what was just expressed**, Kami Waza ends. The realization might be a shock for the person who expresses Kami Waza as well. It is more like, “Wow, what did I just do!” The moment this realization occurs the Kami Waza either ends, or the Budoka loses it, at least for the moment. This end or loss is irrespective of whether the expression of Kami Waza was completed or not, though the chances are that it was. Thus, the expression of Kami Waza is only realized as an afterthought, and maybe in hindsight.
The second is that Kami Waza is not magic. The definition I shared and the experience of the same might make it seem so. But it is not, and could actually be remarkably common place. We all see expressions of Kami Waza all around us, on a regular basis, even if it is not in the martial arts. There are situations at work and otherwise, among friends and family, when we see someone who seems to have a wonderful thought or epiphany, and that results in a great solution or artwork or any other achievement being accomplished. This happens many a time against the run of play at that point in time. The person who executed the action or activity would not have a realized it immediately. All of these are likely expressions of Kami Waza. And this leads to the third important observation regarding Kami Waza.
Kami Waza does not occur in a vacuum. Its expression is always a result of a very large amount of effort and experience and therefore wisdom being already in possession of the person who expresses Kami Waza. And so, it is likely that the person who expressed Kami Waza did so in a field they were already great at, but this specific expression (of anything) was extraordinary even by those already high standards. It is something like the total being considerably greater than the sum of the parts!
There is a concept which we Hindus refer to fairly often. This concept is “Bhakti”. It is usually translated as “Devotion”. But like with most Indian concepts it is not something that can be clearly translated into English. An attempt to explain the feeling associated with Bhakti can be made, but an exact translation is not really possible, in my opinion. As I understand it, Bhakti is the attempt to achieve closeness with the divine. Bhakti is also said to be one of the paths to achieve this closeness, as indicated by “Bhakti Marga” (the path of Bhakti). The other paths I know of are Gnana Marga (the path of wisdom or consciousness, sometimes spelled “Jnana”) and Karma Marga (the path of action/activity). I am also aware of the Nava Vidhi of Bhakti (the nine protocols or forms of Bhakti). These are the various means by which an individual can express Bhakti. Also, one must remember, an individual might already have Bhakti towards an expression of the divine and attempt to increase it with the above path and activities or begin to achieve Bhakti with the same.
I am not an expert in these matters nor do I have the experience and learning to opine or explain the nuances of Bhakti. I am only aware of a little and I have shared the same above as a point of reference for the other observations I will make further.
As far as I understand, according to Hindu thought, the purpose of all paths (marga) towards closeness with the Divine is Moksha. Moksha is the liberation from the cycle of death and rebirth. In other words, it is a liberation from the temporal world and hence from the trouble and sorrows associated with the same. Once Moksha is attained, the temporal world is replaced with an existence with the Divine forever, which is the same as eternal joy and contentment.
But then, based on my personal experience, Moksha is not what most of us Hindus are thinking of or even considering, when we practice Bhakti in day to day life. Many a time, before we start our daily activities, we light the lamp every morning in our Pooja Rooms and bow before our preferred expression of the Divine*. If not this, we practice our own specific ways of demonstrating Bhakti towards our preferred Divinity at the start of daily activities, based on the situation of the person. When we do this, we request for things far simpler than an attainment of Moksha. We ask for mundane things, like a good day without problems, good health for everyone, a satisfying life for those near and dear to us. It might even go onto the ability to perform well in an exam, find a solution to the problems we are facing, at work or in life, including those related to health, wealth and relationships. This is the extent of day to day expression of Bhakti for many people.
In Kannada, there was statement, or a variant of it, we were raised with. We still hear it fairly often in many homes which are even slightly traditional in upbringing. It goes something like, “Bhaktiyinda maadu, seri hogutte” or “Bhaktiyinda maadu, yella volledagutte”. This means, “Do it with Bhakti, it be alright or it (any problem) will be resolved” or “Do it with Bhakti, everything will have a satisfactory outcome”. This is roughly the same as saying in Hindi, “Bhakti se karo, sab theek ho jaayega”. We are also told, “Deveranne nenesikondu shuru maadu”. This in transliteration means, “Think of God and start”. In Hindi, it would be “Bhagvaan ka yaad karke shuru karo”. It means that you request the Gods for a positive outcome before you start something. This could be answering an exam, an activity, or just your day in general.
These two statements are emblematic of how simple the practice of and expression of Bhakti is. It might take just a few seconds in a day. It just requires one to spare a thought towards the Divine every day, but as a first priority, as a cultivated habit. Since it is a cultivated practice, it means you set aside a few moments towards the Divine regularly. This expression of Bhakti, allows one to request a desired, favourable outcome in return for the Bhakti demonstrated.
Many a time, when one who expresses Bhakti regularly achieves a favourable outcome, or just luck in day to day living, she or he spares a moment to thank the Divine as well. This is based on the feeling that, the outcome was a consequence of the Bhakti demonstrated, and gratitude is expressed to close the loop of request-granting of the same-gratitude expressed.
One thing to remember though, is that Bhakti is not an alternative to the effort one puts into any activity or targeted achievement in life. One has to put in all the efforts that are needed towards leading a good life of one’s choice. Bhakti is a request for support towards the Divine beyond the effort that has been expended. This could be due to troubles unforeseen, troubles one is not certain how to solve, missing effort due to lack of awareness of its requirement or just due to hard luck. If there is no trouble in life at all, Bhakti could be a desire towards the result being greater than the sum of the parts of the effort put in. Thus, Bhakti is expressed in hopes of a return which could be a final boost in achieving one’s desires and luck to evade unforeseen troubles.
Bhakti can also be expressed hoping to be able to overcome insurmountable problems. Imagine wanting documents to be typed telepathically 🙂 or a problem which requires societal change (beliefs, cultural values, functioning style etc.). These are not things that might happen in an individual’s lifetime. While one can do one’s best, Divine interference might be needed to solve some problems. While this might happen, there is also a possibility that the individual looking for the insurmountable solution has a realization (epiphany if you will), which gives a fresh perspective. The perspective might be anything, from knowing the solution might lie in a different geography (find your fortune in a different country) to understanding that a solution is not possible in a given time and one’s efforts need to be redirected and options reconsidered. Maybe this is epiphany was just about overcoming one’s ego to letting go of a need for a given solution; an eye-opener, if you will.
So, one does all that one can towards leading the life that one wants to and also expends time towards the Divine in one’s life. The time expended towards the Divine varies from person to person and based on one’s situation in life. This is Bhakti. BEYOND all the efforts one has expended towards one’s life if there is some support needed from the Universe for a good life, this is hoped for from the Divinities, in return for the Bhakti demonstrated over a long time.
I guess now the link between Budo and Bhakti in evident, in the concept of Kami Waza. Both Bhakti and Kami Waza are about individuals being guided by the Gods or Devata or Kami respectively. This guidance allows an individual to achieve an outcome that is favourable to her or his life. This outcome might or might not be related to a specific objective that the individual is pursuing, but is favourable nevertheless. In both cases, the expression of the result of Bhakti and Kami Waza, is only after an individual is “empty”. “Empty” by not having any motive in a conflict other than survival in a conflict situation or “Empty” by dint of having expended all one can in life or in a given situation. This “Emptiness” allows a booster to past efforts, experience, training and wisdom, which is perhaps Divine in nature.
A final word of caution here. Both in Budo and in Hindu culture, it is always said that the effort is mutually exclusive of the outcome. The training or expression of Bhakti cannot be towards a specific help or support from the Devatas. If there is no realized outcome of Bhakti, or a realization of expressed Kami Waza, it is not a case where one can question the Kami or the universe itself for betrayal. It is just that there was a lacuna in the Bhakti or the training in Budo, whether or not one realizes the same. Thus, despite understanding the concepts of Bhakti or Kami Waza, they are not crutches to look for or support systems to look out for. One can only continue training or express Bhakti, if one chooses to, and perhaps as a consequence experience Kami Waza or the fruits of Bhakti.
*Mane Devru or the Gods we, in our respective families or communities, have been brought up praying to.
This article is verbose because both Bhakti and Kami Waza are not easily defined. They are feelings to be experienced. So, expressing the same in a manner that leaves me satisfied with the effort, took a lot of words.
**When I say “expressed”, I mean perform a martial movement, which could involve a punch, a kick, a throw, a lock etc.
I use the term Budo as a synonym to “Martial Arts” in this article.
Clarification – In this article I am referring to the great Vaanara king Vaali, who is the brother of Sugreeva. It is the Vaali who is seen in the Ramayana and is killed by Rama. I am not referring to Bali, who can also be called Bali Chakravarthy, who is the grandson of Prahlad. This Bali is the person who interacts with the Vaamana Avataara of Lord Vishnu and is a great Asura king who is celebrated in the festivals of Bali Paadyami and Onam. I am explaining this since I have seen some people refer to Vaali, the brother of Sugreeva as Bali and in some television serials as Mahabali Bali. This is just a different pronunciation of Vaali, which is pronounced as Baali but written as Bali. Of course, Vaali is also written as Vali sometimes. It is assumed that the person reading the name knows that “Va” has to be pronounced as “Vaa” or “Ba” as “Baa”. But some people might not realize this and hence this clarification. Just another point here, Bali Chakravarthy is Bali, but Mahabali Bali is actually Mahabali Baali.
Vaanara king Vaali, elder brother of Sugreeva was an incredible warrior and martial artist. The very best! He had defeated in single combat three extraordinary opponents which give testament to this fact. The first and foremost of these was Ravana, who was as great a warrior as one could think of. Vaali defeated him in a manner so nonchalant and effortless that it boggles the mind.
We need to remember that Vaali was a Vaanara and therefore had a tail. Like at least some Vaanaras, he had a prehensile tail, which he could move as he preferred and use as a weapon by itself. Raavana apparently attacked Vaali with stealth, from behind, when the latter was busy in performing the Sandhavandana*. Raavana grabbed Vaali’s tail as the initiation of the attack. Vaali used his tail to fend off and defeat Raavana, while never deviating from the performance of the Sandhyavandana. Raavana was left bound and helpless by the time Vaali had finished the Sandhyavandana. Sandhyavandana is still performed by many to this day and even when performed to its fullest extent, does not take very long. Also, it is mentioned that Vaali did not realize what he had done with his tail until Raavana begged for help when Vaali had completed the Sandhyavandana. Thus, Vaali not only defeated Raavana effortlessly, he did it in a manner most humiliating and in short order. Raavana, thus defeated, sought his friendship and gained the same.
Vaali also fought and defeated a shapeshifting Asura called Dundubhi. Dundubhi was an incredible warrior and challenged all known great warriors to prove his own superiority. Dundubhi was a brother-in-law of Raavana. Dundubhi challenged Vaali to a duel when he heard of the prowess of the latter. In the great fight that ensued, when he realized that Vaali was more than a match for him, he turned himself into a massive buffalo to continue the fight. Any experienced martial artist will generally agree that martial skills are designed to fight against fellow humans, and the same skills will not work against other animals with different body types. A normal buffalo is much larger than a human and fighting one is a daunting thought. So, fighting a buffalo many times larger than a normal one would be exponentially harder. Of course, Vaali was a Vaanara and had a tail, so his skills would be different, but the task would be difficult nevertheless. Vaali of course, prevailed. If the Ramayana TV series from the 80s is to be believed, Vaali fought the gigantic buffalo unarmed, which makes the feat even more astonishing. He even hurled the massive buffalo carcass quite some distance with just his strength. The skeleton of the giant buffalo is later used as a test of Rama by Sugreeva.
The third famous duel of Vaali’s is with Maayaavi, another extraordinarily powerful Asura who challenged him to a fight. Maayaavi was a brother of Dundubhi’s. The fight between Vaali and Maayaavi eventually moved to cave where Sugreeva stood guard at the entrance. The fight between the two lasted a year before Vaali prevailed. There are other aspects of this story that are not relevant for this discussion and hence I am leaving those out.
Image 2 – Sugreeva guarding the cave where Vaali and Maayaavi are fighting
One of the reasons Vaali was impossible to defeat in combat was a boon that he had. He had a boon from Indra which resulted in his gaining half the strength of anyone he is fighting. Sometimes it is said that he had a pendant gifted to him by Indra, the wearing of which resulted in same. So, the boon was the pendant. Either way, Vaali’s strength would increase while that of the opponent would decrease by half. So, apart from being a phenomenal warrior, Vaali also ensured that the opponent was diminished just by dint of being his opponent. The boon and his own skills pretty much made him invincible.
Now, there are a few points to consider here. Does, “half of the opponent’s strength” mean just physical strength or does it mean half of the skills? I do not know. Also, what constitutes a fight and what makes one an opponent? Does one have to be actually fighting Vaali for the boon to take effect? Or does just having ill intent towards Vaali result in the boon diminishing one’s strength/abilities?
If just having ill intent towards Vaali results in the opponent being diminished, then were Rama’s abilities as an archer diminished when he decided to shoot at Vaali from hiding? Is that why he could not distinguish between Vaali & Sugreeva in their first duel? Is that why Sugreeva needed to wear a distinguishing garland to identify himself during the second duel? And was Rama’s eyesight diminished due to the boon or was it just the distance and resemblance of the brothers? If all this was happening, were the two tests set by Sugreeva that Rama passed, sufficient in the first place? Or were the two tests specifically designed by Sugreeva, who knew of Vaali’s boon, to check if Rama operating at fifty percent would be able to strike the target (Vaali). I do not have the answers to any of these questions.
Next, when we consider the duel with Raavana, was Raavana an opponent just by having ill will towards Vaali? After all, he initiated the attack and with stealth, from behind. Vaali defeated him without even realizing he was in a fight! How cool is that! Based on this encounter, it does seem that Vaali does not need to be in an active fight for the boon to take effect. Any person, who puts to action a thought to cause harm to Vaali seems to be deemed to be an opponent and the boon diminishes that person while enhancing Vaali.
An aside here, this encounter gives a great opportunity to discuss Vaali’s Sakkijutsu (intuitive abilities) and perhaps as a consequence of that, his Nanigunaku Sanigunaku (natural nonchalance). Was Vaali’s enhancement by half of Raavan’s stealth (a skill by itself) his intuitive ability to sense an attack? And hence was his enhancement the ability to start a fight without his opponent realizing that it had already started (a stealth attack met with a stealthy defensive offence)? After all, if he could not know a fight was occurring, how could any opponent sense the same (Sakkijutsu of the opponent nullified)?!
Now, let us consider the fight with Maayaavi. Maayaavi supposedly ran to hide in a cave when he knew he was outmatched. But Vaali pursued him to finish him off. In this situation, if the opponent has decided to escape and thus end the fight, he is no longer an opponent right? If yes, does his diminished skill and strength return to its full potential? And does that mean Vaali’s ability to tap into this resource from the opponent also cease? Or is that added to Vaali’s own skill set for good? If yes, is Vaali potentially going to improve forever, with every fight? And can his opponents of the past, if they survive, ever go back to their full strength? And if they do, does the siphoning off due to the boon not be in effect anymore? The answer to the last question seems to be that it does not, for Raavana, was still as great and dangerous a warrior as ever.
Also, the fight between Maayaavi and Vaali lasted a year in the cave. This does seem strange, considering Maayaavi was running for his life (not a strategic retreat) according to the story. Vaali had defeated the other opponents in far shorter times. So, did it take Vaali a year to defeat an opponent who was already defeated, a year, because that Asura was not really an opponent anymore? And since he was hiding and trying to avoid a fight, was his ability not diminished anymore and therefore Vaali not enhanced any further? I would say that it definitely seems so. For trying to find a person in hiding and who is only going to fight to survive, mostly to get away is far harder than one on the attack, simply because the opponent’s movement no longer offer openings to exploit. Add to this the fact that Vaali is no longer enhanced and the opponent diminished, it would take a lot longer. So, no wonder this fight took so much longer, for Vaali as not hunting, not fighting.
In conclusion of the discussion about Vaali’s boon, it does seem that the intent of the other person towards Vaali is what triggers it. If one has malicious intent towards Vaali, the boon takes effect, if one does not, the boon not get triggered either.
Another aside here. If having no ill intent towards Vaali was the key to nullifying his boon, was Ahimsa the answer? Not the “non-violence” Ahimsa, but Ahimsa from a martial perspective. Here Ahimsa is not about not doing violence, it is about not looking to do violence. A link to my article about Ahimsa from a martial perspective is seen below**. Rama was looking to punish Vaali for stealing his brother’s wife, not trying to pick a fight with him or to hurt him otherwise. So, if he was trying to punish Vaali, does it mean he was trying to right a wrong? Was this why he was able to succeed despite the boon? Or did the boon not take effect as Rama’s intent was not to hurt Vaali but to protect Sugreeva? Or is all this just semantics on my part? Perhaps it will be explored at some future time.
In the Bujinkan, we learn three concepts that go hand in hand. These are, “Toatejutsu”, “Shinenjutsu” and “Fudo Kana Shibari”. These are detailed below.
Toatejutsu means striking from a distance. It does not necessarily mean something like shooting with a gun, but it could. It refers to the fact that one could affect the opponent before being in the striking range of the weapon on hand, irrespective of what that is.
Shinenjutsu means capturing or maybe affecting the opponents’ spirit, or the will to fight. This is not about magic, it is about being in a position or situation where an attack would leave an opponent vulnerable, making the attack not worth the attempt.
Fudo Kana Shibari means to hold the opponent in an immovable (unshakable) iron grip. This again is not necessarily about physical immobility though it could be that. It refers to leaving an opponent unable to decide what to do and how to move.
When taken together, the three concepts would mean something like “Strike from a distance at your opponent and capture her or his spirit in an unshakable iron grip”. In more mundane terms, it could mean “Leave your opponent incapable of deciding what to do by affecting her or his will to fight even before starting the fight from the expected physical distance”.
If the above situation can be created vis-à-vis the opponent, the result is that the opponent is left wondering when to attack and how to attack, and even more importantly, if there is an option to attack at all. The risk an opponent opens herself or himself to due to an attack seems great and causes hesitation in the opponent. Once this happens, the opponent can no longer have any momentum or flow in the attack and cannot press home any advantage with an initial attack. This leaves the opponent thinking about the fight as much as he or she can actually fight. Thus, the fighting ability is effectively limited and this is what can be said to be the diminishing of an opponent. Whether the diminishing is by half the ability, is up to interpretation. If we can say that the opponent has to think twice about every move, instead of moving with no need to think too much, we could say the diminishing of the opponent is by half as thinking twice means half the number of attacks. 🙂 But I indulge in semantics here, everyone can make up their own mind about this.
The words above might seem like a great solution in a fight, but are these concepts practical in a real fight, where there are no rules and the end result might be death? I will explore this with a look at a few more concepts described below.
There is a concept called “Kurai Dori” that is taught in the Bujinkan system of martial arts. It translates roughly to “strategic positioning”. It means, in response to any attack, find a position in space that, when taken, minimizes risk to oneself and makes any further attack difficult, if not impossible. In other words, when attacked, find a place where you are safe and attacking is either difficult or risky for the opponent. This is not to say that it is a finishing move. This concept is dynamic and one has to apply it continuously in any conflict situation to stay alive and over time mitigate the attack sufficiently. The individual techniques applied can be anything, but after kurai dori is achieved. Conversely, the techniques applied can be to achieve kurai dori as well.
Next, there something we are taught called “Cut Space”. It is about cutting empty space around the opponent, which is meant to discourage the opponent from making an attack. It might also force an opponent to move away from the current position, ceding more space for one to maneuver in. This concept is also applied to distract the opponent, by cutting in a space which was not an intended attack, but once the opponent’s attention is taken to the space where the cut/attack occurred, another opening might open up, which can be exploited to the detriment of the opponent. A variant of this concept can be “Put something in space” in order to deter the opponent from an attack. An example of this from the last few hundred years would be use of land and sea mines. These cause the opponents to rethink attack routes and gains times for the defender, and allows troops to be used elsewhere.
The third important concept relevant to this discussion comes from a statement that I once heard from Nagato Sensei, one of the most senior most practitioners and teachers of the Bujinkan system. He said, the concept of “Sakkijutsu” is the beginning of the Bujinkan system of martial arts. Of course, Sakkijutsu is something a student learns and comes to express after many years of training. But it is said that, only once a student can realize that she or he can express Sakkijutsu is that person a true student of the Bujinkan, and ready to explore greater details of this system of movement/fighting. Sakkijustsu refers to the ability to intuitively realize the threat that is present and how it might be manifest. Of course, this is not magic, it is a combination of lots of training hours, life experience and mindfulness/awareness of the surroundings.
Lastly, Bujinkan practitioners, are made aware over time, that in a real conflict situation, survival is vastly more important than victory. This realized, every movement is geared towards kurai dori explained earlier, but in survival mode. One only takes an opening against an opponent if he or she is fully protected. Self-protection is key. The learning of this concept is to not have any motivation towards victory, but to use kurai dori to stay protected at all times, until a safe opening to exploit, presents itself. The opening once exploited against the opponent might lead to victory, but more likely to the mitigation of the attack by the opponent.
To put the above four concepts together, consider mastering the following situation. One intuitively realizes the attack originating from the opponent (sakkijutsu) and cuts the space where it would happen. The opponent, being denied that space for the attack has to reconsider her or his moves. This moment of hesitation allows the defender to move to a safer position, applying the principle of kurai dori. This rigmarole, as experienced from the opponent, if it continues, might eventually lead to the opponent withdrawing or leaving an opening in a desperate attack (of course the defender might give out as well). The withdrawal or desperation is a consequence of having to rethink moves constantly, never being able to achieve any flow or momentum in the attack. This constant reconsideration is fatiguing to both mind and body, and leads to the diminishing of the opponent, as described earlier. On the other side, the defender, is moving at every instant towards a satisfactory outcome due to the diminishing of the opponent, and this is an enhancement of the same.
In simpler terms, all the above concepts together make the opponent uncertain of the attack and their own ability to pull it off. This creation of doubt diminishes the opponent. When one does not commit to an attack and remains nonchalant about the conflict, triggering a response to a fake movement has a greater probability of creating an opening to subdue the opponent. It also can, with sufficient maneuvering make them attack in a way that creates an opening that can be exploited. This ability to create openings in the opponent enhances one’s ability to survive and end a fight. If done correctly and for long enough, the opponent might just retreat and end the fight. This then is how to diminish an opponent while enhancing oneself (if only to survive and not necessarily to win). It cannot be said if the opponent is diminished by 50% and the other side is enhanced by the same 50%, but the idea of diminishing the other while enhancing oneself holds true.
So, a practitioner of the martial arts, with many years of experience, has access to concepts and practices which allow a replication of abilities that could mirror the boon that made Vaali impossible to defeat. I hope with the above few paragraphs I have shown the same. Considering that the Bujinkan system is a real & extant martial art, the Bujinkan system, practiced by several thousand students on a daily basis, all over the world, I hope at least a few might agree. 🙂
A few final thoughts about this exposition. If Vaali had the ability to make opponents uncertain and think a lot, and was so proficient at this that his ability came to be deemed a boon, Vaali is even more awesome than originally observed! Does the creation of the idea of a boon mean he was the only one at his time who had this ability? Or was it he who was most proficient and his expression of this seemed to be above and beyond what anyone else from that era could manage? I have no answers, just the questions.
Additionally, if the possession of the boon was indeed a story, was it cleverly used as disinformation to put people off from picking a fight with Vaali? After all, the boon was supposed to be from Indra himself. Was Vaali’s skill so out of this world that it had to originate with not just a Deva but with the King of the Devas? Vaali is also mentioned as the son of Indra (divine or spiritual son, not biological), so it all works together brilliantly in reputation development and hence in conflict management (creating an aura of invincibility to deter opponents).
Lastly, sometimes the boon is mentioned to be in effect only when Vaali wore a pendant granted by Indra. Was this a clever disinformation tactic as well? If an opponent believes in the boon and still chooses a fight, if Vaali turns up without the pendant, does that make the opponent overconfident and therefore let down her or his guard? Is the pendant theory a clever bait? Again, this is a question I have no answer to.
However one looks at the Boon possessed by Vaali, it is a wonderful opportunity to observe a large number of martial concepts/practices and how the same could have always been attempted and applied by humans over millennia.
Notes:
*A ritual performed thrice a day (but mostly once and in most cases, not at all these days) as a salutation to the Sun. It has other aspects included and need not ONLY be a salutation to the sun.
Mundane Budo 
.png){kind=link}