Current Affairs / Recent History

Lord Narasimha – A treasure trove of martial concepts

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

Narasimha Jayanthi was on the 11th of May this year (2025). Lord Narasimha was the 4th of the Dashāvatāra (dasha – 10, avatāra – incarnation). Lord Narasimha is a representation of incredible martial prowess. It is this prowess that I delve into in this article, to identify how his abilities are still practiced in real world martial arts, which in turn almost always have real life applications beyond the dojo.

A depiction of Lord Narasimha from the 6th century CE, Badami, Karnataka, India

Lord Narasimha came to be, to specifically counter one Asura, Hiranyakashipu. Hiranyakashipu had a vara (boon) from Lord Brahma which made him impossible to kill and thus functionally immortal. Hiranyakashipu’s boon conferred the following protections on him.

  • He could not be killed by a human or a beast
  • He could not be killed during the day or during the night
  • He could not be killed indoors or outdoors

I am now going to extrapolate a bit. I presume that Hiranyakashipu could not be killed by any weapon wielded by or controlled by a human. Otherwise, arrows would have been able to kill him in an age before gunpowder, an age when there existed “celestial weapons”, or astras of various kinds which could wreak unimaginable damage. Further, we will have to overlook the notion that humans are also beasts, just a different species. I have no idea if the boon took into consideration some specific definition for “human”.

I also presume that he was invulnerable to diseases that were cause by any biological vector, for they would constitute beasts. Considering the protection from the first point, the subsequent 2 points seem like an add-on package in case someone found a loophole in the first one. And as was the case, that is exactly what happened.

Beyond the boon itself, Hiranyakashipu was an incredible warrior, on par with the Devas. He wanted to be on par with Lord Vishnu before going out and conquering the world! This was the motivation for his gaining the boons. Further, he forced people in the lands he conquered to worship him instead of Vishnu. When I say worship, I mean in offerings at pooja, yajna and homa that are performed. There is a lot more nuance to every aspect of this story, which I cannot go into in this article*. I strongly recommend that everyone read the story in detail. Not only is it incredibly entertaining, but it is also full of conundrums and ways of overcoming the same. The connections to various happenings around the world is simply fantastic.

A common depiction of Lord Narasimha and his slaying of Hiranyakashipu in modern times. Image credit – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

In the end, Vishnu incarnates as Lord Narasimha to destroy Hiranyakashipu. He bursts forth from a large pillar and fights Hiranyakashipu, eventually slaying him. There is a great fight between Hiranyakashipu and Narasimha, at the end of which Hiranyakashipu is disembowelled on the threshold. The end occurs by circumventing each aspect of the boon protecting Hiranyakashipu. These are as mentioned below.

  • Narasimha was neither man nor animal, but both. Hence Hiranyakashipu’s boon did not protect him from Narasimha. Nara means “man” and Simha means “lion”, literally “Man-Lion”.
  • Narasimha fought and killed Hiranyakashipu at twilight, which is neither day not night.
  • Narasimha killed Hiranyakashipu on the threshold, which is neither inside nor outside. I do not know if the threshold was that of his throne room or that of his palace.

From all the iconography I have seen of Lord Narasimha, he used no weapons other than his claws while fighting the mighty Hiranyakashipu. The same were used to disembowel and kill the Asura king. This same pattern is seen even in modern days comics depicting the story of the Narasimha avatāra. At the same time, Hiranyakashipu is depicted as using a sword or mace (gada), sometimes a sword along with a shield. I must add, I guess that the claws of Lord Narasimha were exempt from being classified as a weapon as Narasimha was neither man nor beast.

Lord Narasimha fighting Hiranyakashipu who wields a mace and a sword. Image credit – “Dasha Avatar”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

I will now extrapolate again. Based on the way the fight between Lord Narasimha and Hiranyakashipu is depicted, I think of this as a fight between a great warrior who was wielding weapons and another warrior, who was fighting unarmed. Of course, the fact that Lord Narasimha is a God evens out the odds of going up unarmed against an armed warrior. And the fact that a God had to fight at all and needed weapons (!) shows the martial prowess of Hiranyakashipu.

Now that the details of the fight are clear, let me look at the aspects of the same which, while fantastic, can highlight aspects of real-world martial arts and conflict management.

I will start with the simplest and most obvious one. The use of claws. In the Bujinkan system of martials, among the historical weapons we learn of, there are two interesting ones, which are worn on the fingertips. One is called the “Nekote” and another is the “Kanite”. Nekote means “cat claws” and Kanite means “crab claws”. Visually, to me at least, the two seem very similar.

Both the Kanite and the Nekote are pointed metal tips worn on the fingertips, much like thimbles. The points on these can be used to cause damage to the opponent with a shallow stab or rakes across the body. An image is seen below of the Kanite. These are reminiscent of the claws used by Lord Narasimha to kill Hiranyakashipu.

Kanite (crab claws/finger). Image credit – “Unarmed Fighting Techniques of the Samurai”, by Sensei Hatsumi Masaaki.

Even without the metal attachments, practitioners learn to use the tips of the fingers as weapons. There is a way of striking called “shako ken”. The fingers are used as claws to rake an opponent. Obviously, this is not meant for use against armour or any protected surfaces. It can be used to hook and pull the apparel of opponents. This strike is very similar to using the weapon called the “shuko”. The “shuko” in turn is very similar to a historical Indian weapon called the “bagh nakh”. I had written in greater detail about the bagh nakh and the shuko in a previous post, where I had discussed the martial prowess of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. A link to that article is seen below+.

Another way of striking with the fingertips is with the “Go Shitan Ken”. “Shitan Ken” is to strike with the fingers. “Go” refers to the number 5. So, “Go Shitan Ken” means “five finger strike”, in other words, to strike with the fingertips. This strike involves stabbing at the face or any other part of the opponent with the fingertips. It is not necessarily a strike or stab; it could be a push as well. To increase the force of impact of this strike, the five fingertips could be held together (like while eating). An image of each variant of Go Shitan Ken is seen below.

Two ways of using the fingers to strike (shitan ken). The fingers can be kept apart or held together for the strike.

Considering we are discussing claws here, there is a category of weapons one is taught about in the Bujinkan, called “Shizen Ken”. This refers to “natural weapons”. This in turn refers to weapons one is born with. Shizen Ken includes nails, teeth and even spit, that can be used to cause pain or discomfort to opponents with pinches, rakes, bites and just old-fashioned disgust**. 😛 The claws used by Narasimha would be called a “Shizen Ken”. But if a God that is neither man nor animal uses claws, would that then be a “natural” weapon? I am not sure. 😊

A closeup of Lord Narasimha’s claws. Image on the left is from Pattadakal, Karnataka. Image on the right is from Badami, Karnataka. The depictions are from the 6th and 7th centuries CE respectively.

Form around 2015 to 2020, Hatsumi Sensei, the Soke (inheritor/grandmaster) of the Bujinkan, focused a lot on the concept of “Muto Dori”. We learnt from our teachers, mentors and seniors that this was a very important concept, that included not just physical aspects but also ones relating to the attitude and a spirit of calmness, self-control and of course, breathing. “Muto Dori” in its simplistic form can be translated as “capturing without a weapon”. It means that an unarmed individual can take on and perhaps defeat an opponent wielding weapons, and not just survive.

Needless to say, it is extremely difficult and needs a lot training to achieve this successfully even in the dojo, let alone a real fight. The chances of survival and success diminish considerably if there is more than one opponent with weapons. But the training of this concept is very beneficial in terms of learning one’s weaknesses, achieving a modicum of self-control and in fine tuning one’s extant abilities. Hence, the practice of this concept lasts a lifetime, if not just during one’s time as a budoka.

If we think back to the fight between Lord Narasimha and Hiranyakashipu, Narasimha was demonstrating Muto Dori all through. Hiranyakashipu was a warrior of great prowess and wielded weapons against him. Despite this, Narasimha successfully disarmed and defeated him. Narasimha would have had one goal all through the fight. Hiranyakashipu had to be either manoeuvred towards the threshold, or he had to be moved to the threshold. This means Muto Dori with an objective! Anyone who has ever gone up against an opponent with a weapon while being unarmed would realize how mind boggling an achievement this is!

I am not going into details of how muto dori is practiced because it has to be experienced. No volume of words or even videos will transmit what it entails. So, suffice it to say that as a martial artist, Lord Narasimha’s abilities, for his demonstration of Muto Dori, should be the epitome one can aspire towards.

The above 2 images, the one on the right is a close up of the one on the left, are my favourites. This is a depiction of Narasimha actually fighting Hiranyakashipu in a doorway, with the threshold below them. This image actually shows a fight! Narasimha has locked both arms of Hiranyakashipu, rendering his ability use the sword and shield useless! And he is tackling the legs of the Asura king with his own! This is such a wonderful snapshot of fight in progress! This absolutely is a depiction of MUTO DORI! The image is from Pattadakal, Karnataka, from the 7th century CE.

Now I will look at some martial concepts that relate to conflict management as a whole, which also become apparent from the story of the Narasimha avatāra.

We have all been taught that to make any argument or a counter to any proposal or point raised against oneself or a team, we need to have all the necessary data. Making a point or a counter to one, without necessary and relevant information is almost foolhardy. This is something all of us are taught and practice regularly at work and in various aspects of life.

This same concept is stated in the Bujinkan, mellifluously I must add, as “Tsuki and Suki”. This is something I have heard mentioned a few times during training. Tsuki is a punch or a stab, a thrust in essence. Suki is a hole, more like an opening in armour or a gap in the same. It is a point when a thrust can be applied to cause harm to the opponent. So, one needs to “tsuki” a “suki”. One should attack an opening.

To attack an opening, one first needs to find an opening. To find an opening, one needs to know the opponent and how she or he is moving. Knowing the opponent includes the armour, weapons and objectives of the same. All of this adds up to “having all the necessary information”***. Simply put, having information is a precursor to “identifying the suki to tsuki”. The tsuki itself is the equivalent of counter a point in an argument. In a fight, an attack is a point raised, which is “countered” by a tsuki, which is a counter argument, and all of this is facilitated by information.

This flow of events in the various avatāras of Lord Vishnu is as follows. A great Asura acquires a vara (boon) from Lord Brahma. This boon ensures the invincibility of the Asura as he or she cannot be killed, though he or she is not immortal. This invincibility causes havoc in the world and the Devas, who are the guardians of the world, to lose power and go into hiding. The Devas and people of the world after failing to protect themselves despite all efforts, beseech Lord Vishnu for succour. Lord Vishnu incarnates in an avatāra to end the terror of the Asura and restore balance.

In the flow of events mentioned above, for any avatāra, I suggest that information is key! Lord Vishnu, when he appears as an avatāra, tailors the specific incarnation to circumvent all aspects of the boon the Asura possesses. In other words, the Asura creates the avatāra. Every aspect of the boon is understood, the loopholes are identified and exploited by the avatāra. This is the same as “tsuki to suki”. An opening is identified in the armour provided by the boon and a tsuki is applied to this suki. The avatāra is a tsuki and the loophole in the boon is the suki!

Hiranyakashipu realizes that the chink (suki) in his boon has been identified and is being used to attack (tsuki) him. Image credit – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

All this does make one wonder, when the boon is granted, what is the confidentiality around it? Does the Asura announce to the world that he has acquired a set of powers due to the boon? Or is this gradually identified as people lose fights against the Asura? Does Brahma reveal details of the boon he has granted to the Asura, to the Devas who then report it to Lord Vishnu to device a counter? Or does Lord Brahma communicate the details to Lord Vishnu directly? Or does Brahma, who granted the boon, already know the loopholes which he reports to Lord Vishnu? If the answer to these is a “No”, does the duration of an avatāra depend on how long it takes to identify the loopholes? Or is there time taken to identify the “suki” in a boon before an avatāra incarnates? I do not have answers to any of these. Perhaps these are stupid thoughts. We are talking of Gods after all, and time does not have the same meaning in such circumstances, and I could be rambling. 😛

But these questions do lead to an appreciation of the Asuras and how they craft the boon they settle upon. I will explore this through a few examples. Many Asuras asked Brahma to grant them immortality. Lord Brahma could not grant that boon as all that was created had to end. So, the Asuras asked for boons that made them near immortal and definitely invincible, at least for long durations.

  • The Asura Tāraka asked that he be invincible and killed only by a son of Lord Shiva. This was a really smart move as Lord Shiva was a yogi and in deep meditation and unlikely to ever have children. Also, he was in deep mourning after the loss of Devi Sati. Tārakāsura was eventually killed by Lord Kartikeya, the son Lord Shiva and Devi Pārvati (a reincarnation of Sati).
  • The Asura Mahisha asked that he be unkillable by any male, as he was certain that no woman could best him. Devi Durga ended up killing him.
  • Rāvana asked that he be unkillable by most creations of Brahma. But he did not include humans in the list of beings he would not be killed by, as he assumed that humans would never be capable of defeating him. Lord Vishnu incarnated on Earth as Lord Rama, a human, to defeat Rāvana. What is interesting is that Rāvana was defeated by the Vānara king Vāli (Bāli) and the human king Kartaveerya Arjuna, but neither of them killed him.
  • Mahishi, the wife of Mashishāsura asked that she be vulnerable only to a son of Lords Vishnu and Shiva, both male Gods! Eventually, Lord Ayyappa killed Mahishi. Lord Ayyappa was the son of Devi Mohini (the female form of Lord Vishnu) and Lord Shiva.

There are more examples, but the ones mentioned above adequately illustrate the points I am going to make. Asuras were incredible, despite going against Dharma and attempting to upend the natural order of the universe, which would result is the suffering of vast numbers of beings. In all the examples above, the Asuras clearly had a great deal of intelligence. Their awareness of how the world existed at a given time, informed how they crafted their requests for boons.

The consequence of all these boons was that the Devas routinely lost power and the ability to perform their duties as the guardians of the 8 directions and natural phenomena (natural order). The Asuras lorded over the Earth during the time when an avatāra was yet to arrive to reestablish the natural order. Beyond the ability for great information gathering, the Asuras had great presence of mind in wording the request for a boon. The boon is no different from an inviolable contract in modern day parlance. So, their awareness of the strength of language was incontestable. All these observations together indicate that the Asuras were warriors of both physical and intellectual prowess.

Beyond all the above points, the Asuras were rewarded for another aspect. The path to achieving a boon from Lord Brahma was a torturous one. A very long time had to be spent in meditating on Brahma, in unimaginable conditions with all earthly needs overcome. This perseverance deemed one worthy of a boon. Hence, the effort ensured that the boon was inviolable and necessitated the presence of a God on earth to overcome.

The meditation of Hiranyakashipu was brutal on his body. It resulted in him almost dying and plants and anthills growing over him. Image credit – “Prahad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

In my opinion all of this seems like what in modern day parlance is termed “Lawfare”. It could also be called “the process is the punishment”. “Lawfare” refers to “warfare through laws”, where the actions of specific peoples are either limited or given free rein through laws of a land. “Process is punishment” is when a person is highly unlikely to be convicted of any wrongdoing under given laws, but needs to work through the due process to get oneself acquitted nevertheless. A lot of resources and time is lost in this process, which has a massive opportunity cost. This cost is the punishment, not the actual one that the law might prescribe, as a conviction is almost certainly not on the cards.

These concepts were used by the Asuras and the avatāras both, with success on both sides. The process of proving oneself as being worthy of a boon ensured that most creatures, including Asuras, Devas, humans, Vānaras and other entities, would NEVER prove themselves eligible. The process was simply too hard to complete and the punishment too much to bear!

I called the boon an inviolable contract earlier. This was despite it bending natural rules and leading to the natural order being threatened. So, it was like a law that no one could violate. The Devas, despite having consumed Amrita, were incapable of overcoming the powers bestowed by the Vara. Even Lords Vishnu and Shiva, despite being the ultimate power in the Universe, were not allowed violate the restrictions of the boon, even if they could. This is why Lord Vishnu, as preserver of the natural order, had to incarnate with specific abilities to nullify the abilities bestowed by a boon. This is undoubtedly “lawfare”, where a law is created by a boon to benefit specific individuals or groups of individuals. Eventually, the law is NOT violated and yet the beneficiary of it is destroyed by identifying the loopholes in the law!

Mashishi asking for a boon, and thus indulging in “Lawfare”. Image credit – “Ayyappa”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

If one considers the contemporary Indian context, the abrogation of Article 370, the amendment to the Waqf Act and not repealing the laws that curtail the financial freedom of temples are considered “lawfare” by people of different political leanings. There is one interesting aspect about laws in relation to this post which I have added in the notes, simply because it tangential and redundant to the idea already explained. I do recommend that people read it++.

That brings me to the end of this article. The Narasimha avatāra should, beyond the traditional significance and symbolism, open our eyes to knowledge that is not commonly known. This avatāra sheds light on the traditional martial arts and modern conflict management. And if one is not a practitioner of the martial arts, the story of the avatāra can open one to the idea that it is not a fantasy of old, the aspects holding it together are very real. Similarly, the story should hopefully reveal that conflict management is not magic and has no “silver bullet”. Intelligence, effort, time and perseverance are always required.

Notes:

* The last sukta (hymn) of the Rig Veda, as far as I know is called the Aikamatya sukta. Aikamatya roughly translates to “common opinion”. It could also mean, according to the little that I have read, “unity”. But this is not unity through homogenization. It is more like accepting all opinions and coming together. It is something like the modern Indian refrain, “Unity in Diversity”.

This sukta invites everyone to come together around the sacred fire and also states that all the Gods (essentially Gods of everyone) will be given offerings through the fire. I have heard two wonderful interpretations of this sukta. One by Mr. Sanjeev Sanyal, who is the Principal Economic Advisor to the Govt. of India and also a historian and author. Another is by Mr. Abhijit Iyer Mitra, who is a strategic affairs analyst, a Senior Fellow at the IPCS. Both are very well known in Indian media (both traditional media and social media).

Abhijit Iyer Mitra says that this sukta I am referring to is akin to the Treaty of Westphalia, which ended the 30 years war in Europe. The treaty of Westphalia allowed citizens to follow any form of Christianity that they chose. It also ensured that the state or ruler cannot mandate the religion to be followed by its citizens. It separated religion and state. It also made all forms of Christianity equal as one could not persecute the other. This is pretty much what the Aikamatya sukta states, that all Gods will be accepted and prayed to and people will come together. The sukta of course, is a few thousand years older than the treaty.

Sanjeev Sanyal expands on this idea by showing what happens if this “agreement” made through the sukta is violated. He uses the stories of King Daksha and Hiranyakashipu (referred to in this article) to explain the same. King Daksha conducted a yajna where all Gods were invited to receive offerings, except Lord Shiva. Daksha’s daughter Devi Sati was married to Lord Shiva and Daksha was against the union. In opposition to her father’s decision, Sati disrupted the yajna by immolating herself in the sacred fire. This angered Lord Shiva and King Daksha was slain.

Hiranyakashipu forced people to abandon their worship of Lord Vishnu. He further demanded that people worship him in Vishnu’s stead. This is the same as King Daksha’s actions. Both Daksha and Hiranyakashipu violated the agreement of the sukta that all Gods would be worshipped. This violation resulted in their being punished. It is like there being a consequence for violating the treaty that mandates freedom of worship and equal respect to all Gods. This is the notion that Sanjeev Sanyal has put forth. I am not aware if others have also suggested the same.

+ https://mundanebudo.com/2025/02/19/chattrapati-shivaji-maharaj-the-bagh-nakh-and-the-shuko/

** In Hindu culture there are “Navarasas”. Nava is nine and Rasas are emotions. One of these is “beebhatsa”. This is “disgust”. It is one of the nine emotions that can be evoked in an audience by any performance. The manner in which Hiranyakashipu is killed, by disembowelment, evokes a sense of disgust, or beebhatsa in the person experiencing the story. This same emotion is evoked by the manner in which Bhima kills Duhshāsana, in the Kurukshetra War in the Mahabharata.

*** In a martial arts context, “knowing the opponent” and “gathering information about the opponent” happens in the flow of the fight. It is not necessarily an activity that happens in a separate time from the fight. One needs to identify aspects of the opponent as the fight is happening. This seems esoteric, but anyone who has done any sparring knows that this happens all the time during training.

One needs to know oneself – one’s own abilities, weaknesses and objectives. And also, all these details about the opponent. In Hindu culture, knowing oneself is called “Swayambodha” and knowing the opponent or enemy is called “Shatrubodha”. I had written an article about these 2 concepts in a previous article, the link to which is seen below.

Connect, Control – Part 1; “Connect, Control = Shatrubodha in flow”

++ The guru of the Asuras, Maharishi Shukrācharya created the “Sanjeevini Vidya” by meditating on Lord Shiva. The Sanjeevini Vidya allowed him to bring back to life Asuras who were slain in battle. And they came back as they were before death, not like zombies from modern day pop culture. This was an effective counter to the Amrita that the Devas had in their possession. Amrita conferred immortality on the Devas, (for the duration of a Manvantara, if I am not wrong).

I presume that Hiranyakashipu and other Asuras who asked Brahma for the boon of immortality did so before the Sanjeevini Vidya was created. If not, there would be no need for such a boon. (And if it was later, would the boon hold if they were brought back after death? I have no idea). Anyway, the Asuras used Brahma’s boons to counter the Devas who had Amrita.

Eventually of course, the Devas gained the ability of Sanjeevini Vidya through subterfuge and a honey trap operation. Why they needed it though, I have no idea, as they already had access to Amrita. Was it to find a counter to the Vidya? Again, I have no idea. In my opinion, this conflict between the Devas and Asuras ended when Bali Chakravarthy was confirmed as the next Indra after the Vāmana avatāra. That’s another treaty by itself, something I have written about in other articles of mine, the links to which I am sharing below. All of these events can be considered technological warfare and “lawfare”.

https://mundanebudo.com/2023/11/24/dashavatara-budo-part-1-issho-khemi/

https://mundanebudo.com/2023/12/07/dashavatara-budo-part-2-katsujiken-satsujiken/

“Fortress India” and the essence of “Totoku Hysohi no Kamae”

Vikram M R, , , , Leave a comment

The murder of Hindu tourists in Kashmir earlier this week has severely affected all of us Indians. We are all coping with it in our own ways. Since I have a domain and blog, I am using them to deal with the sadness, anger and other feelings. Perhaps some of the ideas shared here might resonate with others, though that is neither necessary nor the objective of this post.

The most important thing that any practitioner of the martial arts learns is protection of the self. One can choose to use the word “defence” instead of “protection”. This is true whether one is practicing an art form that involves weapons or an unarmed fighting style. When I refer to weapons, I mean both weapons of offence and defence. Examples of weapons of defence include body armour and shields.

The emphasis on protection or defence is revealed by a very important aspect. I will use the Bujinkan system of martial arts to explain this because that is the art form I am familiar with. We are taught that even weapons of offence are first and foremost, SHIELDS. Whether one is using a sword or a spear or a staff, all weapons of offence, we are reminded that these weapons are to be used a SHIELDS before their ability to cause harm to an opponent is utilized.

When one is using a staff, or bo, the basics taught include ukemi with the staff. Ukemi refers to receiving an attack, in other words, how to protect oneself with a bo in response to an attack. This same is true while using a spear. One learns how to receive an attack and hopefully redirect it away from oneself. While using a sword, one learns how to use the strong part of the blade and the tsuba, or the disc guard on a katana to stop an attack and the middle part of a blade to control or redirect an attack – the principle is similar to how a staff or spear is expected to be used.

I must add, I am referring to traditional martial arts here, specifically to the use of shastra*, as we call weapons that are not discharged, in India. This means that the attacks I am referring to could come from swords, axes, staffs, spears and other polearms. To protect oneself, and use one’s own offensive weapons like swords or spears as shields, all one has to do is put the weapons between oneself and the weapon(s) wielded by the opponent(s).

The importance of using even weapons of offence as protection is demonstrated by the concept having a posture named after it! There is a kamae called “Totoku Hyoshi no Kamae” in the Bujinkan. A kamae can mean “posture” or “attitude” (posture of the mind/spirit). “Totoku Hyoshi no Kamae” can be translated as “hiding behind the sword”. The reference to the sword is because we learnt this kamae while training the sword. But this kamae could refer to any weapon, when it could be called “hiding behind the weapon”. Simply put, this means using the weapon as a shield, by putting it between the wielder and the opponent (or opponent’s attacking weapon).

One of the senior most sensei of the Bujinkan system and soke of the Shinden Fudo Ryu is Nagato Sensei. I distinctly remember him saying, one should “Leave no opening” while facing an opponent. His statement was made with respect to how one should move in response to an attack by an opponent. He meant that when one responds, he or she should ensure that there is no opening left for the opponent to exploit. Until this is achieved, there is little sense in attempting a counter attack. Of course, this is incredibly hard to achieve and requires years of incessant training.

Another learning from Sensei’s statement is that one should keep moving in response to an attack until there are no openings left for an opponent to attack after the initial one. It need not mean that one moves or responds to the very first attack in a manner that denies any further openings. That could be a happy outcome, but not to be expected, much less depended on.

This brings us to the use of armour. One can “use any weapon as a shield” and move to “leave no opening”. The two together mean that one should move in response to an attack while using one’s own weapon as a shield. This movement will ensure that the shield is in the right place to protect its wielder. Like I said earlier, this is difficult to achieve without a lot of training and practice. Lack of training can be mitigated with the use of armour.

In any fight the conditions are always unpredictable and many a time, unknowable. In such a case, body armour is important. When the individual cannot move as required or utilize a weapon as protection, the armour takes the attack and protects its wearer. Further, armour also increases the opportunities to use a weapon of offence as it was intended, to harm the opponent.

While an armour protects the one wearing it, training is also needed to maximize the protection afforded by armour. No armour is without its openings and chinks. The openings are usually at the joints, the back of the leg and the arm pits. These openings are necessary to enable movement in armour. These openings will be targeted by opponents and practice is needed to keep these attacks at bay.

The above image shows openings in Plate Armour. Image credit – Wikipedia.

Historically, armour and weapons have evolved in response to each other. I will take the example of western armour to elucidate this. In the early Middle Ages chain-mail was worn over gambesons as armour. Later coats of plates were worn over the mail and gambeson combination. Eventually, a full plate harness came about. The full plate armour meant that the person wearing it was pretty much impervious to any weapon on the medieval battlefield. But this armour had openings as well, in the places I referred to earlier. To better protect the arm pits, chain mail was used under the plate. The elbow and knee joints eventually had articulated plates to enable movement while affording protection. The back of the legs were always vulnerable, but eventually plates were added there as well.

But weapons evolved to challenge armour. The estoc evolved from the regular sword, as a stiffer pointer version of the same. This allowed half-swording as men-at-arms and knights grappled to stab through the joints of plate armour. Daggers with reinforced points appeared to enable the same. And poleaxes evolved to combine hammers, axes and spears. The poleaxe could bludgeon opponents in armour to cause blunt force trauma and concussion like injuries. The spear point of this weapon could stab into joints and eye slits in the helmets that accompanied plate armour.

The head of a Poleaxe

When all the previous points are considered together, the following points should be clear.

  • Protection or defence is of paramount importance.
  • Every armour has its openings that can be exploited.
  • One needs to train to move to protect the openings.
  • Even weapons of offence are first and foremost a shield for protection.
  • A counter attack can only come when protection is achieved and there are no openings left for exploitation.

With the above points in mind, let me look at the situation we Indians and the Indian Government are in, post the terrorist attack in Pahalgam in Kashmir. Before I start, I must mention that I am not an expert in geopolitics or geo-strategy. I am not a defence expert or an ex-soldier. Nor am greatly aware of how international relations and diplomats work. I am just a layman, with experience in martial arts, the knowledge of which drives some of my thinking. I am as sad and angry as most of my fellow Indians and its diaspora. This post, specifically what comes next, could be considered my rant, or a means of venting; either way, it is me trying to make sense of what is going on and what could come next. When I say what comes next, I do not mean a response by India to the terrorism it has been subjected to, I mean how we Indians share opinions and react to what the administration does, or has done.

There are many people who are wondering why there was no security in the Baisaran valley in Pahalgam where 26 Hindu tourists were murdered by terrorists. That is a fair question and the government has admitted there was a lapse. Over the last 6 years tourist numbers in Kashmir were continuously on the rise and violence was on a steep decline. Hence it was assumed that normalcy was pretty much back and tourists would not be targeted as that affects the local economy. One aspect of normalcy is that overt security presence is minimized. All of this seems to have been a temporary truth and hopefully normalcy will indeed return in the near future, perhaps with overt security presence. Either way, the lack of security leads to a point that has been raised even when violence was on the wane in Kashmir and in the naxal belt. I have heard this point referred to by some as “Fortress India”.

I have heard the term “Fortress India” mean two things. First is to ensure that India’s territorial integrity is inviolable. The second is to ensure that the life of every Indian is protected within the country. The second is usually in reference to protection from terrorist violence. In my opinion, this concept of Fortress India is the same as “Totoku Hyoshi no Kamae”. It means that protection is paramount. “Fortress India” refers to the country as a whole, while “Totoku Hyoshi no Kamae” refers more to the protection of an individual. Protection of the nation includes protection of its critical assets and infrastructure apart from the people and includes protection from cyber warfare and any 5th generation warfare attempts.

Once protection or defence of a nation is paramount, weapons invariably come into the picture. And like mentioned earlier, every weapon is first and foremost a shield. To demonstrate this, the first example would be the nuclear weapons possessed by some 10 countries in the world. The nuclear option has always been a deterrent, in other words a shield. Countries possess nuclear weapons to prevent other countries from causing damage beyond a “threshold” (however they define it). No one would ever dare to use one, at least as of now.

This concept of “protection” extends in a slightly different manner to modern day “stand-off” weapons. These include missiles launched from various platforms, but mostly aircraft. These can be launched from a distance far enough away to prevent the aircraft from being targeted by the air defence platforms of enemy nations. So, the range of the missile, or glide bomb, is the defence to the platform, while still being able to deploy the offensive (destructive) capability of the missile. This is the same as moving to a position to safely parry an attack from the opponent and carrying out the counter when “there is no opening” exposed to exploitation. In the case of the aircraft, the distance from the anti-aircraft weaponry is the “safe position” when there “is no opening” to attack for the air defence systems.

A shield for the nation, easy for visual representation, but very hard in reality.

The “protection” aspect extends to any air assault being able to have an electronic warfare suite, to jam the radar of incoming attack missiles. Then there is the ability to conduct network centric warfare, where an AWACS can guide a missile fired by a fighter aircraft. Or the aircraft that is using its radar can guide a missile fired by another aircraft which is part of the same mission package. All of this requires that vastly complex technologies work together precisely. And this working together or networking, requires a great deal of training. In other words, in a strike package, some aircraft are protecting the other aircraft which are carrying out the attack. So, this is the basic concept of traditional martial arts at a personal level scaled up to massive technological deployments at the scale of national armies.

And that brings me to the concept of resources, time and money. For a modern day martial arts practitioner, there is a huge cost to keeping up with the practice, even as just a hobby. The training equipment is not cheap, and time has to be set aside for the practice, both of which are hard even if one is passionate. And seeing improvements in one’s martial abilities takes time, years even, and for recognizable changes to manifest in personal and professional lives takes longer still. This same is true for the protection of nations. Vast resources are needed, and the time taken to evolve and improve technologies runs into decades. The cost to society due to defence related expenditure can be large. So, not all nations can afford technological superiority. This includes cyber warfare and war for the minds and morale of national populations.

Lastly, technological progress, just like personal ones, will see failure, and learning from the same is needed. Losses will be faced, and overcome. Who can state that nothing has changed in India’s defence architecture since the 2019 Balakot strike and the consequences of Pakistan’s Operation Swift Retort? I would say no one can. And if someone said it, they would be wrong. Longer range missiles have been inducted, better EW suites are available, software defined radios have been introduced to overcome jamming, and more improvements are on the way.

Grey zone warfare has perhaps been used (unknown gunmen) as well. Have there been improvements in intelligence and cyber warfare capabilities? I have no idea. And improvements are happening at an impressive pace in the development of laser weapons and scramjet engines. Both of these bring us closer to an Indian version of the Israeli “Iron dome” missile defence. Just so we do not forget, there is already a ballistic missile defence shield based on the Prithvi missile. This has been deployed for a few years now. So, development is happening incrementally and continuously.

But this is not to say that there is no scope for improvement and there are certain projects that are more cause for disappointment among the general public than the rest (think Kaveri engine and the infrastructure needed for its testing). And speaking of disappointment, we come to the war being waged against the fabric of Indian society.

We are a polarized country, just like the rest of the democratic world. Homogenous non-democracies will always attempt to exploit fissures in our societal fabric, like the fault lines of caste, religion and militant leftist ideologies. This is no different than finding an opening in armour. A united national populace is armour for a nation, and the splintering of the same if the creation of an opening to attack.

This begs the question, are we protected against “narrative warfare”. It seems we are, at least for now. And are we using it successfully against adversaries? I do not know. Perhaps we are and I do not know, or maybe we are not very successful at it, yet.

This leads to the question, are we citizens responsible for protecting our own selves and hopefully each other in this narrative assault? Perhaps we are. And if yes, how successful have we been? Considering how polarized and tribal we are in current times with social media access, perhaps we are successful in not being defeated by narrative, but not successful is ensuring the opponents of the nation realize that the attack will always fail, for certain. It seems that foreign adversaries still see opportunities for success here. There is sufficient friction in the country to enable these attacks.

There is an old Bedouin saying, which goes, “I against my brother, my brother and I against our cousin, my brother and our cousin against the neighbours, all of us against the foreigner.” I suppose in the Indian context, considering the size of our population, we can expand it to something like this.

“Me against by brother or sister. My sibling and I against the family. My family and I against the village or city. My city and I against the country. My country and I against the enemy nation.”

The spirit of this saying is that no matter our differences, we unite against a threat to the nation, be it foreign or domestic. We perhaps need to train how to protect each other in the narrative wars to come.

With that I conclude this post. This article is more of a coping mechanism for me, venting if you will, as I confessed earlier. So, I do not have a clear conclusion. Just a bunch of thoughts and connections I have strung together.

Notes:

* Shastra (weapons that are not discharged), not Shaastra or Shāstra (fields of knowledge/study)

The Dasara festival & “En No Kiri Nai” – Connection is Survival

Vikram M R, , , , , Leave a comment

Arrangement of toy soldiers, part of a Dasara doll display

I work in the IT (Information Technology) industry. One thing that is common in the IT industry is the need to avoid “escalations”. An “escalation” occurs is when someone (likely on the side of the client) complains that work or delivery of a solution or progress of a project is not happening as expected (relating to costs or timelines). Prevention of “escalations” is of paramount importance, right up there along with usual indicators of cost, revenue, profitability, growth and client relations.

The last part there, client relations is what escalations are believed to affect first. To avoid escalations and to mitigate their consequences when they do occur, steps are put in place to stay connected with the team and clients. These are formal mechanisms that are put in place and are taken very seriously across the industry. This is true for all industry sectors, but especially so in the service sector (beyond IT and extending to hospitality, banking etc.)

This aspect of “staying connected” is at the root of escalation prevention and also key to identifying new opportunities in business. When I was pursuing an MBA, the professor teaching us Sales Management used to say that the work of a Salesperson is to build a relationship with existing and potential clients/customers, and then stay connected. This “connection reveals opportunity” was what he wanted us to take away from his course.

I am also a student of the Bujinkan system of martial arts. I heard for the first time, around the year 2009, a Japanese phrase, “En no kiri nai”. This was a phrase that Soke Masaaki Hatsumi used while teaching. As I understand it, the phrase means “do not break/sever the connection”. The idea of this concept is that one needs to be connected to the opponent(s) to be aware of what his/her/their intentions are, and this awareness allows the situation to be controlled. This connection and control can be physical, but not necessarily. Also, the control involves self-control, control of the opponent(s) and control of the overall space/environment of the conflict (conflict could easily be a synonym for “escalation”). In a previous post of mine, I had discussed the idea of “being aware of the opponent” in much greater detail (the idea of Shatrubodha). The link to this post is seen in the notes below1.

Daishihan Alex Esteve from Spain, was in Bangalore a few weeks ago and we had a great few classes with him. During the sessions, he was exploring aspects of the Koto Ryu. As part of this exploration, he was sharing how specific points on the arms, fingers and face can be used to control the opponent. Here, the control was to prevent the opponent from initiating attacks by inducing pain and the threat of potential fractures. This method of control came with a warning.

Daishihan Alex emphasized that if the threat of a fracture or any other damage to the body becomes a reality, control is lost. If the threat comes to pass, the opponent is likely to fight for her or his life and the situation deteriorates, in other words, escalation occurs. Another way of seeing this is as the loss of connection. To control an opponent through a pressure point on the finger, the finger should be connected to the body in the natural manner. If the finger breaks, this connection is broken and the opponent can move with a broken finger which can no longer be used to induce further pain! The pain has increased to a point where the opponent’s brain has switched to a desperate fight for survival, which can overcome all forms of existing control.

Ensuring that the opponent does not go berserk due to the potential of injury requires self-control. This means that one should know when not to overdo the pressure on a pressure point. If one expands this point further, we find examples of laws in some countries for bouncers. The laws require that the bouncers never initiate a confrontation and never strike a person. They can protect themselves, and use grappling or wrestling to subdue the opponent. This means that they can control another person, and thus the conflict, but to achieve this, they need to have self-control, to not strike another person.

In a martial context, the word “opportunity” can be replaced with the word “opening”. Staying connected to the opponent reveals openings to control the opponent and staying connected requires self-control, not a blind adherence to pre-set motives. Also, we are reminded regularly that winning or victory in a conflict, especially in a real physical conflict, is survival, not the condition or fate of the opponent. If this is brought back to the industry example I started with, escalation prevention is survival, is victory.

So, the above points show that opportunities come from connection and connection leads to control. Control leads to self-protection/self-preservation (no escalations remember!). This is victory.

Speaking of victory, we are in the midst of the festival of Dasara (Dussehra to some). Today is Ashtami, the 8th day, tomorrow, the 9th day is Āyudha Pooja and day after tomorrow, the 10th and final day of the festival, is Vijayadashami. Vijayadashami is the celebration of victory and the day to begin new endeavours. Āyudha Pooja is the day to show gratitude to the various inanimate tools and implements we use in our lives. In my post from last year, related to this festival, I had discussed the importance of Āyudha Pooja and Vijayadashami in greater detail2. The link to this post is seen in the notes below.

Weapons in preparation for Ayudha Pooja

Āyudha is the word used for “weapon” in many Indian languages. The term Āyudha can also be applied to any tool or implement that we use to live our lives and earn a livelihood (like laptops, machine tools, tools of any trade etc.). Weapons are just tools used by individuals whose responsibility is security of various kinds. These are the implements used to achieve success or victory.

Earlier in this post, I mentioned that victory is survival. And connection leads to control which leads to survival. So, “connections are a key to victory”! That means connections are a weapon, or a very important tool at the very least.

Connection as I have been using the term, is about being aware of oneself and the surroundings. The surroundings include the space and environment around oneself. It also includes the individuals and organizations one interacts or interfaces with, and that means awareness of the motivations and objectives of people and organizations.

Just as escalation prevention means staying aware of what might be going wrong in a project, prevention of escalation of conflicts at the levels of nations includes diplomacy and espionage. Both involve learning about what friends and foes want, are working towards and are up to. While diplomacy might involve mechanisms of communication that are defined, espionage might involve identifying new connections and using the same for various ends, nefarious and otherwise. So, connection is intelligence too!

This is borne out by several examples from history, including the actions (supposedly) of the Israeli agencies in the ongoing conflict in West Asia. A few other examples that come to mind are shared below.

One of the reasons for the South Indian kingdoms losing to the Khilji (Khalji) and Tuglaq armies is supposed to be poor intelligence, or a lack of awareness of the urgency of the threat posed from the North. When Khilji attacked the Seuna Yadavas at Devagiri in 1296, the large part of the Devagiri army was supposedly raiding further south, likely in Hoysala territory. Also, when the army returned, they fell prey to false reports of the size of the Sultanate army. This indicates a lack of Shatrubodha, or awareness of the enemy! It also reveals a lack of awareness of who the threat is and when it could materialize. In other words, there was a complete lack of connection with what was happening in the North, while the same was not true of the South.

In an eerily similar situation, Malik Kafur (Khilji’s General) is supposed to have been able to defeat the Hoysalas at their capital Dwarasamudra in 1311, as the Hoysala army with its king, Veera Ballala III was campaigning further south in Pandya territory. The Hoysala king Veera Narasimha is supposed to have set aside the taxes from one village, for pilgrims to use as travel expenses and more importantly, the toll levied by the Delhi Sultanate (jizya) while visiting Kāshi. This happened some 80 years before the Sultanate armies were on the doorstep of the Hoysala capital. This again indicates a weak connection to the surroundings or a break in one that existed. The YouTube video linked below shows Sandeep Balakrishna of “The Dharma Dispatch” explain the actions of Veera Narasimha quoted earlier. The link is to the YouTube channel, “Prāna Stories”.

This happening in India is inexplicable as the tradition of the importance of espionage had existed for about 1,500 years before the Delhi Sultanate invaded the Deccan kingdoms. Chanakya, in his Arthashastra, is supposed to have emphasized how a ruler should ensure that he is aware of happenings in countries all around his territory and even beyond. As I recall, Chanakya suggests friendly relations with nations with which a kingdom does not share borders and military superiority over the ones with which there is a shared border. He also advocated always having active spies and being ready for covert action (maybe with the legendary Vishakanyas).

This is another way of saying, “stay connected, always”! For, whether one is making friends or staying dominant, both are forms of staying connected, even if the means and ends differ. Also, whether to make friends or achieve superiority, one needs information and awareness, which comes from intelligence and hence connections.

Even in modern times this holds true. Consider Japan in the middle of the 19th century. It had maintained an isolationist policy for about 250 years by then. But the arrival of Commodore Perry and his fleet forced Japan to sign a one-sided treaty and open its borders. Japan had fallen behind many parts of the world technologically due to its self-imposed isolation. The importance of the incident with Commodore Perry is revealed by the number of Japanese manga and anime that use it as a backdrop for their stories.

This experience of Japan shows that a while policy of minding one’s own business and not getting involved is great self-control, it is a complete lack of connection. And that is a sure shot way to encountering negative consequences. All of us, as individuals, societies and nations are part of a system and disconnecting leads to danger, if not outright harm, on all three levels.

Consider how India handled the Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971. India took its time to build up its military and intelligence capabilities before declaring war. This is shown by the actions of the R&AW, India’s external intelligence agency and the tri-services. Also, India indulged in diplomacy with all parts of the world to ensure that external interference would not thwart its military objectives. This is revealed by the USSR holding off the efforts of the USA to help Pakistan, its then ally. This is an instance of building and using connections in all domains to achieve objectives successfully.

The thing with espionage is that it knows no friends or foes, for it is connection, pure and simple. I recall reading in a novel many years ago, I think it was a Frederick Forsyth novel, I cannot say for certain, that Israeli foreign policy sees no friends, only enemies and neutrals, so no one is free from being spied upon by Israel (the Kendra Bindu* of news currently!).

An example of this that does not involve Israel is the case of the R&AW officer Ravindra Singh. He is supposed to have spied on India for the CIA and eventually defected to the USA. This happened in 2004, after the relationship between the USA and India had thawed post the nuclear tests of 1998 and friendly (somewhat) relations had been established. So, at least in international relations, friends should expect to be spied upon by friends and not desist from spying on friends of their own. It is all just about staying connected remember! 😛

Coming back to the festival of Dasara, the one distinguishing feature of this festival in parts of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu is the display of dolls. The displays could have themes or just be a revitalization of memories. People can use new dolls made in traditional styles to tell stories of Rama or Krishna or any other or just display dolls that are inherited from parents and other older relatives. The themes could also be lifestyles in a city, a park, animal life and the like.

However one indulges in the arrangement of the display of dolls – the entire event, from preparing the platform, cleaning stored dolls, arranging them as planned and later the storing of the same for use next year and cleaning up after the festival is done – it is all about connecting with one’s recent history, culture and family traditions. It is a connection across time – to remember a time from a century or a few decades ago and adding it to current lifestyles.

Arrangement of “Bombe” (dolls) at my in-laws place 🙂

The other feature of the Dasara many people in South India associate with, is the Jambu Savaari in Mysuru (Mysore). This is the carnival like parade led by elephants, which recreates the way Dasara was celebrated in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. This is also a connection across time. The Jambu Savaari is a connection at a community level, even if one only watches the procession on TV or on a live stream. The display of dolls is a connection at a personal level, with family and friends.

The festival of Vijayadashami on the last day of Dasara is when the Jambu Savaari happens every year. This festival is also considered auspicious for any new activity to begin. So, people are encouraged to start something new on this day. Now, consider what I hypothesized earlier. Connections are a tool and Āyudha Pooja is the celebration of tools.

If we put the two festivals together, we celebrate connections on Āyudha Pooja and endeavour to begin establishing new connections on Vijayadashami. For starting a new connection or fixing one that is not great, is a new activity. If connections can provide protection (victory), that is only apt, for Vijayadashami is also the celebration of victory. Thus, a dual purpose is served.

The last point about Dasara brought us to connections across time. This is perhaps vitally important in an Indian context. Indian or Bharatiya civilization has survived an assault by both Islamic and European cultures. Connecting to this past through history should reveal many important points to ponder. One of the important ones is about what happens when the civilization breaks connections with sections of its own people and environment.

American political scientist Harold Dwight Lasswell had produced a paper in 1936 titled “Politics: Who gets What, When, How”. I recently saw an article in the “Frontline”3 which used this title to begin, by saying “Politics is about who gets what”. The article is not relevant to the points I am about to make, but the line is relevant.

Everyone knows that India is extremely diverse in terms of language, food, culture, traditions and even geography and climate. Now, consider the description of “politics” from the previous paragraph. If any of the diverse sections of the Indian population is deprived of any resource, a feeling of a breaking of a connection with the Indian state is created. Something else needs to be done to fix this break and re-forge the connection. This is a perpetual task, considering limited state resources in India. One of the resources is “a feeling of staying in control of one’s destiny” or simply put “a feeling of having power”. So, power sharing is the name of the game, apart from all other resources. So, Indian politics, perhaps all politics, is “to stay connected with everyone”.

“Staying connected to everyone” can be expanded further based on a concept from the Hindu way of thinking. The are 5 “Rnas” or debts everyone is supposed to carry, according to Hindu thought. These connect to not just everyone, but to everything! This should be obvious as seen below.

The 5 debts are –

  • Deva Rna – The debt owed to the Gods for maintaining the natural order of the universe
  • Pitr Rna – The debt owed to the ancestors for their activities that allow us to live the lives we do
  • Rishi Rna – The debt owed to the Sages of the past, for the knowledge, technology and systems they created, that enable our lives
  • Manushya Rna – The debt owed to fellow humans that exist, for we are all connected in invisible ways
  • Bhuta Rna – The debt owed to the natural world (plants, animals, land, climate etc.) for without the ecosystem, our lives are impossible

So, as seen above, these are debts everyone is expected to endeavour to pay. This is a perfect summarization of saying that connections are vitally important to survive and should never be forgotten. Watch the following video from the YouTube channel “Samvada English”, between the 25 and 45 minute marks. Here Dr. Aarti V B, explains the five debts in a beautiful manner, apart from several other concepts of Hindu Dharma.

Leading on from the last few paragraphs, I will end with a point about connections across time! I had discussed how narratives and news are modern day weapons which are “time-based”, just as missiles and bombs are space based, as in, “long range missiles” and “bombs that can flatten a city (geographical spread)4.

The depth of connections can be vast and perhaps only be identified with a hindsight of many centuries. Consider the following video from the YouTube channel of the ‘The Print”. In the video, historian Anirudh Kanisetti explains how the Pandya kingdom drove up the prices of horses all over the world by importing vast numbers of the same from Central Asia. This turned out to be a catalyst for the invasion of Pandya territory by the Delhi Sultanate. To reach the Pandyas, the Sultanate armies had to defeat the Yadavas of Devagiri, the kingdom of Warangal and the Hoysalas. When the Pandyas were defeated, a lot of these horses were part of the loot taken by the Sultanate army.

This video shows that knowledge is another form of identifying connections, even if they are of events that happened centuries ago! The events that transpired during the campaigns of the Delhi Sultanate form narratives that affect Indian politics in current times. So, the past is not really dead and a tool by itself. The use of History as a weapon/tool means one needs to identify its connection to various aspects of contemporary life.

Issac Asimov, one of the greats of Science Fiction writing, wrote a short story called “The Dead Past” in 1956. In the story, a scientist develops a means to see the past, which can be used by everyone. This happens after his request to use the Government controlled technology to do the same, is refused. This has major repercussions he never envisioned. This story is also an exploration of how the past is not dead and connections to it still shape our lives.

And that hopefully explains how connections are the key to everything and how the festival of Dasara and the martial arts lead to the same learning/reminder.

Wish you all a wonderful Āyudha Pooja, Vijayadashami and Dasara in general!

Stay connected, stay strong, it is the primary weapon for survival.

Notes:

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

2 https://mundanebudo.com/2023/10/23/aayudha-pooja-vijayadashami-the-most-important-festivals-for-the-martial-arts/

*Kendra Bindu – Central point or point of focus

3 https://frontline.thehindu.com/economy/indian-middle-class-ambedkar-economic-inequality-nirmala-sitharaman-budget-2024-hindenburg/article68521449.ece

4https://mundanebudo.com/2023/10/15/missile-long-range-weapon-narrative-long-time-weapon/

A Plesiosaur in Kerala :-)

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

A pesiosaurid. Image credit – “The Animal World – from the Knowledge Quest series by Reader’s Digest”

I visited Lake Vembanad in Kerala some time ago. It is one of the largest lakes in India. It is extremely beautiful and allows for some great cruises. The lake is host to several species of birds which make great subjects for photographs. Considering we have great cameras on mobile phones these days, one can take a lot of snaps, which will not be of professional quality, but make for great memories. Combine this with the image search feature on Google, one can also identify the species of bird or animal photographed, which adds to the entire experience. But the identification is not perfect, and depends on the photograph. Sometimes we would expect that photo is clear enough for an identification, but Google seems to disagree, and the search result is surprising. One such surprising result is what drives this article.

While out the lake, I took a short video of a bird swallowing a fish. I also captured an image. I thought it was a purple heron or a darter (snake bird), but was not certain. To confirm, I used the image search on Google. Aaaaaannddd, Google suggested that the creature in the image was…….wait for it……drumrolls…..

A PLESIOSAUR!!!! 😀 😀 😀

It was like I had discovered the local Loch Ness Monster (Nessie)! The image I used to search and result from Google are seen in the images seen below.

The image on the left was what was used for the search. The search result is seen on the right.

Now look at another image I took of the same bird. It definitely bears a passing resemblance to the famous, and very FAKE, Surgeon’s photograph of Nessie*.

The image on the left is the one used for the search. The image on the right is another image of the same bird. The image is the centre is the famous “Surgeon’s photograph” of Nessie. Image credit for the image in the centre – “Myths, Legends and Folktales – from the Knowledge Quest series by Reader’s Digest”.

Here is a video of the bird, just to confirm that it is not a dinosaur.

This incident goes to show how, even in current times, when we have a surfeit of information and access to the knowledge of the Internet, we are saddled with information that is wrong, glaringly and obviously so. And this with absolutely no intent on anyone’s part of deceit, malice or even mischief. And if this can happen, how often can it be that the information and we have is wrong and we are oblivious to the fact? Now, if there is a deliberate intent to pass misinformation or deceive, how incredibly difficult is it to overcome the wrong knowledge emanating in such a situation? Expand this further and if the knowledge is wrong due to a case of delusion, is there any way to escape at all?

Consider the use of deception and misinformation in the world with the few examples seen below.

  • The most expansive example is perhaps Operation Fortitude, the large scale endeavour carried out during World War 2, before the Normandy invasion (Operation Overlord) to hide the actual location of the landing.
  • The Indian army used the fear in Pakistani soldiers of being burnt to death in tanks to get them to abandon their armoured vehicles on the western front in the war of 1971.
  • Sounds of weapons were used as psychological warfare during the first Gulf War (Kuwait liberation war) to induce Iraqi soldiers to surrender.
  • This last example is not historical, but is aitihāsic. In the Mahabharata, Krishna uses a solar eclipse (or magic) to get Jayadratha to reveal himself and be slain by Arjuna.

Credit for the 2 images above – “Arjuna fulfills his vow – Mahabharata 35”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

The last example above just goes to show how misinformation has always been used by humans. Could this be an evolution of ambush hunting of animals adapted to attack humans?

Now consider how we look at the use of technology in modern day democracies.

  • In India, specifically during the elections, we discuss how there is a “tool kit”, which is a euphemism to suggest that specific organizations (mostly foreign with Indian allies) and foreign deep states are indulging in narrative warfare to affect the development of India and to control its regime.
  • In the USA and now in Canada, there is talk of election interference and manipulation by foreign powers.
  • National governments are increasingly identifying mechanisms to regulate and control digital and social media as these are the front lines in information manipulation and narrative control, 5th generation warfare, as it is called.

So, there has always been an attempt to achieve superiority through either a denial of information or through the use of misinformation. The counter to this would be to identify misinformation and the acquisition or gathering of authentic information, which might translate to knowledge. Both of these are continuous and incremental processes, not unlike the gradual application of misinformation.

This is perhaps why we have so many festivals in Hindu culture that are attributed to the celebration of knowledge. Consider the previous and coming month. There is a surfeit of opportunities to realize “knowledge is everything”.

  • 22nd August, 2024 was World Folklore Day. Folklore, in many cultures, was a means of passing on knowledge, especially with oral traditions.
  • 24th August, 2024 was Hayagreeva Jayanthi. Lord Hayagreeva is the incarnation of Lord Vishnu where he is depicted with the head of a horse. Lord Hayagreeva is considered the God of knowledge.
  • 26th or 27th August, 2024, was Krishna Janmashtami. Lord Krishna imparted knowledge on several aspects, including through the Bhagavad Gita.
  • 5th September is always Teacher’s Day in contemporary India. It is the birthday of former President Dr. S Radhakirhsnan. It is a day to celebrate teachers who impart knowledge.
  • 7th September, 2024 was Ganesha Chaturthi. One of the epithets for Lord Ganesha is Vidya Ganapati. Vidya is knowledge.
  • 10th October, 2024 will be Sapthami, the 7th day of Dasara. On this day, some communities celebrate Saraswati Pooja. Devi Saraswati is the Goddess of learning.
  • 12th October, 2024 will be Navami, the 9th day of Dasara. On this day, apart from Āyudha Pooja, some communities perform pooja of Lord Hayagreeva as well. As mentioned earlier, Lord Hayagreeva is the God of knowledge.

So, knowledge is a key theme in several festivals of Hindu culture. Another aspect of knowledge that is celebrated in Hindu culture is the time and effort that goes into acquiring knowledge. This includes the development of expertise as well.

The time and effort in developing knowledge or expertise goes into training (including studying, practicing, interacting, experiencing etc.). In the Bujinkan system of martial arts, two Japanese terms are used in relation to training. One is Genjitsu and the other is Genjutsu. Genjitsu refers to reality or the actual truth. Genjutsu refers to using illusions or misinformation, mostly to weaken or negatively affect opponents.

Genjutsu however, could be turned inward; it then becomes a delusion. This is a result of training going bad or being in a silo for too long, when one does not realize that the training one is going through is either not of any benefit or actively detrimental to oneself or others. A mentor of mine, Arnaud Cousergue, has written about this in an article which I am linking below+. He refers to some practitioners choosing to only practice what is termed “cosmic stuff” without a firm grounding in hard training and technical aspects.

I had earlier mentioned how folklore is a means of transmitting knowledge in oral traditions. I personally feel urban legends are modern day folklore, but are not designed to transmit any knowledge. Consider the following two examples to illustrate the same.

Around the year 1990, there was a story doing the rounds in Bangalore of “Nāle Bā”. “Nāle” is “tomorrow” and “bā” is “come” in Kannada. The story was that a supernatural entity was going around parts of the city and causing harm to the residents. The entity’s means of gaining entry to a residence was to knock on the door and speak in the voice of a resident. The easiest way to deter this entity was to ask it to “come tomorrow” or “nāle bā”. This could even be achieved by putting up a board at the gate or write on the main door or the compound the same words (in Kannada). There were several homes which had done this.

In 2001, there was the menace of the “Monkey Man” in Delhi. A creature(s) or an individual(s) in the garb of a monkey/ape was attacking people on the streets of Delhi at night. In this case, there were some people who suffered injuries. These varied from serious to minor ones. There were even a few deaths reported due to the “Monkey Man”. But it was never clear if the cause of death was the attack or an accident caused out of fear and panic. There were also suggestions that some of the incidents were misreported. In the case of “Nāle Bā”, I am not aware of any case of real threat or harm of a grievous kind to anyone.

Both of these are urban legends, but did not serve to transmit any knowledge. It was just a story that gripped a city for a short duration. This is analogous to a delusion in training. One reacts to a situation that is not real or believes that the training one is indulging in is very useful, while it really is not.

So, in the world we live in, with deep fakes, fake news and “narrative setting/engineering”, it is extremely difficult to acquire or develop knowledge with real and accurate information. It is a continuous process to develop one’s ability to sense if a piece of information could be fake or partially false. It is exactly like continuous training with an awareness of whether or not it is relevant. It is the development of the ability to spot the Genjitsu and not be overcome by Genjutsu, whether it is delusions or external illusions.

Sensei Masaaki Hatsumi, the soke (inheritor) of the Bujinkan system of martial used to have themes to focus on for every year of training. This was a tradition that lasted from the 90s to the beginning of the pandemic. The theme for the year 2008 was “Menkyo Kaiden”. This phrase from Japanese can be used to illustrate how changes in the way a word is spoken and the spelling is changed can result is vastly different meanings.

Most of the times, “Menkyo Kaiden”, as far as I know, means that a person has received or learned everything a teacher has to offer, and is ready to add to that body of knowledge. One “receives a menkyo kaiden” after she or he has learnt everything a teacher has to transmit and has imbibed the same to the satisfaction of the teacher.

But when theme was mentioned as Menkyo Kaiden in 2008, Hatsumi Sensei, as far I know, wrote the theme in such a way that, while the pronunciation would remain the same, meant “transmitting falsehoods to the mind”. In practice, it meant, “confuse the opponent” or “mess with the opponent by confusing her or him”. This was all about feints and movements that caused the opponent to react in a manner that put her or him at a disadvantage.

This is literally the opposite of the original meaning! In the first case it was about giving all the knowledge possible. In the second, it is all about confusing a person with information and intentions that could be false or true, the truth of which that person is not supposed to be able to discern!

This is similar to another concept called “Kyojitsu tenkan ho”. This means that truth and falsehood are like a revolving door. It could be faking an attack or the intention to attack or the nature of the attack. The attack might be real, or a feint, which could be an opening to something else. This is something that all martial arts and martial sports teach. So, it is commonplace to want the opponent to be unsettled at all times so one can achieve an objective, which could be detrimental to the opponent.

This in itself would be a wonderful elucidation of how one needs to develop an instinct to determine if information received and knowledge gained are correct, relevant and beneficial. This aspect is also taught in the martial arts. Practitioners of the martial arts are expected to, apart from the physical techniques and abilities, also develop their intuition, awareness of situations and mindfulness of the opponent and factors like the surroundings and the atmosphere/environment of a place.

All of these are intangibles that are related to the instinct that is needed to survive a fight, or a conflict in general (like in the office where there is no physical threat). In the Bujinkan, this is taught as “Sakkijutsu” and is very important to develop over years of practice. This roughly leads to a practitioner having “a feel” of the situation, which includes the opponent, the place, the situation and most importantly, the potential for danger. This hopefully leads to either minimal conflict or hopefully the nullification of one, but in either case, the key is to escape/avoid any harm to the self.

This concept is not specific to the Japanese language either. In many Indian vernacular languages, the term for “experience” and “feeling” is the same. The word “anubhava” in Kannada and “anubhav” in Hindi are used to express this. “Anubhava” could mean quantum of experience, or what one is feeling. In the first case, the sentence in Kannada would be, “ninage yeshtu anubhava ide?” which translates to “how much experience do you have?” In the second it would be, “neenu yenu anubahisuttiddiya?” which would translate as “what are you feeling/experiencing?”

The word for expertise is “parinati”. In other words, while expertise is something that is recognized as a consequence of effort over time, the words for experience and feeling are the same, which could mean that an experience is the feeling that one can receive or gather. And when one is able to “get a feel” for anything, easily or nonchalantly, that is a sign of long experience, which is the root of expertise.

In conclusion, in contemporary times, when information is in surplus and easily accessible, knowledge, which is processed information, is not easy to come by, for the veracity of the information is hard to ascertain. With experience, one can perhaps get a feel for the correctness of information, and this skill could be knowledge unto itself.

I recently saw a video on Instagram where Eminem was discussing chemistry like a pro! It was an AI generated video**. If the maker of the video had not mentioned this, one would be left wondering if Eminem is a chemist by profession! But the video certainly “feels” off and anyone who knows of Eminem will check if this video is fake or not.

We recently had a training session with Daishihan Alex Esteve of the Bujinkan. During the class, Alex mentioned that the knowledge of biomechanics is accessible for anyone who needs it these days. But about 200 years ago, the knowledge of the use of biomechanics in martial arts would be a closely guarded secret, for the knowledge of the same was an advantage to the ones who possessed it, and this knowledge was not available to most of the populace. Go back further, by about a thousand years and the knowledge of biomechanics would have seemed mystical knowledge, for the number of people possessing the same would be a handful in any society and the effect of its use on any individual would perhaps be seen as magical.

In the case of the Eminem video I mentioned, the ability or skills to identify the video as AI generated is not commonplace, not all of us can do it. So, it does seem mystical, if someone can nonchalantly identify it, especially if that person does not know who Eminem is. But the regulation of the use of AI is beginning and an option is now provided on platforms to mark something as AI. This is likely to be the beginning of more people developing the skill to identify AI handiwork. So, as more methods to identify AI are developed, those are likely to be kept secret simply for IP reasons. Now this skill or ability is not mystical, but carefully guarded. And perhaps the ability to identify the involvement of AI without being told so will become second nature in the future. Until then, it is good to have a “feel” for something that doesn’t seem quite right, or all real.

As a last word, I will share a link to a video by Praveen Swamy, on the YouTube channel of the media organization, The Print. In the video he discusses how the conflict between cryptographers and cryptanalysts has been going on since millennia. The context in the video is about hiding information, but it is not that different from misinformation and the hiding of authentic information. This conflict between real knowledge and its duplicitous variants is eternal, all one can do is flow through this battle safely.

Notes:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loch_Ness_Monster – Look at the segment on the “Surgeon’s photograph”

+ https://kumablog.org/2014/07/ – The cosmic stuff that is referred to in the article is the belief that training only soft movements against slow attacks has prepared one for a real fight without having undergone rigorous training in the basics and hard training.

** The video was on the Instagram account of “yourchemistrypal.sg”, who had made the video using Parrot AI.

Why the Prince can’t be PM, yet

Vikram M R, , , , , 2 Comments

In a previous article of mine where I was extolling the relevance of the festivals of Aayudha Pooja and Vijayadashami*, I had described the concept of “Shinken Gata” in the Bujinkan system of martial arts. The Shinken Gata is also a test students of the Bujinkan go through in some dojos. Shinken Gata can be roughly translated as “The Form (Kata) where the Spirit (Shin) in the Weapon (Ken)”. The test involves facing multiple opponents who attack at the same time from different directions, while attempting to perform specific forms.

In my experience, some of the learnings from this test for a student are,

  • Fatigue sets in really fast
  • Multiple opponents cause disorientation
  • Techniques and forms fail routinely and cannot be relied upon
  • Fear sets in when there are multiple opponents, even in a safe simulation
  • The objective of the test was never to check the form. It was to show that the spirit (“Shin”) is the true weapon. One keeps going until there is no life left.
  • Failure will occur. One strives despite this awareness. It is sometimes possible to prepare to avoid failure, not always.

This test is in some ways similar to the “Kobayashi Maru” test in the Star Trek franchise. This test will always result in the individual being tested failing. Its objective is to test character and also to teach that one has to do one’s best despite the knowledge of impending and certain failure.

The Shinken Gata in the dojo where I train is usually administered before a student starts training weapons. In the past, there used to be many of dropouts post the test, but this has reduced in recent years. Individuals did not always drop out because the test was too hard or because they failed. Many a time people left AFTER they passed. I am not certain why, but one reason I have come to expect is that the passing of this test is very satisfying, euphoric even; hence the person who has passed is satisfied with what has been achieved and no longer has a drive to train further.

Those that pass the test and continue training have renewed vigour and train harder for a while. But the learnings from the test remain for a very long time. Those that do not experience the Shinken Gata test always want to. It is like not having tested oneself. Add to this the feeling that one has never experienced a real fight (fortunately) and has not even endured it in simulation, and one always feels deficient.

The simulated reality of the Shinken Gata makes one better prepared for a real conflict, even ones not physical, with an acceptance of reality and its unexpected nature. This experience in most cases helps one endure and survive, if not thrive. Shinken Gata even as a simulation shows what might be needed in the face of death, while facing overwhelming odds. One does everything one can, until the very last instant (the proverbial throwing of the kitchen sink or burning the boats). Hopefully this drive will enable survival and perhaps victory or achievement of an objective.

In my opinion it is something similar to this feeling of Shinken Gata that is part of the moulding of individuals who successfully become leaders. What they do with the leadership once it is achieved is a different matter altogether. This idea is the focus of this article. At the time of writing this article, we are still in the course of the 2024 Indian election to the Lok Sabha; there is still one last phase of voting to go. Hence, me being as political as any other Indian, am sharing some thoughts on why the Lord of the Congress cannot be the PM, at least not yet.

Consider the following well-known rulers/leaders/administrators from various points in Indian history and their struggle to attain the throne/leadership.

Left to Right – Ashoka, Chandragupta 2nd Vikramaditya, Harshavardhana. Credits for all 3 images – Wikipedia

  • Ashoka Maurya had to fight and kill his brothers to achieve the throne of Maghada in the third century BCE.
  • Chandragupta 2nd Vikramaditya had to dethrone his brother Ramagupta to achieve kingship of the Gupta Empire in the 4th century CE.
  • Harshavardhana’s brother Rajyavardhana was the Pushyabhuti king. He was killed treacherously. Harsha had to fight King Shashanka of the Gauda kingdom to protect his family and kingdom in this uncertain time. His limited success in the war protected his kingdom and he took the throne of Thanesar in the early 7th century CE.
  • Pulakeshi 2nd had to fight against his uncle Mangalesha who was the regent and had usurped the throne. This victory in the internecine conflict resulted in his taking the throne of the Chalukya kingdom in the early 7th century CE.
  • Raja Raja Chola had to fight off enemies from within the Chola Empire and also fight external enemies before becoming the king in the late 10th century CE.

Left to Right – Pulakeshi 2nd as depicted in a statue in Badami, Karnataka, Raja Raja Chola depicted in a bronze sculpture. Credits for both images – Wikipedia

  • Rana Sanga had to survive his elder brother’s enmity to become the king of Mewar early in the 16th century CE.
  • Rana Pratap had to survive attacks from the Mughals and also intrigue by his brother before claiming the throne of Mewar in the latter half of the 16th century.

Left to Right – Rana Sanga, Rana Pratap. Credits for both images – Wikipedia

  • Akbar had to fight and win the 2nd battle of Panipat against the forces of Hemu to win the throne of Delhi, during the middle of the 16th century CE.
  • Aurangzeb killed his brothers and jailed his father on his way to becoming the Mughal emperor during the middle of the 17th century CE.
  • Peshwa Madhav Rao had to overcome his uncle Raghunath Rao before taking over as Peshwa of the Maratha Confederacy and restoring its glory after their defeat in the third battle of Panipat. This was in the latter half of the 18th century CE.

Left to Right – Akbar as depicted in the Amar Chitra Katha publication “Birbal The Wise”, Peshwa Madhav Rao as depicted in a statue in Maharashtra. Credit for the image on the right – Wikipedia

  • In the 20th century PM Indira Gandhi had to split the Congress party on the way to becoming the powerful leader that she came to be.
  • Lastly, in the current century, consider PM Narendra Modi. When he was the new CM of Gujarat in 2002, the tragedy of Godhra and the following riots occurred. After this incident, he had to survive opponents within the party, endure international ignominy and be acquitted by the enquiries and judicial processes that followed over the years. He then had to overcome challenges from within the BJP before becoming the PM candidate before the 2014 Lok Sabha elections.

In all of the above cases, the individual who became ruler or leader had to face serious, almost existential threats to their selves or at least to their leadership ambitions. The leaders either faced very serious external threats or, in most cases, had to fight internecine conflicts before becoming the ruler or leader. I opine that this struggle early in their careers, is akin to the Shinken Gata, but with vastly greater consequences. It is likely this relentless fight to achieve the top post that stood them in good stead later, as they achieved success in keeping the top post against all challenges and also added more fame to their time as the ruler/leader.

This is not to say that those who do not survive a civil war or severe external threats will not become rulers or leaders and be successful thereafter. The examples of Bindusara, Samudragupta and Rajendra Chola demonstrate this. These rulers inherited kingdoms which were not on the brink of war and did not fight family on the way to the throne. Yet they are remembered as successful monarchs, even great ones, in the case of the latter two.

I am suggesting that when one fights hard to achieve the top post, and especially when one fights a civil war to achieve the same, even if it is not bloody and only full of intrigue, the chances of becoming a great leader is higher. Even if one is not yet fighting for the top post of PM or monarch, but has had to fight to achieve the highest post or any objective one aspired to, the struggle and endurance is likely to stand that individual in good stead should she or he aim higher, maybe for the top post.

Conversely, if the highest post one has held is handed to that individual on a platter, and that person aims higher, for the post of PM in today’s context, the lack of struggle to achieve the previous highest position could come as a handicap. The experience of a fight or conflict of any kind would lend itself to the strife that needs to be endured to win an election against a powerful opponent. And any fight to be PM would indeed involve powerful (skillful, wily, ruthless, choose your adjective) opponents.

Apply this to the principal challenger for the post of PM in the current elections, Rahul Gandhi. He has not had to fight against his own party members to become the leader of the Congress party. But he has been fighting for the post of PM for ten years now. Of course, it can always be said that he is not keep on the post of the PM, but if one chooses to believe that, that is their choice.

Rahul Gandhi is facing current PM Narendra Modi, who is as incredible an opponent as there can be. Rahul Gandhi was going up against a seasoned political and electoral warrior forged over the course of many past conflicts without any such history on his side. If Rahul Gandhi had had to fight hard to become Congress President, would that experience have changed his fortunes against Narendra Modi? I suspect that would indeed have been the case. This lack of past conflicts did him in, in both 2014 and 2019.

But things have changed in the last year. Since 2023, Rahul Gandhi is a much different political warrior compared to the one he was in both 2014 and 2019. The fight and defeats of the last two elections have been experience after all. Add to this the urgency or desperation to win or at least not lose as badly as the last two times have made him a stronger competitor. He is more fiery, applying greater effort and using all means that he can perhaps consider. In my limited observation, this includes building a coalition of limited strength and using the skill sets and resources of individuals and organizations outside India.

The drawback to these efforts will likely turnout to be the late start. The improved efforts will not result in the leader of the Congress becoming PM in 2024. The experience gained has not translated into successful application of the same to overcome the current PM. Hence, the Prince cannot be the PM. But, the struggles of the 2024 elections will translate into ability, if the effort is sustained. And hence, the Prince is not the PM, yet. His struggles could have put him on the long road to eventual success. But that, the future will tell, perhaps in 2029.

Disclaimer – I am not a historian, nor a specialist in the social sciences, and I could wrong about all the above points.

Notes:

* https://mundanebudo.com/2023/10/23/aayudha-pooja-vijayadashami-the-most-important-festivals-for-the-martial-arts/

The Illusion of a Majority

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes:

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

3 Watch between the 17 and 18 minute mark.

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

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

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

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

+ https://power.lowyinstitute.org/

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

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

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

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

“Real” Issues

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes:

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

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

The Book vs The Library

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The history, tradition and geography of origin could inform,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes:

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

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

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

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

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

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