“Real” Issues

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Holika and the idea of the Kunoichi

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Image credit – Artwork created by Subhashini Selvaraj

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The history, tradition and geography of origin could inform,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Brain over Brawn – Deception laced with Luck

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Image credit – “Smudgeface” from Tinkle Comics 299

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

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

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

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

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

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

Image credit – “Lucky Po” from Tinkle Comics 189

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

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

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

Image credit – “The Drummer” from Tinkle Comics 307

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dharmasya moolam arthahaThe root of Dharma is wealth/good economic condition

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

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

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

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

JAI SHREE RAM!

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

Notes:

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

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

A myriad of methods

What is waza or technique or a form? We shall try to understand what that means with the following musings.

We have now trained with many teachers. We can, if we are regular students, over time, generally see a pattern that any teacher uses. This reveals to varying degrees the different types of practitioners of the martial arts.

Some express their learning by exploring the minutiae of the basic forms and apply all advanced concepts to those forms as well. The exploration generally is a consequence of applying the newer concepts to the older forms.

Others express their learning by expanding into other martial art forms to experience the feeling in those. Could this help them see their core martial art “from the outside”? Does it give them a fresh perspective? Or perhaps the core martial art form they train inspired them to try new things and art forms. Is this perhaps the same as applying new concepts to old forms? After all, the forms in other martial arts are also old, as far as their origins go, even if they are not the “old forms” that one trained when he or she started.

Here, we need to remember that the “core” martial art itself need not be the one you started with or the one you train most or the one you picked up last. That is a personal choice which need not remain static.

Still others teach the martial art form to different demographics, like children or adapt the teachings of the martial art form to women’s self-defence. They relearn other fighting forms and there is a free flow of concepts to and from all the martial art forms they train. They might do this by reading the new concepts being taught as a consequence of repeating the old forms incessantly. They may also choose to apply the new forms to varying speeds of training (in terms of faster or slower attacks), varying “intent” behind the attack and defence (harder/deeper strikes). Over this variation they layer the newer concepts to derive a new experience and learning for themselves.

There might even be those who remain students by being pure followers, simply consuming what is taught in class after class and leaving to the “act of following” any evolution they might undergo in their martial learning.

Many others, by dint of having a background in the defence services or law enforcement, see similarities in the way martial movement is similar in the old forms and the modern application. These practitioners experience and assimilate the new concepts differently from those without a similar background and their application of the new concepts does not seems to directly flow to life situations. It is first filtered through their modern martial experience and then applied to life situations.

There are also individuals with backgrounds in medicine, sports and its support ancillaries, and the mind sciences whose initial learning of the old forms itself is coloured by their experiences in their respective professions. The newer concepts always have to go through this experience first, to be assimilated. Thus, it is flavoured at first contact perhaps?

There is yet another class of practitioners, who might be literalists. These practitioners reverse the assimilation process. They apply any learning to life situations first and from there make the martial movement itself an analogy of the situation. For these folk, the learning is almost like a practical class in a “self-improvement” book, with the martial art class being something akin to a game played in an induction class in a multinational corporation. The objective of the martial art form here is material and esoteric grain/growth. With newer concepts being taught, the older forms disappear in their once recognizable avatars. They morph into something used to purely represent a concept.

Thus, we have a whole gamut of practitioner methodology. Each of these affects the way any martial art technique is demonstrated. The form is like any story transferred through time and space. The rendering changes with each translation into a new language. Similarly a form or technique evolves ever so slightly in each transmission.

The variations in the transmission is due to the points focused on by the practitioner/teacher. This in turn is due to the background and method of practice and assimilation of the teacher as we have seen above.

This then leads to a wonderful array of options for students to pick teachers from, based on their own lives. The student may eventually become a teacher and the cycle continues.

Finally, the technique or form then is what was transmitted and assimilated between two individuals in a given place at a given time. It evolves with each rendering and transmission and while the name might remain the same, its appearance and essence (essential focus, key point) changes consistently. This is not very different to an individual changing with growth over time, the name remains the same, the person does not.

The frequency of change depends on the number of practitioners and their growth in turn. Over a long enough period of time, the same set of forms might leads to a whole new school of martial arts altogether. This is just like new species are created with small mutations and very little difference in DNA (humans and chimpanzees for example).

Thus, the form is not something written down in an old book (or a new one), it is what an individual expresses those words as. The form or technique is not something that exists by itself, the form is the person, with all the wonderful strengths and frailties that come with the individual.

The fact that the form or technique is the person is perhaps why grand-masters of schools eventually teach their oldest and most accomplished students concepts that border on the esoteric. They seem to realize over the course of their lives that they need to create a better human to improve the form, and to filter out all that they might seem malicious in the form (person) to lead to a better art form.

This perhaps is because in the case of the martial arts, unlike many other knowledge and arts systems, we deal with weapons, the weapons being the individuals themselves.

We always have to understand who we will use any weapon against. Everyone agrees that a weapon is to be used against an enemy. The hardest thing in life is to determine who the enemy is. There may be many things or people we dislike over the course of our lifetimes, but these do not constitute our enemies. Many of these do not play a part large enough in our lives to affect us to any great degree. They are just irritants, not “enemies”. Enemies are those that affect our livelihoods and our loved ones in a negative manner.

Conversely, it is always a lot easier to identify who we love (deeply care about, admire, respect). The ones we love, we can’t do without. They are our fuel. Also, we as humans might take the ones we care about most for granted. This in turn is seen when the ones we can’t do without change over time. We would love for our loved ones to remain their selves as we love them best, irrespective of how we change. This is not wrong, just human nature. When the ones we care about change for any number of reasons, we can no longer take them for granted, and that does indeed affect our livelihoods. This makes CHANGE ITSELF the enemy. But since CHANGE is non-corporeal, the ones we love might morph into the ENEMY.

This is not an enemy one wants to destroy, just one that should be prevented from changing. Thus, the WEAPON, the MARTIAL ARTIST might really get turned against the ones he or she cares about, to ensure a lack of change, which is JUST A MARTIAL ARTIST WANTING TO BE IN CONTROL of something other than oneself.

We need to bear in mind that the martial artist is not a weapon because of just the physical damage he or she can cause. Martial artists can cause tremendous psychological and intellectual damage due to their training. The transmission method they use with students and interaction methods they use with others due to the points of focus in their training of the forms itself becomes a weapon.

An example here can be planting a specific behaviour in students either consciously or unconsciously that might influence their lives in a detrimental manner (much like a cult does). A student might be conditioned with training to jump when the teacher lifts the finger. This only means that the teacher has to be supremely careful of when to lift a finger, not that the student is the master’s slave looking out constantly if a finger is raised.

The same is true in dealing with non-martial artists, if one sees them as inferior or as targets to experiment on, especially if the martial artist lacks empathy in training the forms.

Thus, in conclusion, waza or technique or form (in their multitudes) is a series of experiments by one upon oneself with the aid of fellow practitioners, teachers and students to hone themselves to continuously adapt to change (with the ability to empathize with one’s surroundings being a part of the adaptation to reduce conflict).

Before I end this article though, I have to add a little detail. This last aspect relating to psychological effects, in my opinion, is especially important in the Indian context. Due to our culture, traditions and our past, a teacher is always put on a pedestal in our lives. This is something that is ingrained in us from the time we are kids, in school and in the stories we are told. This continues through college and to the various people we consider teachers or mentors even much later in life.

In school, we start every day with a prayer* which states that the Guru is Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva (Maheshwara) and Parabrahman and that we offer salutations to the Guru. Of course, “Guru” can be more than just a “teacher”. A Guru can be a mentor, guide, teacher and even equivalent to a parent. When the Gurukula system existed, the teacher was indeed a parent for most of one’s formative years and hence one owed one’s character largely to the teacher. In modern day living, a Guru can be simplistically translated as a “teacher”.

Due to this great reverence for the teacher, the tendency for students of any age to blindly trust the teacher and do everything as stated is great. A student finds it incredibly difficult to disagree with or to say NO to a teacher regarding anything. In this situation, if a teacher is not aware of his or her responsibility to the student, or plain flippant in what her or she states, the potential for causing damage to the student is very high. Hence, “awareness” of every student and the effect one has on her or him is vital for a teacher, including in the realm of martial arts.

If the teacher is raised with Western culture where this relationship between the teacher and the student is not same, this risk is exacerbated. The teacher needs to make a strong effort to first learn the culture of Indian teacher-student relationships before he or she can set out on the journey of teaching Indian students. Beyond this, the teacher needs to always have awareness of one’s own methods in perpetuity, at least with respect to how to it is affecting her or his students. This is a part of the responsibility, whether or not one likes it. It is a consequence of being a martial artist, a weapon and a human.

Notes:

* The prayer, or more appropriately shloka, I referred to earlier is seen below.

Guru Brahma, Gurur Vishnuhu, Gururdevō Maheshwaraha

Guruhu Sākshāt Parabrahma, Tasmy Shree Gurave Namaha

A translation to the above shloka, as I understand it, is seen below.

The Guru is Brahma, The Guru is Vishnu, The Guru is Maheshwara (Shiva)

The Guru is the Brahman himself, I offer salutation to this Guru

The “Mahabharata” to the “Sakki Test” to “The Wheel of Time” – Endure deep trouble to unlock great ability

Credits for the images – (L) Many issues of Mahabharata published by Amar Chitra Katha, (C) Logo of the Bujinkan, (R) Symbol of “The Wheel of Time” written by Robert Jordan (Orbit Books), sold by Hachette India

I recently watched the second season of the web series “The Wheel of Time” on Amazon Prime. The second season is a massive improvement over the first and brought back some of the thrill and joy of the books, even though the stories are changed a lot in the series. Growing up, the books of “The Wheel of Time” series, by author Robert Jordan were one of my favourite reads. Robert Jordan is the pen name of James Oliver Rigney Jr. The author passed away before he could complete the massive series. Author Brandon Sanderson, with notes from the author and help from Jordan’s wife Harriet Mcdougal and his team completed the story with aplomb! The series ended in 2013 with 14 large books.

I loved the action sequences in the books, especially the ones with swords. There is also a lot of magic use in the action sequences. Initially, all the magic users are women who belong to an order called the Aes Sedai. As the series progresses, men start using magic too. The women of the Aes Sedai order, who I will refer to as Aes Sedai going forward, just like in the books, have one unique trait. The Aes Sedai swear three oaths that regulate, and limit, their abilities with the magic they use. These oaths are magically enforced and cannot be broken, on pain of death. So, once sworn, the oaths can never be broken. Loopholes are discovered as the series progresses, considering the disadvantages of the oaths, but that is not relevant for the purposes of this article. Most Aes Sedai stick to the oaths even at the end of the series.

One of oaths that is sworn is that the Aes Sedai will never use magic as a weapon, except in self-protection. Aes Sedai are not immune to stealth attacks and ranged weapons. So, most of them have one or more bodyguards called “Warders” to protect them from non-magical attacks. The oath allows them to use magic to protect themselves and their warders, even if it means using the magic as a weapon. I understand this as, the intention behind the use of magic as the key. If it is in self-protection, magic can be used as a weapon. If the use of magic is purely for offensive purposes, an Aes Sedai is prevented from doing the same by the oath.

The Aes Sedai swear this and the other two oaths to mitigate the lack of trust the normal/non-magical populace has towards their order. One consequence of this oath is that in any situation where the Aes Sedai has to protect anyone other than herself or her warder, she has to first actively put herself in danger to trigger the exception to the oath. There are several “forces of darkness” in the series of 14 novels, which can be defeated only by, or safely, only with the help of, or exclusively, with the use of magic.

Consider the following situation. An Aes Sedai is part of a troop of warriors fighting against the forces of darkness. An Aes Sedai has to protect civilians from the forces of darkness. An Aes Sedai is protecting civilians from mundane threats like bandits, highway men, enemy soldiers, mercenaries and the like. In all these situations, the Aes Sedai can only use magic to protect the civilians or soldiers IF AND ONLY IF she is also facing the same threat as they are, and her own life is in danger. In this case she can use magic as a weapon against the attackers, either human or the forces of darkness. If she is not in imminent danger and wants to protect other people, she cannot use magic as a weapon against the attackers. She can only use magic as a shield to protect the people. Alternatively, she can destroy the weapons used by the attackers to the extent possible.

The above limitation on MAGIC AS A WEAPON is also seen in Hindu culture. It is seen for the same reason. To prevent the misuse of the magic weapon and making the wielder of the magic weapon a tyrant, a consequence is always enforced against the user, in case of a blatant misuse of the weapon/magic. Also, the way around this misuse seems to be to actively put oneself in harm’s way. This need to protect oneself is usually the criterion that allows the use of the magic weapon.

This article is about exploring this idea. Of how putting oneself through a really tough time (if not active danger) allows the following.

  • Use magical weapons in the tales.
  • Human abilities that are not easy to measure or even to teach (ones that our logical minds sometimes might refuse to accept even if we instinctively know they exist, due to the lack of sufficient scientific explanation).

In the Mahabarata, during the 12 years when the Pandavās were living in the forest after losing the game of dice, Arjuna went on a quest to acquire celestial weapons. Celestial weapons are either weapons used by the Gods or weapons into which the powers of the Gods can be imbued. These are weapons with extraordinary powers and destructive capabilities. The destruction they cause in the ranks of any enemy is many magnitudes greater than those of mundane human weapons. The magic the Aes Sedai use, in the quanta of destruction, are similar to the celestial nature of these weapons in the Mahabharata and other Hindu scriptures.

The path to acquiring celestial weaponry is very hard. One has to perform specific activities and austerities, which might include meditative penance. These actions demonstrate to the God who can grant the use of the weapon that the potential wielder possesses the physical, emotional and moral capabilities to gain the use of the same. There might be instances when the wielder is only granted a “one time” use of the weapon, like in the case of Karna, who could use Indra’s Shakti (Indrāstra) only once. It could also be that one is not really desirous of a celestial/divine weapon, but due to the character of the person and the actions he or she performs, is granted the use of a celestial weapon as a boon (vara).

Arjuna can be used as an example of both the ways of acquiring the divine weaponry. Arjuna gained the use of the Pāshupatāstra by impressing Lord Shiva with this meditation and martial prowess (he had to fight Lord Shiva in the form of a Kirāta/hunter). He also gained the use of Indra’s Vajra through penance and meditation, after he proved his abilities by impressing Lord Shiva. This episode happened during the Vanavāsa of the Pandavas. But much earlier in his life Arjuna had gained the Brahmashiras from his guru, Drona. Arjuna had impressed Drona by being his best student. Towards the end of their education, Arjuna saved Drona from a crocodile. This act, along with the character he had demonstrated as a student, impressed Drona enough to make him give the Brahmashiras missile to Arjuna. The Brahmashiras is more powerful compared to the Brahmāstra. It is Brahmāstra to the power of 4, as far as I know.

Image credit – L & R, “Arjuna’s Quest for Weapons, Mahabharata – 20”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

Arjuna gained the use of several other divine weapons. But consider the three divine weapons mentioned above. They are all incredibly destructive. Indra’s Vajra is a great weapon, but pales in comparison against the Pāshupatāstra and the Brahmashiras. These two weapons are what we would call weapons of mass destruction in today’s parlance. Either of those, according to the tales, could end all of creation if misused. This leads to the crux of using these weapons.

Image credit – “Enter Drona, Mahabharata – 5”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

Image credit – “Enter Drona, Mahabharata – 5”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

Drona, when he granted the Brahmashiras to Arjuna told him that it was never to be used against normal foes. It was to be used only against non-human foes, essentially when under great duress. Similarly, when Lord Shiva granted the use of the Pāshupatāstra to Arjuna, he was told to remember to never use it against a foe that was inferior. In both cases, a violation of this rule meant that all of creation could be destroyed by the weapon.

Image credit – “Arjuna in Indraloka, Mahabharata – 21”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

Arjuna had to single-handedly defeat the Nivātakavachas and Kālakeyas as a fee in return for the knowledge of the use of the several divine weapons. The Nivātakavachas and Kālakeyas were Dānava enemies of the Devas. They were protected by a boon due to which the Devas could not defeat them*. Only a mortal could defeat them as they were not protected against the same by the boon. Usually, many Dānavās did not claim protection against mortals when they requested boons as they were considered inferior and not a real threat. But they were vulnerable against mortals who were armed with the weapons the Devas could wield. This was the loophole in the boon that was being exploited here.

So, Arjuna set out to fight them. The Nivātakavachas were extremely powerful, and Arjuna was fighting alone. He only had Mātali as his charioteer during this fight. Mātali was Indra’s charioteer and Arjuna had been granted the use of Indra’s chariot. By now Arjuna had access to Indra’s Vajra. The Vajra was so incredibly powerful that he did not consider using it while fighting the Nivātakavachas. This was despite his being alone and vastly outnumbered. Mātali had to be remind him to use the Vajra at this time. Once reminded, Arjuna deployed the Vajra and vast numbers of the Nivātakavachas were destroyed. This episode demonstrates how Arjuna instinctively knew not to resort to a divine weapon in a cavalier manner, even when the odds were heavily against him. This ingrained training in Arjuna was so strong that he needed a reminder to use a divine weapon.

Image credit – “The Reunion, Mahabharata – 22”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

Once the Nivātakavachas were defeated, Arjuna set out to defeat the Kālakeyas. They had the ability to carry out aerial attacks as well. Again, Arjuna was alone except for Mātali, facing off against multitudes. The opposition was so incredible that Arjuna thought it safe to deploy the Pāshupatāstra. The deployment of Shiva’s weapon destroyed the Kālakeyas. This is the only use of the Pāshupatāstra that I am aware of. I have seen some say that the Pāshupatāstra was used when Arjuna slew Jayadhrata on the 14th day of the Kurukshetra war. But I am not sure of this and hence am not using this as an example here.

The Brahmashiras was a weapon that was also in the possession of Ashwatthāma, the son of Drona. Arjuna and Ashwatthāma fought on opposite sides in the great war of Kurukshetra. After the Kauravas, the side Ashwatthāma was on, had been defeated, he killed the remaining forces of the Pandavas at night while they were asleep. This enraged the Pandavas and Bheema went to attack Ashwatthāma. Krishna followed Bheema with Arjuna and Yudishtira realizing that Ashwatthāma might deploy the Brahmashiras despite the warnings against using this weapon against humans. As expected Ashwatthāma used the weapon and Arjuna deployed the same weapon to counter it. Eventually Maharishi Vyasa intervened, and Arjuna withdrew his weapon. Ashwatthāma did not know how to withdraw the weapon and caused misery in the future. For this crime he was cursed and forced to endure the consequences. This is the only time the Brahmashiras was used.

Image credit – L & R, “After the War, Mahabharata – 39”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

Consider the conditions under which the three celestial weapons under consideration were used. The Vajra was used when Arjuna was severely outnumbered and under relentless attack. The Pāshupatāstra was used under the exact same circumstances as earlier to which was added aerial attacks by superior foes. Lastly, the Brahmashiras was wrongly deployed against humans by Ashwatthāma. Arjuna deployed the same only to counter a misuse of the weapon. In all of these cases, the divine weapon was used when one’s life or all of creation was in imminent danger, against odds that were insurmountable. The celestial weapon was, for all practical purposes, the factor that balanced the situation and saved the life of user. The Aes Sedai putting themselves in danger to be able to use magic as a weapon, in my opinion, is the same as the conditions imposed on the use of certain celestial weapons in stories from Hindu culture.

Image credit – L & R, “The Reunion, Mahabharata – 22”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

The above examples are all from stories, either modern fantasy literature or from Hindu culture. So, is the act of putting oneself in danger or at least through the ringer useful in modern life? Is there anything good that comes out of putting ourselves though extreme training and fatigue? Can some ability of ours become clear or be unlocked by this kind of activity? I would opine that the answer is a yes.

To be clear, I am not saying that one’s life has to be in danger or even that the potential of physical injury or disability has to be exist. It is just that we do some activity, mainly physical, to exhaust ourselves to a great extent. This opens up a new vista for ourselves; this is what I mean. I will share one aspect, partially based on personal experience to suggest that this is possible even in modern day life.

In a previous article of mine I have described the Sakki test**. This is the test taken to achieve the 5th Dan in the Bujinkan system of martial arts. The link to this article is seen in the notes below. In brief, it requires the person taking the test to sit in Vajrāsana. A Shihān with a 15th Dan is standing behind the person taking the test. Both have their eyes closed. The 15th Dan strikes the head of the person in Vajrāsana with a padded sword (or stick). The person taking the test is expected to move out of the way of the strike by intuitively knowing when the strike happens. This ability to intuitive realize what is happening and survive, by moving spontaneously, is a demonstration of Sakkijutsu. Sakkijutsu refers to the ability to intuitively get a sense of things, and hopefully use this to one’s benefit, typically by moving (or doing anything necessary) without the need for logical thinking.

Sakkijutsu is not a one-time thing that works only during the test. It is something everyone is supposed to use, at all times in one’s life. All of us martial arts’ practitioners and even people with no martial experience use this ability. Everyone has intuitions and people use it unconsciously many a time in their lives. Typically, based on personal experience and the talking I have done about this with people who are not martial artists, this is how Sakkijutsu occurs. People are busy doing something or thinking of something, when out of the blue there is this strong feeling, and they act on it. This act in turn leads to something beneficial. The realization of the feeling is only in hindsight. An example of this can be while driving. One might feel like not overtaking another vehicle, when suddenly a third vehicle zooms past in the path that would have been taken for the overtaking. A potentially risky situation was avoided by the feeling. Another case might be when someone is busy at work, they look at their phone for no reason, and get a call from someone they know or a client.

This is not magic; it is just something most of us do without ever thinking about it. The Bujinkan emphasizes this as part of martial training. I suspect most martial artists use it, whether or not they actively think on it. In a physical conflict a fraction of a second might help avoid injury and this is the reason Sakkijutsu is held in great regard.

In my personal understanding, Sakkijutsu works as a combination of training and life experience. One trains the martial art diligently and lives life by learning as many things as possible. Living through life, we build a large repertoire of experiences. These include multiple physical spaces, times of the day, people, attitudes and feelings associated with all of these in a myriad of combinations. It is these experiences that make one move as one has trained. The trigger for the move is intuition, which is based on an unconscious trigger from the environment we are in, or the people we are around, at a given time, based on life experiences (these include the knowledge gained from various media and the knowledge of others as well). All of this is my own opinion. Others might have different ways of thinking of Sakkijutsu.

Sakkijutsu in daily life happens in far too many ways to be able to explain it easily. If I consider the examples I mentioned above, the intuition will be about something people are not actively thinking about. They might be doing something similar, but not the same. While driving, we do not think of specific vehicles, we consider the spaces on the road. But the intuition might be about a specific vehicle. While working, we might be busy thinking of something work related, but the intuition might be about specific individuals, either at work or among friends and family.

Based on the previous paragraphs, the mind is full of one aspect, but empty of others. The intuition would be about one of these aspects which was absent in the mind. This is the unconscious trigger for the intuition. In other words, when the mind is empty of something, that is likely the thing about which the intuition might occur. In daily life this is fairly easy, as we are all thinking of something or the other, all the time. So, the mind is full of something, but empty of everything thing except that one thing. And therefore, it is always open to intuition.

This is entirely reversed in the Sakki test I described earlier. Everyone, including me, who has passed the test, will say that the way to pass the Sakki test is to keep one’s mind clear or empty. The Sakki test has removed all other senses from the situation, as the eyes are closed, smell and taste are of no help, there is no tactile sense until one is hit on the head. Also, it is too late to move if one assumes one can move based on the sound the 15th Dan makes while striking. Further, there is the awareness that this is a test. So, one is not thinking of anything except the test at that point in time. This is because, as students, we are raised to focus on the test when taking one. It is also a case of focusing on the task at hand, and in this case it is the Sakki test.

So, external senses are of no use and the one thing that enables intuition, which is to fill the mind with something that is not the aspect that we need the intuition about is not possible! J If we could think of or keep our mind busy with something(s) other than the test, Sakkijutsu will work! But, this being a test, one is busy thinking only of the test! So, that is the one thing that there will NOT BE intuition about. 😀

This is why people say keep the mind empty. If the mind is empty of all things, the Sakki will be there when needed. Similarly, if one can be immersed completely in something other than the test, the intuition is likely to be there as well. But either of these are insanely hard at the time of the test!! But then, it cannot be that hard because everyone gets it in a matter of a few days at best. Once the test is passed, for the rest of one’s life, it is a continuous realization that Sakkijutsu works when one is not actively thinking or looking for it. It works when needed if one can just know that it works without second guessing the same or trying too hard with logical reasoning of trying to explain the same. It is an innate ability that all of us humans possess.

That said, to help each other pass the Sakki test, there is one thing that is done among my Buyu (fellow martial practitioners/martial family) in our dojo. There could be several things and ideas about this in other dojos, I am only referring to our way of thinking here. We usually get the person taking test to train really hard on the day of the test and maybe on the day or two before the same.

The person taking the test is encouraged to train only with her or his senpai (seniors). And the senpai train hard with the person. The intention in the attack is far stronger that it otherwise might be. And any attack is relentless. The person faces a really hard time, and no quarter is given in the training. Of course, there is no major injury in this as the senpai has good self-control. But the threat of one is ever present and minor knocks, chokes, throws etc. are present for sure. The idea is that the person taking the test should feel wrung out by the end of the session when he or she goes to take the Sakki test. Multiple senpai might train with this person to achieve the necessary fatigue.

The level of fatigue at the time of taking the test is such that he or she is too tired to even think at the time of test. In other words, the training has been so intense that the person is just happy to be sitting and not having to survive anymore. Hopefully, this level of fatigue makes the person tired enough to make her or his mind blank, i.e., too tired to think! Thus, the mind is blank and the test can be passed. Once this is done, the experience lasts a lifetime, and the person has the rest of her or his life to fine-tune and improve Sakkijutsu.

Thus, when a person goes up against an opponent who is far superior in experience, the ability to have intuition is unlocked or at least unblocked. This is very similar to putting oneself in danger to gain the ability to use magic, or to be able to use weapons that can nullify extraordinary foes. Of course, intuitive ability is not magic, or divine in nature. But it definitely feels so with hindsight, when one realizes the trouble avoided due to Sakkijutsu in real life. This is true irrespective of whether or one is in an active, recognized conflict.

Of course, I am not suggesting that the fatigue caused in a training session is in anyway equal to one facing certain death or major physical injury. Nor am I equating the situations faced by warriors in real battlefields to a dojo setting. There is no equivalence. But I am suggesting that the situations are similar, and the end results are beneficial. It is something that one can learn from stories and the experiences of real warriors to apply in life. Put oneself through an uncomfortable situation to gain something positive, even if it is just the realization of how lucky one was to get out of that situation. Perhaps the luck itself was Sakkijutsu at work.

I could be off or wrong in my understanding. If someone feels that way, I would gladly welcome alternate points of view. In conclusion, I suggest that this concept of hardship to unlock or reveal abilities has always been known. A reminder of this is what we see in the stories, both old and new.

Notes:

* This sounds like there was a treaty between the Nivātakavachas and Kālakeyas respectively with the Devas, which required mutual non-aggression. Indra could not violate the same. This treaty does not include mortals/Mānavās. So, Indra equipped Arjuna with celestial weaponry (the weapons the Devas would use) and got him to defeat the afore mentioned groups of Dānavas. This is just me speculating with my modern-day sensibilities. I do not have any evidence to support the same.

** Sakkijutsu article

https://mundanebudo.com/2023/08/31/shabdavedi-sakkijutsu-and-why-charioteers-are-awesome/

Dashāvatāra & Budo, Part 2 – Katsujiken & Satsujiken

The previous two articles I posted were related to the festival of Deepāvali and the stories of the Dashāvatāra respectively. The article related to Deepavali was related to the stories about Naraka Chaturdashi and Bali Pādyami. In both the articles I identified concepts from the martial arts in the stories related to the festivals and the Dashāvatāra, and expanded on those. This article is an addition to those two and perhaps the last in the series, where I will try and delve into the last few concepts originating from the first article. A link is seen in the notes below to the two previous articles*.

In the previous article the main concept that I explored was “Issho Khemi”. “Issho Khemi”, based on my experience, was translated as either, “do whatever is necessary” or “do just enough”. Further, I referred to the biography of sword master Yamaoka Tesshu and his way of training the sword, to understand this concept. The biography of Yamaoka Tesshu referred to was ““The Sword of No-Sword: Life of the Master Warrior Tesshu”. I remember the book saying that Tesshu encouraged his students to train hard but did not focus on specific techniques or forms. In other words, in my opinion, he preferred that his students train the sword to use “Issho Khemi”.

Considering that we are referring to swords and doing whatever needs to be done, we need to consider another concept that I have learnt as part of the Bujinkan system of martial arts. This is the concept of “Katsujiken and Satsujiken”. Katsujikan means “the life-taking sword” and Satsujiken means “the life-saving sword”. Simply put, if the sword can be used to do whatever is necessary, the necessity could be, as the situation calls for, to save a life or take a life – Issho Khemi.

There are many ways of understanding “Katsujiken and Satsujiken”. The context in which it is used in reference to a real fight is “if you are not ready to kill, do not draw the sword”. This notion is not unique to Japanese martial arts. I have heard it said with respect to guns as well, where it is said that one should not draw the gun if one is not willing (or ready) to pull the trigger. There is a similar saying with Kalari Payattu as well. Kalari Payattu is the martial art form originating in the state of Kerala.

In Kalari Payattu, there is a saying which goes, “Thodaade Thodaade, thottaal vidaade”. It translates to “do not touch, do not touch; if someone else touches, do not spare that person”. Of course, what is being said is, avoid physical contact in a conflict, but if it is initiated by someone else and there is no choice but to fight, do not spare the other person (opponent). I am sharing a link in the notes below where a Gurukkal (teacher), Dr. S Mahesh, teacher and practitioner of Kalari Payattu makes this statement and explains the same**.

In this context, avoiding the drawing of the blade is one saving the life of the opponent. The objective is to avoid any injury to anyone. So, the sword is not drawn, hoping the situation can be deescalated. To this end, there are forms and techniques that are trained in the Bujinkan system of martial arts where one defends oneself with the sheathed sword. This sometimes looks like forms trained with the hanbo (3 foot staff). This then goes on to forms where the opponent is controlled without drawing the blade completely. The blade is partially unsheathed when necessary to ensure that the opponent realizes that pressing the attack further is detrimental to her or his health and the defender is offering an opportunity to disengage and end the attack. The blade is also sheathed as soon as this message is complete to avoid any escalation. Thus, without drawing the blade (completely), the lives of the attacker(s) and defender are saved. Thus, Satsujiken, the life-saving sword, is achieved.

In case the situation is too far gone and there is no hope of surviving a physical conflict without incapacitating the opponent(s), Katsujiken has to be adhered to. Of course, it does not mean that anyone needs to lose their life. It means causing injury to the attacker(s) is acceptable to survive the physical conflict. Here, to save one’s own life, the life of another might have to be taken; at least physical harm may be caused to someone else. The imperative to cause injury to others might be more urgent when the safety or others is involved. If someone or something being attacked is dear to someone, that person might have to resort to the life-taking sword to save the others, especially if the individuals being attacked cannot escape or do not know how to survive without help.

When a situation calls for Katsujiken, one really needs to let go of thoughts of consequences of causing harm to others and focus on survival. This means being in the moment and doing whatever it takes to survive, with no motivations regarding the future. If one is lucky, this attitude might deescalate a situation and mitigate the need for Katsujiken (if the opponent is wise enough to sense the same).

Of course, it is never really clear when Katsujiken or Satsujiken have to be used. The choice might move from one to the other and depends entirely on the gut feel of the individual(s) involved in the situation at a given time and space. A change in the time, space or people will alter the consequences. Apart from this, hindsight might show what was possibly a better choice, but that is not much use except as experience for a future conflict.

Everyone hopes that Katsujiken is never needed. Satsujiken itself should be a last resort. This is possible with external factors like societal norms and behaviour. Another important aspect that prevents anyone from even considering Katsujiken is the efficiency and effectiveness of the legal and justice system of a place. The effort and negative consequences of having to deal with the legal system itself is huge motivator for people to avoid escalating a conflict to physical levels and then to a case where bodily harm is caused. The punishments one faces for physical harm to others are a deterrent to any life-taking of even injurious actions. This of course, is only possible if the individuals involved in the conflict cannot act with impunity, which means they are not afraid of the legal or other consequences of their violent actions.

Even though Katsujiken and Satsujiken have “ken” at the end which represents a sword, the concept is not restricted to swords. The life-saving and life-taking aspect is with relation to any weapon or even unarmed conflicts. It could perhaps even be expanded to violence which is emotional or intellectual (consider gaslighting, ragging/hazing, demeaning narratives, and the like).

In a previous article where I discussed the festival of Āyudha Pooja, I had mentioned that the word “Āyudha” means weapon. But based on the manner in which the festival is celebrated, “Āyudha” can be any tool. A link to the article where this is discussed in detail is seen in the notes below.+ Based on the previous paragraph and the Āyudha Pooja festival, where any tool can be considered a weapon and vice versa, the life-taking and life-saving nature can be attributed to any concept (idea or theory included) or tool applied as a solution in a conflict.

An example of this was seen in my previous article relating to the festival of Deepavali (link to the article in the notes below)*. In that article I had discussed how stealth and deception were the real weapons applied against both Narakāsura and Bali. In the case of Narakāsura the deception was to carry out an unexpected aerial attack against him at night and catching him by surprise. In the case of Bali, the deception was to get him to make a promise that he would not be able to keep and hence be defeated. Both actions were driven by knowledge of the opponents. Bali was honourable and righteous and would never break a promise, guaranteeing his defeat. Narakāsura would never back down from a fight and hence would be slain.

The outcome of the application of deception, however, was completely different in two cases. Bali was defeated without any violence while Narakāsura was killed and many of his troops lost their lives as well. Bali was defeated by the Vāmana avatāra of Vishnu and Narakāsura was killed by the Krishna avatāra. Further, Bali was rewarded by being named the next Indra while Naraka’s name is forever remembered as that of a tyrant. Based on this, the application of deception against Narakāsura is “Katsujiken” or life-taking sword, while it is “Satsujiken” or life-saving sword in the case of Bali. The “ken” or sword in both cases is the concept of deception.

Before the segue into the use of deception against Bali and Narakāsura, I had mentioned how only those involved in a conflict can identify when Katsujiken or Satsujiken is applicable in a given situation. Perhaps even they do not actively think of it in these terms. They “feel” the situation and while going with the flow of the conflict determine the necessary actions. In hindsight the action taken can be classified as either life-taking or life-saving.

So, how do those participating in the conflict identify what the preferred course of action or response is? I opine that the answer is to “listen” to the opponent and therefore the situation. This is not unlike being a good listener in daily life. We all try to be good listeners at work, with friends and with family. The idea is that this will help us identify the actual problem a client is facing and if the people near and dear to us are saying anything that is not explicit in the words being used. In the case of a conflict, specifically a physical one, even if it is a sport, the word “listen” means one should “feel” the fight.

“Feel the fight” or “feel the situation” does not mean just the tactile aspects. It means one should be aware of the opponent(s) and the time and space where the fight is taking place. The word “mindful” can be used instead of “aware” in the previous sentence. One needs “awareness” of a situation, or an individual needs to be “mindful” of a situation. The awareness here includes not only what is happening, but also the intent of the opponent(s) and even the abilities of the same.

In order to be mindful of a situation, during training sessions, it is suggested that one let go of all motivations except to survive. It is suggested that one not try to win, see if a technique works, focus on a given form, try to make the opponent feel bad or anything else. One should focus on Issho Khemi. I discussed this concept in my previous article*. Issho Khmei is to do whatever is necessary to survive.

An example of this, based on my personal understanding, is the is the use of the tachi. The tachi is the curved Japanese sword that was a precursor of the katana. It was worn differently and used very often by cavalry. The tachi also tended to be a bit longer and more curved compared to the later katana, though this is not a hard and fast rule. Also, it was a weapon that came up against Japanese armour (yoroi) often. I was taught by my mentor that since any sword, including the tachi cannot cut through armour, the tachi was not used as a sword.

The yoroi forced the tachi to be used as a hammer or an axe and also as a knife. Additionally, the tachi was used as a lever and a shield as well. The hammer or axe aspect comes as one strikes the opponent with the sword with no guarantee of achieving a cut. This strike allows the sword to be placed somewhere on the armour. Once this positioning is done, one tries to maneuver the tip of the blade into a gap in the armour where a stab can be achieved, fatal or at least debilitating to the opponent. I have been told by some folk with a lot of experience that the initial strike sometimes happened with the back (mune – blunt edge) of the tachi. Also, only the last few inches of this weapon was sharpened to aid in effective stabbing. The rest of it was not necessarily very sharp as it was more for striking and could not cut through armour anyway.

When two opponents in armour and swords go up against one another, they tend to end up grappling. This is because a cut is not possible and a stab in the gaps of the armour is the objective. One of the ways of getting a stab is to get the opponent down and then stab from a dominant position. Also, when the tachi is more a metal rod and less a sword against armour, it is effective as a lever to grapple with and take down an opponent. This is not unlike the way we are taught to use a hanbo in the Bujinkan. Of course, if the sword is a metal rod that can hit, it can also act as a shield to block the same. Thus, the tachi is a staff, axe, hammer and a knife, disguised as a sword.

This same way of using swords is also seen in European martial arts. When armour development improved greatly and full plate harness was used in Europe during the 14th, 15th and 16th centuries, swords also evolved to the new reality where a cut was useless against armour. Swords became more pointed to enable stabbing. A highly specialized stabbing sword called an “Estoc” was developed which had a square or rhomboid cross section, but a very sharp point. This meant that it was a metal rod with a point, so, no cutting at all, but great thrusting. This also enabled half-swording where one could hold the blade at any position with no risk of being cut.

Of course, even when swords were sharp half-swording is possible. The same is true with a tachi. It just depends on learning how to handle a sharp edge. Based on what I have seen of half-swording, they do seem similar to the ways of using a hanbo as well, just like a tachi. All of this can be simplified and explained by considering how we would use an unsheathed sword. In both European and Japanese martial arts, individuals carried a dagger or a tanto for stabbing once both opponents were down. This was more efficient as it was easier to control on the ground, unlike a longer sword. I am personally not aware of any manuals or specific forms from Indian martial arts where armour was considered and grappling was resorted to, to overcome the same. Please do let me know if anyone knows of the same.

The morphing of a sword into a hammer, knife and shield is an example of being aware of the opponent (wearing armour as a simplistic example in this case) and using a tool, sword in this case, however possible, to achieve survival. So, when the tachi is a shield, it is Satsujiken and when it is a hammer or a dagger, it is Katsujiken.

I started off with this example to show how one must be mindful of the situation in a conflict. But when we consider the development of arms and armour over centuries to counter one another, we realize that the duration of a conflict need not be a short one. It could short for individuals, based on how long they are a part of the same. But the conflict itself might go on for durations which last the lifetimes of multiple generations. In this situation, being aware of opponent(s) is something like the Government of a nation always needing to be aware of the threats to its citizens. Here the intelligence gathering arms of the state are the main enablers of being mindful of the world, beyond just the known enemies of state or opponents of government. This is “listening” or “being aware” in perpetuity.

Tales from Hindu culture are replete with the need to be mindful of the opponent(s) abilities. Several avatāras and forms of our Gods and Goddesses were specifically born in that form to counter the ability of a given threat to the world, the threat in most cases being an asura. In my previous article, I have described the purpose of each of the 10 avatāras of Lord Vishnu. The link to this article is seen in the notes below*. I will share specific examples here to elucidate how awareness of the opponent led to the form of God. I am leaving out Narakāsura and Bali as they have already been discussed in great detail above and in an earlier article* (link in the notes).

Lord Narsimha

The Asura Hiranyakashipu had a boon (vara) due to which he could not be killed by any man or animal, inside or outside, during the day or during the night. Lord Vishnu took the form of Narasimha to specifically exploit the loopholes in the boon. The boon is the armour/ability in this case and the loophole in the boon is the gap in the armour that can be exploited. Narasimha was neither man not animal, he was both. He killed Hiranyakashipu on the threshold, which is neither inside nor outside, at twilight, which is neither day nor night.

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

Devi Durga

The Asura Mahishāsura had a boon which specifically protected him from all living beings except women. He believed no woman could harm him and hence did not ask for protection from them at the time of requesting the boon. Devi Durga is a form of Devi Parvati or Shakti who came into being to eliminate Mahishāsura. Durga received the weapons of all the Gods which made her the greatest warrior. Mashisha had no protection against Durga as she was a woman and with her martial abilities, she destroyed Mahishāsura.

Image credit – “Tales of Durga” (Kindle edition), published by Amar Chitra Katha

Lord Karttikeya

The Asura Tāraka had a boon due to which only a son of Lord Shiva could defeat him. Lord Shiva was in deep meditation and had no wife at the time the boon was granted. Hence, there was no one who could threaten Tāraka. Eventually Devi Parvati married Lord Shiva and Lord Karttikeya was born of them. He eliminated Tārakāsura. I am cutting the story really short here!

Image credit – “Karttikeya” (Kindle edition), published by Amar Chitra Katha

The above just a very small set of the examples from Hindu culture of being aware of the abilities of the opponent to be able to overcome the threat. I would strongly encourage everyone to read the stories in full. They are a very enriching experience. Hindu tradition is literally chock full of examples that are constant reminders of the need to be mindful of any given situation.

Since we are speaking of identifying a gap or an opening in the armour or ability of an opponent, and the notion in this article is originating from the Bujinkan, which is Japanese in origin, I must share the beautifully poetic words to express this concept. Tsuki, in Japanese, is to punch. Suki is the hole or opening that can be punched. So, many stories from Hindu tradition are all about “Suki to Tsuki”. Identify a Suki or opening to Tsuki, or punch. In other words, find an opening and attack it, exactly like the avatāras did.

Staying with Japanese culture, there are legends of the Muramasa and Masamune blades from medieval Japan. I am not aware of all the stories associated with these swords, but I am sharing a gist of what I know. Blades made by the swordsmith Masamune were supposed to be blades that saved lives. Swords made by the swordsmith Muramasa were supposed to be cursed. They always took lives and brought misfortune to the owners of the same. I have heard some opinions that Muramasa was an apprentice of Masamune’s.

One interesting story about these is about the comparison of which sword was sharper. A sword by both Masamune and Muramasa were left suspended in a stream to check which was a sharper blade. The Masamune blade did not harm any fish swimming past. The fish avoided the sword and never swam into the dangling blade. Vegetation that floated past was cut effortlessly. However, with the Muramasa blade, fish swam into the blade were cleaved effortlessly. But vegetation got tangled on the blade and was not cut. I could be wrong about the details of the story, but I hope the essence that one was a life-saving blade while the other was a life-taking blade is clear. Muramasa is Katsujiken, Masamune is Satsujiken.

There is a manga (Japanese comics) called “Crying Freeman”. In one volume of this manga, the protagonist gets possession of a Muramasa sword and is subject to misfortune++. His wife believes that the Muramasa sword brings misfortune because people try to get rid of it and not learn to use it. She feels that the blade needs its owner to learn to use it in the best manner possible. So, she takes up this responsibility and trains with the Muramasa blade. Send turns out to be right and the string of bad luck ceases. I think this is a wonderful take on learning to be mindful, even of inanimate objects!

Since we are referring to pop culture by discussing manga, I will share one beautiful description of the concept of “do not draw if you are not ready to kill”. In the second novel of the acclaimed science fiction series “The Expanse”, titled “Caliban’s War”, there is face off followed by a shoot-out. Two groups, one of the protagonists who are heavily armed with guns and another of a group of security personnel who are similarly armed are facing off against each other.

Neither wants to start shooting but both are extremely suspicious of the other and on a hair trigger response. One of the protagonists, who has no combat experience, based on his viewing of movies, thinks he can threaten the other group into withdrawal and cocks his gun. This immediately triggers a shoot out and all the security personnel have to be killed. Later one of the protagonists relieves the non-combatant of his weapon and explains that any one with real combat experience assumes that a cocked gun is a prelude to a definite firing of the same and will not wait to see what happens next, they will simply shoot. The person who did it had no idea of this and cost several lives in a tragic and inadvertent situation. I believe the character in the novel who starts the shoot out accidentally is Praxidike Meng.

One last point before we conclude this post. I mentioned earlier in this article that societal norms and a robust legal and justice system can be a deterrent to violence. In other words, there is a systemic incentivizing of Satsujiken over Katsujiken. There is a Sanskrit phase that says “Dharmo Rakshatih Rakshitaha”. It means “Dharma protects those that protect it”. Dharma can be “the right thing to do”. It can also be “that which sustains”&.

If there is a set of rules and practices put in place by a system and this system by efficient and effective performance mitigates violence in society, then that system could be a Dharma. Individuals who follow the system by not violating the rules are upholding the Dharma. In turn, the Dharma or system protects those that follow the rules, or laws. Individuals are protected as those that might consider violence against others are discouraged by the knowledge that they have to bear the brunt of the system if they violate the law (rules). This makes the violators ones that do not protect Dharma. Thus it is a symbiotic relationship; follow the rules to protect the Dharma, and the system, Dharma, protects you because when everyone follows the same, there can be no violation, and hence no violence.

Here, both definitions of Dharma hold good. If one considers Dharma to be “the right thing to do”, following the system/Dharma is the right thing for people to do. Similarly, the right thing for the Dharma/system to do is protect those that practice it. If one considers Dharma as “that which sustains”, the system/Dharma can only be sustained if people practice it. By practicing it, practitioners are letting the Dharma/system sustain them as it protects them from violence and hence get on with lives with less fear.

With that observation, I conclude this series of 3 articles starting with the one about Deepavali. The festival of Deepavali and the Dashāvatāra are indeed a treasure trove of concepts that lead to a plethora of learning from the martial arts.

Notes:

* Deepavali – Light on the Martial Arts

* Dashāvatāra & Budo, Part 1 – Issho Khemi

** Link to the video where the statement is made by Gurukkal, Dr. S Mahesh – watch between the 22nd and 25th minute mark

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

& I am taking this definition of “Dharma” from the book “Mahabharata Unravelled” by Ami Ganatra. The link to the book is seen below

++ Link to “Crying Freeman Volume 3”

https://www.amazon.in/Crying-Freeman-3-Kazuo-Koike/dp/1593074891/ref=sr_1_1?crid=311ADMT6QJ85G&keywords=crying+freeman+vol+3&qid=1701959502&sprefix=crying+freeman+vol+3%2Caps%2C202&sr=8-1