India CurrentAffairs

Asura Planet

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

In Hindu culture, the Asuras are very often seen in a negative light. Asuras, sometimes conflated with Rakshasas are, from a modern perspective, the villains in most of the stories we hear. But as we know these days, they are not villains. Some of them might end up becoming villains. More often than not, they are in opposition to the Devas.

The Asuras usually include the Daityas and Dānavas. Daityas, Dānavas and Devas are cousins. They end up battling for control of various realms often. While the stories we hear and read eventually end with the destruction of one or a few specific Asuras, it does not mean that they always end up on the losing side. They end up being the victors quite often.

It must also be remembered that while the Asuras are seen conquering the realm of the Devas (Swarga and its capital Amarāvati), and the realms of humans or Mānavās, the Asura realm is shown as being attacked or conquered by the Devas (never the Mānavās) only a few times. The Asuras regroup time after time under different leaders and attempt a new conquest. They succeed in their conquests quite often and subdue the realms of Devas and Mānavās. This conquest leads to an avatāra of Vishnu or Devi or Shiva to be responsible for saving the Devas and Mānavās.

The Asura Shumbha conquers Swarga. Image credit – “Tales of Durga” (Kindle edition), published by Amar Chitra Katha.

This sequence of events leads to interesting observations. Firstly, if the Asuras were rarely invaded and only defended against, it seems that they were too powerful to face offensive action. Only one of the Trimurthy or Devi could attack them and succeed. The two instances that I am aware of when the Devas attacked and defeated the Asuras was when Vrtra was slain and then when Viprachitti was defeated.

Secondly, it seems that the Asuras were the definition of resilience, innovation and perseverance. Every time they were defeated, they held out to rise in strength again. This is resilience. The next Asura leader performed great meditative penance (tapasya) to achieve a great boon from Lord Brahma. This boon nullified the advantage provided by the Amrita in the possession of the Devas. This is innovation. This process took years on end. But after this gap, the Asuras invaded again with the new leader and his or her powers and generally succeeded in defeating the Devas. They ruled Swarga for a long time after the victory before a divinity defeated them. This is perseverance.

Mahishi taunts the Devas after acquiring her Boon. Image credit – “Ayyappan”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

I mentioned the Amrita in the possession of the Devas in the previous paragraph. Amrita gave the Devas great health and immortality. This was an unbeatable technological advantage. To overcome this advantage, the boons the Asuras acquired were vital. This mitigated the advantage provided to the Devas by the Amrita, at least to a certain extent.

An aside – I have heard that this is a likely origin of the word “Asura”. During the Vedic Age when Yajnas were widely prevalent, two sacred drinks are mentioned as being offered to the Gods, Soma and Sura. These were not offered to some Gods. These Gods came to be “Asura” as “Sura” was not offered to them, the “A” indicating the lack of the offering. I am not sure if this is accepted by everyone or if it is just another theory.

The martial art I practice is the Bujinkan system of martial arts. The Bujinkan is sometimes referred to as “Ninjutsu”. But Ninjutsu, or Ninpo, is one of the facets of the martial arts practiced as part of the Bujinkan system. The “Nin” in both Ninjutsu and Ninpo, refers to “Perseverance”. So, Ninjutsu is “The Art of Perseverance” and Ninpo is “The Way of Perseverance”. And if the Asuras are the exemplars of perseverance, they are the true practitioners of Ninjutsu!

Historically speaking, the Devas in their primary roles are representative of the natural elements. Indra, the king of the Devas, is the God of Thunder and Lightning and Storms. This means that he is a personification of these natural forces. Similarly, Agni represents Fire, Vayu represents the Wind and Varuna represents water and water-bodies. Surya represents the Sun, Chandra or Soma the moon and one of the Vasus represents the Sky.  The Ashvins represent healing properties, speed (horses) and safety during voyages. It seems to me like they represent the natural intelligence of humans to protect themselves.

Humans have striven from time immemorial to survive the elements. Over millennia they achieved mastery over the elements and learnt to thrive despite the elements. Now we have reached a stage where human actions are causing chaos in the elements in the form of climate change and devastating the natural world.

This flow of events over the last several thousand years suggests to me, that we are the Asuras. The Devas are nothing but the natural world as mentioned earlier. Humans initially cowered before the elements, but showed resilience to survive all ecosystems. This resilience and human expansion was facilitated by the continuous innovation demonstrated by humankind. The innovation took centuries in many instances, like the domestication of livestock, crops and most importantly, fire. The continuous flow of innovation is only possible through rugged survival. This is the perseverance of the human species as a whole.

So, humans have over several centuries demonstrated resilience, innovation and perseverance. With these traits, humankind has conquered the natural world, in other words, the Devas. This checks two boxes for humans to be the real Asuras. The third box relates to the Asura trait that led to their defeat time after time.

The Asuras after their successful conquests, gradually descend to being despots and cruel dictators. They end up throwing the natural order into chaos. It is at this stage that the avatāra appears to defeat the mighty Asura leader and drive the Asuras out of the realms of Devas and Mānavās. The Asuras go from being conquerors to destroyers, which leads to their downfall.

Mashisa goes full despot. Image credit – “Tales of Durga” (Kindle edition), published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Humans, as mentioned earlier are supposedly throwing all ecosystems of the Earth out of whack. All species are suffering and even among humans, there are several that are living lives whose quality is far lower than those of the rest. All of this seems like humankind is the Asura nation that has gone full despot. This is the third box to check for humans to transcend into being Asuras. This is also the event that should trigger the arrival of an avatāra.

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

But is the natural world itself going to be the avatāra aided by conflict within the human nations? I have no idea. But the fact that humans are the real Asuras seems clear. Perhaps humans are like Asuras on steroids. Humans strive to succeed, acquire knowledge and build technology. This is not unlike severe tapasya over a long time. This technology, which is the equivalent of the boons from the stories lets humans harness technology and change geographies, in the form of construction, mining and pollution. This is the equivalent of a conquest and its subsequent subjugation.

Let me elucidate with an example. Hiranyakashipu, when he became all powerful, imposed monotheism (or at least forced Viashnavās to give up their religion). He forbade the worship of Vishnu and forced people to worship him instead. This is the same as the powerful nations expecting everyone to conform to their own education, values and lifestyle. The most powerful nations can achieve this through the boons of wealth and technology. This leads me to this, we are on the cusp of becoming the Asura Planet.

Let me backtrack to the struggle between the Devas and the Asuras for a bit. I had mentioned that the Asuras were rarely invaded by the Devas and this was due to how powerful the Asuras were. Of course, it could be that the Devas did not attack the Asuras or eliminate them out of the goodness of their hearts. The Devas could have been satisfied with the life they had achieved through the use of Amrita. But then, they were all cousins and if the Devas had turned conquerors, especially after being in possession of Amrita the Asuras and Devas would simply be swapping roles, at least in the stories. That said, Devas were not entirely content with their lot and fought among themselves too.

Hiranyakashipu becomes a dictator. Credit for both images – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Some examples of the Devas being in conflict among themselves are the following.

  • Indra and Agni seem to have been in conflict multiple times. Agni took the help of Krishna and Arjuna to stop Indra from interfering when he consumed the Khāndava forest. Indra wanted to stop Agni as his Naga friend Takshaka lived in that forest.
  • The Asura Rambha was saved by Agni when Indra wanted to kill him as he was meditating. Indra had already killed Rambha’s brother Karambha through deceit. Thanks to Agni’s actions, Rambha eventually reincarnated as Raktabeeja to protect his son Mahishāsura.
  • The Asura Jalandhara was raised in the ocean, the abode of Varuna. Jalandhara attacked the Devas to retrieve the treasures of his adoptive father Varuna. In this manner, Varuna and Indra seemed adversarial even though they were not out to fight each other. Varuna had raised the Asura who would attack the Devas.
  • The Devas and Asuras fought a war call the Tārakāmaya War in the Puranas. This war occurred because the wife of Brihaspati, Tara was either abducted by Chandra (Soma) or she eloped with him. Brihaspati was the preceptor of the Devas. This incident led to a war where the Devas sided with their Guru while the Asuras sided with Chandra.

Based on these instances, it is quite likely that the Devas were not entirely peaceful or docile. It is therefore not necessary that they did not invade the Asuras out of the goodness of their hearts.

Since we spoke of Brihaspati, I must mention Shukrācharya. Shukra or Shukrācharya was the Guru or preceptor of the Asuras. He is the personification of perseverance and innovation, which could make him the ultimate expression of Ninjutsu!

Shukra found a way to defeat death itself! He performed tapasya with Lord Shiva as the focus. Once Lord Shiva was pleased, Shukrācharya learned the “Sanjeevini Vidya (Kriya)” from the Lord. This led to his being able to resurrect Asuras who were dead! This was essentially the same as being immortal. It seems to me that the Devas had no choice but to acquire Amrita to counter the Sanjeevini Vidya!1

In the Bujinkan, we learn of the 5 Gojo (roughly translatable as “pearls of wisdom”). These are five important concepts that, taken together, can be a guide to life. The 5 Gojo are,

  • Fumetsu no fusei – translatable as “give and give” or “endless giving”
  • Mamichi no jikai – translatable as “following/staying on the right path”
  • Shizen no niniku – translatable as “the perseverance of nature”
  • Shizen no choetsu – translatable as “the transcendence of nature”
  • Komyo no satori – translatable as “the light of wisdom”

I will not go into the detail about the Gojo here. I have written a separate article describing these as I understand them, the link to which is seen in the notes below*. I would however, draw an analogy between the Asura and modern human way with the Gojo.

The tapasya (meditation / penance / continuous effort) performed by the Asura and the human quest for knowledge is an outstanding example for “fumetsu no fusei”. One has to give oneself to the endeavour incessantly. This focus is the “right path”, which is tread over long periods of time. One needs perseverance to stay this path and continue the tapasya. When the tapasya reaches fructification, one transforms or transcends the current state. This could be as simple as being able to apply the newly acquired knowledge or technology as a consequence of the tapasya. These form the first four of the five Gojo.

Then comes the fifth, the one hardest to practice. At a high level, it could mean that the knowledge acquired or technology developed as a result of the tapasya is applied in the “correct” manner. Here, the term “correct” is incredibly hard to define in reality. Who can define, what is the correct way to do anything? I opine that it is nearly impossible, except at a personal level. This is why it takes “wisdom” to do the right thing with the new knowledge or technology. And if the application seems “correct” in a “given context”, one could have seen “the light of wisdom”.**

If one follows the right path with perseverance and is transformed after a long time on the path, wisdom could be the outcome of the experiences on the path. This could be another way to interpret “Komyo no satori” or “the light of wisdom”. But if the objective on the path was never “wise” or “correct”, both of which are subjective, could the outcome be any “good” of display “wisdom” in a positive manner? I have no idea. Similarly, we tend to assume “wisdom” to result in a positive outcome. But wisdom could also reveal ways and means to achieve negative outcomes.

Hiranyakashipu transforms with great abilities through perseverance and steadfast focus after overcoming great travails, but fails to gain wisdom. Image credit – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

These conundrums are perhaps what led to the defeat of many famous Asuras. They are also what cause the problems we modern humans face. The Asuras practiced the first 4 of the Gojo and became great. They defeated the Devas and made the Asura realm great. This also made them responsible for the “natural order”, which they inherited when they defeated the Devas.

Perhaps some of them failed at this responsibility. Imposing monotheism, like Hiranyakshipu did, or turn a predator of women and molester of Rishis, like Ravana did are examples of failing to protect the natural order. This is also an example of failing the 5th Gojo after passing the first 4. These Asuras actually attempted to snuff out wisdom, let alone be guided by its light!

Ravana, despite great abilities, boons and knowledge, was a great tormentor of people and molester of women. Image credit – “The Ramayana”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Something similar is seen in the challenges we face in our lifetimes. Between 1900 and 2000, humans went from dreaming of flight to landing on the moon to exploring the solar system! Between 1950, when horse and bullock drawn carts were still prevalent in most parts of India, we have gone to having trouble with parking spaces for cars in most urban areas! This is a fantastic representation of a collective achievement of the first 4 Gojo.

That said, pollution and supply chain issues have come to haunt us all. Sustainable development is at loggerheads with the desire for great levels of comfort and convenience. Armed conflict is back in a big way, not that it ever went away completely. Inequality in wealth levels across the world are not diminishing as fast as citizens of the world would prefer.

But all points of view that cause these problems are correct and valid, at least to those who hold them. And this is another demonstration of how “wisdom” is hard to come by. And this is not unlike the problem with the Asuras, who failed to sustain the “natural order” (Rta). Natural Order is not too different from the climate, the change in which is yet another example of a failure of the practice “Komyo no satori”.

This again leads me to my opinion, we humans, or Mānavās, are the Asuras. This is not self-deprecation. It is just an identification of how we want to be the Devas or higher yet, the great Trinity that can fix everything. That is perhaps why we have so many stories of warning to the self, with Asuras as the antagonists!

Notes:

1 The Devas used Kacha, the son of Brihaspati, to obtain the Sanjeevini Kriya. The story of this event is incredible by itself. It has romance in a “honey pot” espionage operation. That also means, once technological parity had been achieved, the boons were the next technological disruptor.

* The Gojo – A personal understanding – https://mundanebudo.com/2023/03/16/the-gojo-a-personal-understanding/

Teachers are Weapons

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

In 1991, there was TV series telecast on Doordarshan called “Chanakya”. Doordarshan is the state broadcaster of India and back in 1991, there was no other TV channel in most of India. The 4 metro cities had one other channel. The serial “Chanakya” was incredibly popular when it was first broadcast. It is still very popular and has great recall. The series was based on the life of Vishnugupta Chanakya, also called Kautilya, who was among those responsible for the creation of the Mauryan Empire in India in the 4th century BCE, and also the author of the “Arthashāstra”.

The series was 47 episodes long. By episode 10, the ruler of Gandhāra, Āmbhi, has submitted to Alexander of Macedon and this is not acceptable to a lot of the ruling class and the general populace. Chanakya is a teacher at the University of Takshashila (capital of Gandhāra) at this time and is worried at the turn of events. The leader of the university mentions to him at this time that if the administration is incapable of leading the society, that job falls to the teachers. This conversation is fiction of course. But Chanakya was a teacher and he did go on to cause major political upheavals in Indian history.

Watch between the 16 and 17 minute marks to see the conversation I referenced earlier.

Chanakya causes major changes by creating a capable set of people who can administer. These are led by a student of his called Chandragupta. Chandragupta Maurya is mentored to be a good ruler. An army to support Chandragupta is created, as is a political alliance, who are willing to take on the ruler of Magadha. In summary, Chanakya, is a teacher and an extraordinary intellectual who could take on the mightiest empire of its time and reset the administrative system, which echoes in Indian society and politics to this day.

Fast forward some 2300 years and we see that universities are still at the centre of attention. In India, the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) is in the news often for espousing views that seem to be that of the Left. It is accused of being anti-India in some the thoughts it seems to express. These ideas seem to stem from both students and the teaching staff, particularly in the Social Sciences and Humanities areas like history, economics and political science.

In the USA, famous universities like Harvard and Columbia were in the limelight recently for causing disruptions in support of Gaza, against the actions of Israel. These universities, including both students and teaching staff were accused of being anti-Semitic. Professors from these universities and the JNU are popular in both social media and legacy media which are considered to be “Left leaning”. In the case of the JNU at least a few alumni of the JNU have tended to influence administrative policy both from within and without the Government.

So, a situation where professors are involved in politics and are shaping (or at least attempting to) national policies continues from the times of Chanakya through to contemporary times. These educators carry out their activities by shaping the minds of students over many years and decades. They can create a large section of the population that votes for governments that enact the policies vouched for by the university teachers. Barring this, they can influence a section of the population through intellectual output like papers, books, podcasts etc. to expect a government to enact policies the professors taught them to think are right.

In India, some intellectuals including professors have been branded “Urban Naxals” due to their perceived support for the Naxal movement. The Naxal movement is a violent Leftist movement that wanted to replace India’s government with a Socialist administration. The Naxal movement is currently almost over in India, having been defeated by India’s security apparatus. The “Urban” part of the pejorative comes because these intellectuals live in urban areas and sympathize with or support Naxals, who mainly operated out of rural areas.

I just mentioned that professors influence the populace through content that includes books. The main audience for teachers from primary education to universities are their students and the main tools used to influence students are textbooks. “Influencing” students can be called “Conditioning” (perhaps with a negative connotation). Students can be conditioned to think in a certain manner and accept certain events as true or concepts as correct if their textbooks say so. This is especially easy if knowledge is imbibed through rote learning.

This means that a textbook is weapon in the arsenal of teachers that can be applied against impressionable minds. It is not unlike drugs and gases than can make individuals susceptible to suggestions. But the textbooks act gradually over longer periods of time. And this has resulted in the strong opinions and heated discussions taking place in India currently, about the content in text books.

This is especially true of history textbooks. These days, people are questioning which administration is introducing what change in a history textbook for any given class. Questions are also raised about the motivations behind the changes introduced and the individuals nominated to the committees that propose or make the changes to the textbooks.

In this video, Michel Danino, the current head of the committee that is writing History textbooks for the NCERT, speaks about the process and controversy surrounding the same.

The entire conversation around history textbooks is because both the Right and the Left in our country are concerned about whose way of looking at history will be more influential with kids. In other words, the crux of the matter is, whose weapon (textbook) will be used in the conditioning of young minds?

In the Bujinkan system of martial arts, we lean of a concept, which in Japanese, is called “Jokin Hansha”. “Jokin Hansha” refers to “conditioned responses”, or the way we humans behave and react to situations as a result of the conditioning we experience in our lives. Consider a situation where someone looks at another and extends their right hand with the fingers outstretched, the other person will extend his or her own hand to shake the hand that was offered. This is not something that we think of too much. It is something that we are all conditioned to do. It has become a part of our natural behaviour. This is an example of “Jokin Hansha”.

Belief in a “certain narrative” or a specific “memory of history” is much the same. It is a “Jokin Hansha”. Every conditioned behaviour can be used to manipulate individuals and groups of individuals. Consider this, one person throws a punch at another, the person on the receiving end, will invariably move or throw up her or his own hands in defence. If the punch was a feint, the attacker can use the defensive movement of the defender to change the attack to a hand grab or move into the space vacated by the other individual in defending against the fake punch.

In this situation, the default defensive behaviour of one person was used by another person to her or his own advantage. A feint was used to capture space or an arm. This is an application of Jokin Hansha. This same situation can be replicated with textbooks.

Seen above are a series of rough sketches that depict how one individual’s movement is used to the benefit of the other. Sketches by Keane Amaral.

If a student has been conditioned to believe that members of one community are disadvantaged due to a lack of financial resources and education by the vagaries of history, any action by a member of that community which could be derogatory towards another community, might be forgiven as “they do not know better”, irrespective of what the motivations of the individual might have been.

If however, a student has been conditioned to believe that members of said community have historically been conquerors and plunderers, and a member of that community behaves in a manner derogatory to another, the situation could be different. Irrespective of the economic and financial condition of the community, the feeling will be, “this is how they have always been, and deserve to be retaliated against”. This difference in response is what scares people. It is the “Jokin Hansha” of a society that is at stake! Textbooks are the weapon in making or breaking the responses of a society to future scenarios!

That said, weapons are useless without the will of the one wielding the weapon. Teachers can mitigate the success or failure of any attempt at conditioning. Which way the teachers who impart the knowledge from the textbooks direct the mind-set of kids depends on the personal brand of politics they believe in. From this point of view, the teacher is the weapon, a living one, who in turn deploys a lifeless weapon in the form of a textbook.

The notion of conditioning can be considered at a more personal level. In Eastern cultures, the teacher is greatly respected and in some cases, considered a second parent. Many kids in India start school with a prayer that explicitly equates a teacher with the Gods*. All of this is conditioning.

This results in students putting a teacher on a pedestal. This is even more so in the physical arts, like sports, dance, martial arts, music, spirituality and the like. The sense of respect is so great that students never consider that a teacher might be wrong, or might not know everything! This means that there is no questioning of what a teacher mentions or asks of the students.

But in reality, teachers are just humans who are experts (hopefully) in the subject whose knowledge or experience they are sharing. Some teachers will have human frailties and weaknesses. Put together the conditioning which results in devotion towards the teachers and teachers who are not perfect, and the creation of a cult is possible.

Teachers can exploit students. Teachers can prevent students from moving on to study with other teachers or study subjects and art forms that they are not teaching. It is also likely that teachers might not identify cases where they are of no use to a student. A student might not really enjoy what the teacher is sharing or not have an aptitude for the same.

In cases of such a mismatch, a teacher should be able to let go of a student, and encourage a student to explore other options. Not doing any of these is a failure. Numbers of students could lead to a sense of importance for a teacher which could lead to exploitation and act as an incentive to hold on to them. In the same vein, more students could mean more wealth for teachers and that is an incentive to control students as well. And then there are the horrible cases of sexual exploitation and other forms of control that a cult could possibly lead to.

All of this means that a student must find the right teacher. This is especially true in a world where education is an expensive proposition and also a business, with a lot of challenges for those involved in it. The teacher-student match needs to work for both, at least for a short duration. Let me share a few statements I have heard while training at my dojo that emphasize the need for a productive teacher-student relationship.

  • I have heard from my teacher and mentors that Hatsumi Sensei, the Soke (Grandmaster) of the Bujinkan, said that one should find the RIGHT teacher. He is supposed to have mentioned this in the context of there being a lot of teachers and not all of them are a right fit for all students.
  • I have heard it said that, just as teacher is present when the student is ready to learn, a student is present when the teacher is ready to teach.
  • It is supposedly said that, a teacher appears when a student is ready, and when a student is really ready, the teacher disappears.

All of the above statements mean that a teacher has a huge responsibility. He or she should be able to impart knowledge and share experience, but not PRESUME responsibility for the journey that is a student’s life.

Now that I have outlined how teachers can be instrumental in making, rewiring and possibly wrecking individual lives and also affect the fate of societies and nations, I will share a story where teachers played a pivotal role in directing the fate of entire societies. The story of the Narasimha avatāra, in its nuances, explains beautifully, how teachers work in the background to affect events that change the world forever.

While Lord Narasimha and Hiranyakashipu are the main characters in the story of the Narasimha avatāra, I opine that Maharishi Nārada and Shukrachārya (the Guru of the Asuras) are the two individuals who shape the story to be what it ended up being. Both of them were teachers of Prahlad at different times and hence shaped events as they unfolded.

When Hiranyakashipu was meditating upon Lord Brahma to attain a boon that would make him an equal of Lord Vishnu, or the Devas at least, his kingdom was attacked. The Devas saw an opportunity to destroy Hiranyakashipu’s kingdom while he was away. Without Hiranyakashipu to lead them, the Asura kingdom was defeated. Indra, king of the Devas, took Hiranyakashipu’s wife Khayadu hostage. Khayadu, the queen, was pregnant with Prahlad at that time. Indra even entertained thoughts of killing Hiranyakashipu’s son as soon as he was born.

Indra decides to abduct Prahlad’s mother Khayadu, but is dissuaded by Maharishi Nārada. Image credit – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

But Maharishi Nārada intervened and prevented Khayadu from being taken hostage. He also saved Prahlad’s life by this action. Khayadu lived at the āshrama of Sage Nārada until Hiranyakashipu returned after successfully attaining the boons. Prahlad was born after his father had returned from his venture. But according to the story, while at the ashram, Sage Nārada explained the virtues and greatness of Lord Vishnu to Khayadu. Prahlad is supposed to have imbibed this knowledge while still in his mother’s womb. In this manner Maharishi Nārada was Prahlad’s first teacher.

Khayadu at the āshrama of Maharishi Nārada. Image credit – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

This knowledge gained from the Sage stayed with Prahlad after he was born, during his childhood years and even as an adult. Prahlad was a devotee of Lord Vishnu even after he became the king of the Asuras. Hiranyakashipu was outraged that his son was a devotee of someone he considered his greatest enemy, and whose worship he wanted to stamp out.

Prahlad being sent to Shukrachārya as a student. Image credit – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Prahlad was put under the tutelage of Shukrachārya as he was the Guru of the Asuras. But Shukrachārya was unable to diminish in any manner Prahlad’s devotion towards Lord Vishnu. In fact he was concerned as Prahlad was sharing with his other pupils the knowledge received from Nārada. Since Shukrachārya failed, Hiranyakashipu attempted to kill Prahlad through various means, all of which failed. These attempts led to the arrival of Lord Narasimha to protect his devotee, Prahlad, and to the death of Hiranyakashipu.

Shukrachārya fails to diminish Prahlad’s Bhakti for Lord Vishnu. Image credit – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Since it was Prahlad’s devotion to Vishnu that led to the arrival of Narasimha, I suggest that Nārada was the cause for the avatāra. Nārada was the one who inculcated devotion** towards Vishnu in Prahlad and hence set up the events that culminated in Narasimha killing Hiranyakashipu. At the same time, is it possible that if Prahlad had been weaned away from Bhakti towards Vishnu by Shukrachārya, the Narasimha avatāra would have been different, or been postponed, or not occurred at all? It seems possible, but the story would certainly have been different.

Prahlad sharing his thoughts about Vishnu with other Asura students. Image credit – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Thus, it was Narada’s actions and Shukrachārya’s failure that led to the Narasimha avatāra occurring as it did. It was a contest between two teachers. On this occasion, Narada’s action were the ones that led to the story we know. Shukrachārya had many other successes, they are just not relevant to this article. In this manner, the actions of two teachers determined the events that led to one of the most important stories in Hindu culture.

Prahlad confirms that Nārada is his  teacher. Image credit – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Before I conclude, I must add another point. Maharishi Nārada ensured that Indra released Khayadu. In doing so, he ensured that Indra would not be committing the same crime that Kamsa, Lord Krishna’s uncle would commit much later. Kamsa killed all of Vasudeva’s children with his sister Devaki as soon as they were born. Also, by ensuring that Prahlad was not killed before he was born, he ensured that Indra did not commit the same crime that Ashwatthāma would commit in the future, at the end of the Kurukshetra war in the Mahabharata. Both Kamsa and Ashwatthāma suffered severe consequences for their actions. Indra would be eligible for the same fate had he carried through with his impulsive plans.

If Indra had been deserving of divine retribution, would the Devas be eligible for Vishnu’s protection, in the form of Narasimha? Perhaps not. Thus, by ensuring Indra did not commit actions worthy of punishment, and Prahlad was a devotee of Lord Vishnu, Maharishi Nārada literally laid the groundwork for the coming of Narasimha.

Maharishi Nārada prevents Indra from committing a grave crime. Image credit – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Based on the above points, teachers shaped the future of empires and ensured the Gods could protect the world in the past. In current day, teachers can shape the future of individuals AND societies for better or worse as we saw in the case of university professors, creators of textbooks and martial arts instructors. Conditioning, which is one of the outcomes that actions of teachers eventually lead to, is thus a weapon. And that makes me suggest, TEACHERS ARE WEAPONS.

As some of you might have guessed, the idea for this post comes from tomorrow, September 5th, being celebrated as “Teacher’s Day” in India. September 5th is the birthday of Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, former President of India. He was a preeminent intellectual, author and educator, whose life is celebrated by recognizing the contribution of teachers to the country.

Notes:

* The shloka (loosely translated as prayer) where teachers are equated with Gods, is seen below.

Gurur Brahma Gurur Vishnuhuh

Gurur Devo Meshwarahah

Guruhuh Sākshāt Parabrahma

Tasmai Shree Guruve Namahah

It translates to,

Guru is Brahma, Guru is Vishnu

Guru is Maheshwara (Shiva)

Guru is literally the Supreme Being

I bow/salute that Guru

** I use the words Bhakti and devotion interchangeably, though “devotion” is not a perfect translation for the word “Bhakti”.

Thoughts from Op Sindoor, Part 5 – The enormity of all that happens in the background

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

Some 25 years ago, I read the book “Every Man a Tiger” by Tom Clancy and General Chuck Horner. This was a non-fiction book published in 1999. It was about the air operation during the First Gulf War, also called the Kuwait Liberation War. General Chuck Horner was the commander of the Allied air forces during that war.

I had read very few books about military history at that time and most of those were about the Second World War. The interest in modern warfare had been kindled in many of my generation in the aftermath of the Kargil War in 1999. It was also in the latter half of the 90s that satellite television had fully taken off and there were several series related to military technology and spy craft on the Discovery Channel and the National Geographic Channel.

At that time, I had only read one book, “Despatches from Kargil” by Srinjoy Choudhary, about Indian military history and that was related to the Kargil War. This book had been published in late 2000. “Every Man a Tiger” was more of a history book than the other because it had been written some 8 years after the conclusion of the First Gulf War. If I recall right, about a quarter or a third of the book deals with the transformation of the United States Airforce (USAF) after the Vietnam War.

This part of the book details how the USAF improved its quality management, adopted new technologies and improved its focus on logistics. This part of the book is dull compared to the parts describing the action and management of the war. But in hindsight, it shows a remarkable level of foresight in the leaders of the USAF in the years between the Vietnam War and the First Gulf War. And this part of the book is what inspired me to write this article.

I had not and still have not read many books about Indian military history. This includes military history post 1947. This is partially because not many military history books were popular in the social circles I grew up in. This in turn could be because this genre was not stocked in the libraries that were frequented back then. It could just be that the genre was not very popular in general.

I always thought that not much had been written about recent Indian military history*. Perhaps this is true in comparison the number of books written about Western military history in the same period. But it turns out that quite a few books were indeed written, and I was not aware of those until they were mentioned on YouTube videos discussing Indian military history. That being said, I have also heard from retired Indian military leaders and thinkers that there are not enough books about contemporary India military history, thinking and strategy. I am sharing a link to a video that specifically discusses this issue.

This video elucidates how Indian military history is not well documented.

But, irrespective of the lack of books for Indian citizens to read about the evolution and improvement of the Indian armed forces, the forces are clearly doing a great job despite all the constraints they face. The evidence of this is in the actions taken during Op Sindoor, which occurred between 7th May and 10th May of 2025. The actions reveal that the armed forces are continuously learning and adding to their repertoire of abilities, processes and technologies.

I am guessing it is extremely difficult to make a movie about the awesomeness of military planning. It is a continuous activity and incremental in nature. It might not make for great viewing in terms of the action and drama of actual fighting involving humans. This challenge is likely to increase going further. This is because war will be taken over to a significant extent by technology, from drones to stand off weapons to beyond visual range missiles to using AI in target acquisition. Pilots will likely be on the ground or far behind drone swarms and the target will never be seen by any operator, except through sensor packages.

During the years since the pandemic, we civilians have seen news about war all the time. It started with the Armenia-Azerbaijan war which introduced us all to drones taking centre stage and legacy systems like tanks and artillery guns being vulnerable. This was followed by the India-China stand-off in the Himalayas, the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war (with Operation Spider’s Web being the latest news-maker from this war), the war in Gaza, the Israeli actions against Hezbollah, the clash between Pakistan and Iran, the fight against the Houthis in Yemen, Op Sindoor and most recently, the war between Israel and Iran (Op Rising Lion).

In India’s case the face off with China was more about maneuvering and not about technological superiority. The one deadly clash that occurred did not involve firearms! But the conflict prior to this, involving Pakistan, did.

Post the Pulwama terrorist attack where 40 CRPF personnel were murdered by a suicide bomber, India carried out an air strike using Mirage 2000 aircraft against a terrorist training centre on Jabbar Top in Balakot in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province of Pakistan. Pakistan retaliated the next day with Operation Swift Retort. In this operation, India lost a Mig-21 Bison aircraft while Pakistan lost an F-16. India also lost a helicopter to friendly fire. The pilot of the Mig-21 was taken prisoner and released a short while later. 200 or more terrorists are supposed to have been killed in the first Indian strike.

This short skirmish did not see the use of drones. At this time, India still did not possess the Rafale fighters which carry the long-range Meteor air to air missile. The S400 Triumf was not available for long range air defence either. Both of these were on order but had not been delivered yet. At the same time, Pakistan did not have the J10C Chinese fighter carrying the PL15E missiles. It did not have the Chinese air-defence and cruise missiles either. So, this skirmish was similar to what had been seen in the previous decades.

And then the Armenia-Azerbaijan war happened in 2020, over the Artsak or Nagorno-Karabakh region, which changed everything. This was followed by the Ukrainian defence against Russia with drones and Russia’s adaptation to this new kind of war. This started in early 2022 and is still going on. The defence forces of the whole world learned from these 2 conflicts and air defence became a facet of great importance. The defence was vital against low-cost drones and rockets and also against man-portable guided missiles that target attack aircraft and helicopters.

The Israeli layered defence system, comprising the Arrow AD system, the David’s Sling system and the Iron Dome emerged as an example to learn from. These proved their abilities in the Israeli war against Hamas & Hezbollah starting in late 2023. But the Israeli system was recognized to be very expensive for all countries to emulate. The cost of the interceptors far exceeded that of the drone swarms and cheap rockets and artillery shells they defended against.

Fast forward a year and a half to Op Sindoor and this changed. A new Indian example that could be emulated had been battle tested. I have heard it said that for the first time, the cost of the interceptors that took down drones launched by Pakistan was lower than the cost of the drones themselves. Indian Air Defence systems took down missiles fired by Pakistan and military aircraft as well. I have also heard it said that the layered air defence system India demonstrated between May 7th and 10th came as a surprise both within India and without.

This video is an example of everyone’s surprise at the effectiveness of Indian air defence.

India’s air defence system, based on my limited knowledge, consists of the AAD (Advanced Air Defence – it is an anti-ballistic missile Air Defence system), the S400 Truimf, the MRSAM, the Akash missiles and the Zu-73 and L-70 guns. There are also snipers, shoulder fired missiles and “non-kinetic” systems like lasers and jammers to take down drones.

In this video, between the 28 and 35 minute marks, the speakers discuss “Grene Robotics”, one of the organizations whose equipment was used in Indian air defence during Op Sindoor. Grene Robotics has developed a system called “Indrajaal” (Indra’s Net) for air defence.

The AAD used to intercept ballistic missiles was likely not used during Op Sindoor. The S400 was supposedly used to take down Pakistani aircraft, including one Swedish Saab Erieye 2000 AWACS at a distance of 313 km! This system also prevented the PAF from rising to take on the IAF on the 9th and 10th when Pakistani bases and command centres were destroyed. The MRSAM or Akash is supposed to have intercepted Pakistani Ballistic missiles. The intercepted missile is supposedly the Fatah-2 or the Shaheen. Chinese CM400AKG missiles were also supposedly used against the S-400 but were intercepted as well.

This video explain the events surrounding the CM400 missile.

Large numbers of drones, including those of Turkish and Chinese origin were deployed by Pakistan. Many of these were supposedly taken down by the Bofors L-70 and Soviet origin Zu-73 guns. Both of these are guns that first came on the scene in the fifties and sixties! India also operates other old air defence guns & systems like the Tunguska and Osa, the Pechora and Igla. All of these are very old weapons!

But the game changer as a whole was the Akashteer system. This is a network that connects the IACCS (Integrated Air Command and Control Centre) of the Air Force and the air defence systems of the Army and Navy. This networking ability apparently identifies an aerial threat and designates the correct system to neutralize it. So, expensive systems are not utilized for smaller threats. This system supposedly uses AI to report all threats also ignore ones that can cause no real harm (missiles that might fall in fields are simply ignored and not intercepted).

In this video, the speakers describe at a high level, the “Akashteer” system used by India for air defence.

The major threat that assets like fighter aircraft face as seen in modern warfare are surface to air missiles (SAM) and shoulder fired missiles manned by small groups of soldiers, as seen during the Russia-Ukraine war. The response to this has been “Stand Off” range weapons. These are weapons that have a greater range. These can be deployed from within safe airspaces and stay outside the range of the defensive munitions.

This lesson was clearly learnt by the IAF. None of the Indian aircraft supposedly left Indian air space during Operation Sindoor. Long range missiles like the air launched Brahmos, Rampage, Scalp and SAAW were deployed. So were kamikaze drones like the Skystriker and Harpy (both of Israeli origin, but manufactured in India). This learning prevented a repeat of a post Balakot-like situation. Even though a few fighter aircraft were lost (before SEAD and DEAD operations, one must add), no pilots were lost, and most importantly, all mission objectives were met.

The most incredible observation that comes up from all of the action during Op Sindoor is that the defence planners and strategists in India have done a fantastic job! They have clearly always known the capabilities of the enemy and the evolution of modern warfare. Every evolution and adaptation has been tracked and responded to! The end result is a mission that produced results, that for a civilian layman seem like clockwork! Of course, there must have been several adjustments over the course of the 4 days, but those are data for further learning by the defence forces.

The reason I mentioned the books about military history at the beginning of this article is because I hope there are some great ones about Op Sindoor in the near future. Not just a blow-by-blow account of how the events progressed, but books that detail how Indian defence preparedness evolved in the 5 or 10 years prior to the conflict. It would also be amazing to understand how the surgical strike in 2016 and Balakot related actions in 2019 affected planning and evolution of military actions.

It seems India has always learnt lessons after every conflict, be they a war with neighbours or an insurgency within the country. I am sharing a link to a video that details the same. This is a video by Shekhar Gupta, the Editor-in-chief of “The Print”. But there is also a feeling among us Indians that we do not document our military history and also that we learn lessons only after a crisis.

This video charts the evolution of India’s security architecture over the decades after independence.

Perhaps there is truth to both. But from the number of books I had not heard of and how much detail is coming out on the internet in recent times, both are not entirely true. We citizens I think, are just frustrated that we did not know more. The actions and successes of Op Sindoor certainly indicate that India has been learning continuously. The volume of data about Indian strategic evolution and military advancement in the last few years also indicates that the other lacuna (aircraft number, engine development, submarine numbers etc.) are being addressed.

I have been following content creators on YouTube who track advancements in Indian defence preparedness regularly. They track the technology, the planning, the strategy and the supply chain for these as well. Following them, I have realized that despite feeling the progress is agonizingly slow, forward movement is happening every day! For they simply would not have content to produce otherwise. Three channels I follow on YouTube, all of which produce content in Hindi, are,

There are others like Bharat Shakti and Strat News Global, which focus more on strategic and tactical issues, and less on technical aspects. There are many other content creators who focus on developments in the Indian defence space. Add to this the several retired defence personnel, who have started writing books and creating their own content on YouTube and we are beginning to move towards a resource rich phase for civilians interested in India’s military evolution.

To be more specific about the points in the previous paragraph, the 3 defence YouTube channels I mentioned, were instrumental in me knowing a lot of the systems used by India during Operation Sindoor. These channels might not know and sometimes do not reveal if they know, what is not explicit in the public domain. So, the actual status of the induction or deployment of a weapon system or network would not always be available on these channels, nor would exact technical details and numbers deployed. But the general capability and the progress of development of various systems will be known if one follows these and other such channels regularly.

For example, these channels have always spoken about the progress of the AAD ballistic missile defence. They have also spoken of the MRSAM and the multiple variants of the Akash missile system. I only knew that the MRSAM (Medium Range Surface to Air Missile) was based on the Israeli Barak-2 missile, and was jointly developed by DRDO with Israeli industry because of these channels.

I also knew that that the Indian Nagastra was used in Op. Sindoor and that the Israeli Harpy/Harop and Skystriker drones were produced locally due to these channels. Further, I know the difference between the “Sudarshan Chakra” and “Sudarshan CIWS”! 😊The former is the name for the S-400 Triumf in India and the latter is the “Close in Weapon System” (air defence gun system) being developed by L&T. I also knew the difference between the Akash missile and the Akashteer networking solution. 😊

Further, as we realize more about the development and planning of weapons based on evolving threat perceptions, what is clear is that these days war is almost as much a matching between adversaries, of R&D, Supply Chains, engineering abilities, defence budgets, communication and the actual people on the frontlines, who operate various weapon systems. It almost seems like a never-ending exercise in management, finance and technology even though they are not visible. Only the final operators of the tools of war are visible and the outcome of the deployment of weapons are known.

Of course, none of this is new. All of this has been going on for centuries, all over the world. One can only imagine the efforts needed in managing the men and animals in an Akshauhini mentioned in the Mahabharata. How did one feed and clear the dung of over 21000 elephants! How did one breed, train and manage hundreds of thousands of horses used in the Kurukshetra war!

In the historical era, Alexander’s campaigns are considered a success of his supply chain. In Roman history, we hear of the “Marian reforms”. These refer to the reforms carried out by Gaius Marius around 100 BCE, in the army of the Roman Republic. They are supposed to include changes to the composition of the army and its training. There were also supposedly changes to equipment design and how these were procured. All of this is supposed to have resulted in a more effective Roman army**. This process of evolution is heard of from every culture in all parts of the world.

The outcomes of Op Sindoor have brought to the fore the efforts that go into the procurement, maintenance and equipping of fighter aircraft and drones, beyond just the actual combat in the air. These days, aircraft supposedly never see their opponents, they are only aware of their presence and actions due to electronic sensor packages. These sensor systems can deploy defensive weapons when needed!

This means there needs to be an R&D and manufacturing ecosystem in a country if it has to even survive going up in the air. If the ecosystem is absent or nascent, money has to be found to procure the abilities from other nations, which means a focus on geopolitics! All this means the focus is on integration and that mystical word, “synergy”.

The achievement of objectives is more about the integration of all systems to work together than just having numbers or courage. Numbers and courage matter a lot, but do not guarantee success. I had read a sentence in a “Modesty Blaise” story, “The Warlords of Phoenix”. It goes something like, “guns make a weak man strong, but make a strong a man a giant”. In a contemporary context, this could be “numbers and courage make a weak nation strong, but integration makes the strong nation untouchable”.

Let me use an analogy from the martial arts to elucidate further. Consider training with a spear. The spear is a stick with a pointed metal tip at one end. The stick is called the shaft or haft of the spear. Remove the shaft and the spear is a dagger at worst or a short sword at best. The advantage of range that made the spear vital in the past is nullified. The shaft is also how a wielder interacts with the weapon.

So, the shaft is what makes a spear, not the spear head! But the tip or spear head is what everyone looks at, respects, appreciates and most importantly, fears. Remove the shaft and the fear diminishes greatly.

This is exactly like modern warfare. The drones, fighter aircraft and the missiles are the tip of the spear. But the planning, management, technology, study, and finances are the shaft of the spear. Without these, the tip diminishes greatly in its ability.

Taking this analogy further, the air defence system is like the shield or armour to the missiles and aircraft that are the spear. Historically, the shield and armour have been as important as the spear or the sword. These were used by all cultures and were always a part of a soldier’s kit for most of history. A soldier with a spear and a shield is more devastating as against one with just a spear. And a soldier with just a shield and no spear is even less so.

The Shield and Armour are vitally important to a soldier. Image credit – “Mahabharata 33 – Drona’s Vow”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

So, the defence system and the offensive weapon package together make for a combination that affords a greater probability of mission success. This is the integration that we discussed earlier. A lack of integration, while still capable, is not as effective as the other.

So, one of the things that Op Sindoor has done spectacularly, is to bring the focus onto the parts of conflict management that are not glamourous and are less well known. The management, planning and continuous learning that enable the successful execution of a military operation have been highlighted like never before. And we as a nation can breathe easy as the planners seem to have been doing a great job behind the scenes.

As a last analogy, martial arts training is all about drudgery. One trains for long hours for years on end, despite knowing that the need to apply the learning might never occur. This is also the most preferred situation; one never wants to fight, for the variables in any conflict are numerous. The learning from training in the martial arts are likely applied in walks of like beyond physical combat.

Similarly, the machinery that defends our nation has clearly been going full steam! One can only imagine and marvel at the innumerable hours spent over years, putting together and training with the various aspects that resulted in the success of Op Sindoor! We owe a debt of gratitude to all the individuals who played their parts in this mammoth exercise.

Lastly, just as the martial arts are likely to lead to benefits beyond physical combat, our nation’s defence preparedness will lead to greater economic development due to increased spending on R&D and manufacturing and the many export opportunities that are likely to materialize.

Notes:

* Some other books I have read and heard of about Indian military history are mentioned below. These are beyond the ones mentioned in the article proper.

** I have heard a statement about Roman military training that goes something like, “the training is like bloodless fighting, while fighting is like bloody training”. I had heard this statement in an old series called “War & Civilization” on Discovery Channel in the late 90s. The series was based on the work of John Keegan.

Similarly, it seems that India’s success in Op Sindoor was as much about the study, planning, research, management and training when there was no fighting, as about the actual fighting during the operation.

Thoughts from Op Sindoor, Part 4 – Celebrate War!?

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

Wendy Doniger has said that the “Arthashāstra”, written by Kautilya (Chanakya) is a “wicked” book. She means this with a negative connotation, as the book recommends violence. She refers to the Arthashāstra’s recommendation to wage war with neighbours and maintain friendly relations with states that are not immediate neighbours.

I agree with Wendy Doniger. The Arthashāstra is a “wicked” book. But I mean it with a positive connation. The book is “Wicked Good”! And for the same reason that Doniger gives. It does not shy away from military conflict. It advocates readiness to participate in violent conflict, if the situation so demands.

Watch between the 48 and 52 minute marks. Between the 40 and 48 minute marks Ms. Doniger expresses her opinion on how Hinduism is a violent religion.

India is a secular nation. But it has a strong Hindu civilizational character that pervades a very large part of its population. Hindu culture is NOT inherently NON-VIOLENT. The worldwide popularity of Mahatma Gandhi* and his pervasive impact on our national consciousness might make some think that Hindu culture is “non-violent”. But it definitely is not, and it most certainly is not a believer in pacifism!

Hindu culture emphasizes “ahimsa”, but that is not the same as non-violence. I have written previously about “ahimsa” from a martial perspective. I will not repeat that here but will leave links to the earlier articles*. Simply put, ahimsa is about not having malice towards anyone or any nation. But that only means that one should not go looking for a fight. If someone brings a fight to you, the threat must be nullified, there can be no doubts there.

Jainism is closer to non-violence, since it tries to avoid harming any creature. But there were kings who practiced Jainism who did participate in wars. So, even Jainism is not entirely free from practitioners who had to commit violence. The other socio-religious systems in India, including Buddhism, Christianity, Islam and tribal belief systems (these are Hindu adjacent), did not actively impose pacifism on their adherents. So, there is no historical precedent for active avoidance of military conflict in the Indian cultural sphere.

Historically speaking, from the time of Bimbisara, around the lifetime of the Buddha, in the 6th century BCE till Operation Sindoor, two months ago, there has never been a time when there was no military conflict in some part of India.

Now consider the stories from Hindu tradition. Avatāras, or incarnations of divinities are integral to several of these stories. The avatāra cycle is all about war, or violent conflict to say the least. And I am not referring to just the avatāras of Lord Vishnu. Many forms taken by the Devi Shakti also involve war. A few examples of this are seen below.

  • Lord Varāha defeated Hiranyāksha
  • Lord Narasimha defeated Hiranyakashipu
  • Lord Vāmana defeated Bali Chakravarthy to stop the war between the Devas and Asuras
  • Lord Prashurama defeated Kārtaveerya Arjuna
  • Lord Rama defeated Ravana
  • Devi Durga defeated Mahishāsura
  • Devi Kali defeated Raktabeeja
  • Devi Chāmundi defeated Chanda and Munda

In each of the example cases the defeating was at the end of a war. A war that had caused severe hardship for multitudes and brought the natural order itself to the brink of destruction. Here, “natural order” includes the way people lived (society) and the forces of nature. Also, the avatāra does not appear until all options for fighting back are exhausted.

From L to R – Durga, Kali, Chamundi. Image credits – “Tales of Durga” published by Amar Chitra Katha

People, including the Rishis and the Devatās attempt to defeat the Asuras or any other adharmic or harassing entity/group by themselves. They succeed quite often. Examples of the Devas and Rishis defeating threats without an avatāra’s support are seen below

  • The fight against Vrtra
  • The fight against Viprachitti
  • The Tārakāmaya war

Only when it is clear that they cannot survive the fight does an avatāra appear. The avatāra fighting on the side of the people, Rishis and Devatas is what turns the fight in their favour.

Varāha (L) & Narasimha (R). Image credits – “Dasha Avatar” published by Amar Chitra Katha

In this same vein, the Asuras are not always the ones with the upper hand. They often end up on the losing side. They have great Asura leaders who rise up, perform severe meditation/penance to achieve boons that grant them the ability to defeat all their adversaries. In all the examples above where an avatāra was needed, an Asura had acquired invincibility due to a boon, which rendered the Devas and humans powerless. If the Asura had not chosen to upend the natural order, there would have been no need for a war.

Vāmana (L), Parashurāma (R). Image credits – “Dasha Avatar” published by Amar Chitra Katha

So, it is an incessant cycle of conflict. The war that liberates the Devas and people is always celebrated. It does not mean that war is something people looked forward to. It is just that they knew that someone would want to consolidate power. This consolidation led to a reduction in the quality of life for most people. This hardship is not something that should be meekly accepted and hence a fightback is a must. This awareness that one needs to fight against unjust powers is what leads to the celebration of war, for the war destroys the injustice. Such a war can be termed a Dharma Yuddha, as against a general Yuddha (war) which is a resolution of a conflict through the use of violence. But that does not take away from the fact that even a Dharma Yuddha is a war with all the hardships accompanying one. Only when the war and hardship end is there joy, not during one.

Let’s now return to the Arthashastra by Chanakya. As a document, it had been lost for several centuries, before being rediscovered in the 20th century. But its influence over Indian political and administrative thinking has endured. I am sharing a video from the YouTube channel of the media organization “The Print”. In this video, the editor-in-chief of The Print, Shekhar Gupta, discusses a Chinese report about Indian strategic thinking.

In the report, the Chinese say that Indian actions are strongly influenced by the Arthashastra! This is some 2,300 years after the document was composed! It reinforces the influence of the Arthashastra enduring despite the original document being lost. This means that if the Arthashastra advocated constant defence preparedness, war and violent conflict were never eschewed in India at any time in her past. War was constant and preparation for it was of paramount importance as part of the duties of a king.

Watch between the 18 and 20 minute marks.

It is only in post-independence India that a collation has occurred between Gandhian Ahimsa and Pacifism. In my opinion, the Ahimsa practiced by Gandhiji was not “non-violence” and definitely not pacifism. I think Gandhiji fought a war to defeat the British belief in their civilizational superiority. This was one part of the fight for Indian independence. The other part was a violent conflict, fought by the revolutionary movement. I have written two posts in the past describing these 2 parts, where the freedom struggle is looked at through the lens of martial arts. These 2 parts together succeeded in forcing a British withdrawal, immediately after the second world war. The links to these 2 articles is seen in the notes below**.

Last, as we consider the Arthashastra, we must remember that it was NOT written by a soldier/warrior. Chanakya was a political visionary and teacher, but not a man of war. He would likely be called an “academic” if he were alive today. This shows that it is not just fighting men and women who are dangerous. Academics and people who can motivate and shape societies can be equally dangerous. These people are knowledge workers, who are dangerous because of their knowledge.

Knowledge is used in two ways. One is through the creation of technology, tactics and strategies that contribute to any war effort directly. The other is in the narrative warfare that takes places constantly and away from the fields of battle. Narrative warfare to affect the populace as a whole is a lot more important in modern times with the reach of both legacy media and social media. We all see examples of this all the time.

The use of narratives through academics and other knowledge workers, “intelligentsia” as a whole, can have a positive or a negative effect. If the communication that happens is supportive of the administration and society, the people behind it (including podcasters, influencers, journalists, reporters etc.) would be hailed as patriots. If they are conceived to be detrimental to society, these same individuals would be branded “anti-national” and that very uniquely Indian adjective, “Urban Naxals”.

The idea of both the narrative and weaponry being instrumental in a conflict, even violent ones, has always been known. This is why Turkic rulers built pyramids of severed heads and Mongols destroyed civilian populations, as a form of psychological warfare. The tales of savagery captured in documents and passed on by word of mouth induced a fear that was advantageous to the invaders.

This is also why the proverb, “The Pen is mightier than the Sword” exists. In Japanese, the pen and sword are expressed as “Bun and Bu”. “Bun” refers to knowledge and “Bu” refers to violent conflict. In modern times, we have a new term to refer to individuals who play a part in conflicts far away from any frontline. We call them “keyboard warriors”.

Notes:

* https://mundanebudo.com/2022/10/13/ahimsa-and-the-martial-arts-part-1/

** https://mundanebudo.com/2022/10/27/ahimsa-and-the-martial-arts-part-2/

** https://mundanebudo.com/2022/11/10/ahimsa-and-the-martial-arts-part-3/

I came across a clip on Instagram around the time that Operation Sindoor was going on. In the clip one individual was critiquing the video of another. The original video clip has a woman claiming that “we do not celebrate war”. This statement was being critiqued in the video, where an individual clearly stated that “we do celebrate war”. This person went to explain how in Hindu culture war is indeed celebrated, with examples. This video was the inspiration for this article of mine. The link to the video is seen below.

Thoughts from Op Sindoor, Part 3 – Money matters!

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

India did not have a strong martial arts culture in the last few decades, until recently. Even now, it is not prevalent in all parts of the country. In places with higher disposable incomes, interest in and practice of the martial arts is growing. In parts of the country that have a strong continuation of historical traditions, martial arts are present as well, but more as a performance art. This is not true historically though. Martial arts were a vital part of Indian culture for many centuries before diminishing in importance in the latter half of the 19th century.

Now that martial arts are making a comeback, an interesting aspect is visible. There is a cost associated with practicing the martial arts. The costs include time, effort and money. Financial costs include, tuition fees of teachers, membership fees of gyms or dojos, cost of apparel and training equipment*. Training equipment includes protective gear and training tools, which include practice weapons. Beyond this, time is spent in traveling to the place of practice and in practice itself. And then there is the effort that it takes to make time and financial resources available for martial arts practice.

The costs mentioned above were present in the past as well. For some professions, this cost was valid as it directly impacted the earning of a livelihood. This is true in modern times as well. But for individuals who are not working with law enforcement, first responders and the defence services, this cost is not necessary. The payback is not necessarily monetary. Hence, there comes a point when martial arts practice becomes discouragingly costly. This was true in the past and is true in contemporary times as well.

The cost of martial practice extends to nations too. Here the cost is justified as a nation’s sovereignty and territorial integrity are dependent on the expenditure on its martial wings, in other words, defence forces, intelligence agencies and law enforcement services. As this is vital at a national level, all nations have defence budgets.

But the defence budgets of all nations are not the same. The defence budget of the USA is almost a trillion USD! The defence budget of China is about 350 billion USD. The defence budget of India is 78 billion USD (in 2025). The cost of defence preparedness might be the defence budget but that is not the same as the cost of war.

The cost of war, depending on how long it lasted and the devastation it caused can be varying. The cost in terms of loss of life and limb of citizens is incalculable. It renders a section of the population unable to participate in any economic activity and in many cases dependent on the state, which is a necessary drain on the economy. There is also a cost associated with reconstruction and rebuilding of the economy. This is exclusive of the opportunity cost and the uncertainty of real recovery.

Unlike the cost of war, defence preparedness can have a positive effect. Over time, increasing defence budgets can lead to the creation of a military-industrial-academic complex. This complex leads to better education for large sections of a society and development of a manufacturing ecosystem. This leads to more jobs, development of advanced technologies and improved innovative abilities of a society. Defence preparedness also involves having great infrastructure in perpetuity. And then there is the boost to the economy through the export of weapons and weapon systems. All this is without even considering the benefits of the development of dual use technologies. Beyond all this there is the saying “If you want to have peace, prepare for war” (from the original Latin, “Si vis pacem, para bellum”).

It could perhaps be said that preparation for war can lead to restarting and rebuilding of a flagging or destroyed economy. A perfect example of this is the Ashwamedha Yajna in the Mahabharata, which occurs years after the end of the Kurukshetra War. The reason the epic gives for the event is that Yudishtira performs this yajna to atone for the sins committed during the Kurukshetra war. But I opine that the reason for this yajna was to kick-start the economy of the kingdoms of Hastinapura and Indraprastha.

A very large number of males had died in the Kurukshetra war. If the numbers from tradition are considered, somewhere between 3 and 4.5 million men died in the war. This meant that a large part of the working population in Northern India was dead. The coffers of all the kingdoms that participated in the war were empty due to the logistics of the war. This meant that the economy of all the participants was in the doldrums.

The Ashwamedha Yajna requires a large investment to perform and conclude successfully. To start with, a large quantity of gold is needed in the performance of various rituals and all the participating Brahmanas have to be compensated for their part in the yajna. A strong army is needed to protect the horse, the Ashwa of the yajna.

The economy does not allow for an Ashwamedha Yajna. Image credit – “The Mahabharata, Part 41 – The Ashwamedha Yajna”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

The horse would wander around for a year in various kingdoms. These kingdoms could stop the horse or let it pass through. If they let it pass through, they had to offer tribute or sign a treaty with the army of the king whose horse it was. If they stopped the horse, they kingdom that stopped the horse had to fight the army protecting it. The fact that an army was involved meant that a functioning supply chain was needed, apart from soldiers and their training.

The massive logistics effort needed for the Yajna. Credit for the images- “The Mahabharata, Part 41 – The Ashwamedha Yajna”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

So, all parts of the economy have to contribute to the Ashwamedha Yajna. Food production is needed to feed the army. Industry is needed to equip the army and carry out the yajna itself. Administrative and financial bureaucracies have to be put in place to coordinate the logistics of all the activities. With all this coming up, the economy gets a jolt to restart. The tribute from the successful performance of the yajna ensures capital flows for growing the economy further.

A strong military is needed and military conflict is inevitable during the Ashwanedha Yajna. Credit for the images- “The Mahabharata, Part 41 – The Ashwamedha Yajna”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

But, for a faltering/failed economy to be able to do this, an initial capital infusion is needed. This could be a loan. But in the Mahabharata, there was no institution or fellow kingdom that could afford to hand out a loan post the Kurukshetra War. So, the Pandavas dug up buried treasure. Maharishi Veda Vyasa directed them to the treasure. The treasure, a vast hoard of gold became the seed capital for the Ashwamedha Yajna and the prosperity it eventually led to.

Buried treasure is initial investment! Credit for the images- “The Mahabharata, Part 41 – The Ashwamedha Yajna”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

This wonderful segment of the Mahabharata shows how preparation for a war could lead to economic recovery. But the Kurukshetra war itself caused untold devastation. The epic is in this sense a wonderful case study for both war and its consequences and the economic recovery preparation for war can lead to (even if the defence preparedness is disguised in a sacred yajna).

Thus, it has always been about availability of resources for martial preparedness, and martial preparedness to protect and enhance economic resources and their availability. But, and it is a BIG but, this only holds where there is a democratic or a Dharmic society. A Dharmic society as I am referring to the word, is one that is defined by a clear understanding of responsibilities of the administration, even if the head of government is a king or queen who holds power due to heredity.

Wealth distribution is a must during and after the Yajna. Image credit- “The Mahabharata, Part 41 – The Ashwamedha Yajna”, published by Amar Chitra Katha

Defence preparedness is unlikely to function in the case of Palace Economies. A palace economy is one where the leader or king or dictator or the family of the same, controls all resources and distribution of the same. This control could be arbitrary, based on the will of the leadership, with no link to real world performance, hardships, challenges or threats.

A fantastic example of a palace economy is the Delhi Sultanate in India, specifically under the Mamluk dynasty and the Khaljis. All the Turkic invasions of Northern India were by palace economies. From the little history we were taught, there was no doctrine of administration that these invaders followed.

After the fall of the Delhi Sultanate, the Mughals controlled the regions of Punjab. The later Mughals, after the death of Aurangzeb, struggled to defend this region. When Ahmed Shah Abdali of the Durrani Empire centred in modern day Afghanistan invaded Punjab repeatedly, they were unable to protect the populace of this region.

Abdali was a wonderful example of a palace economy as well. He took over the regions of Afghanistan after the death of Nadir Shah of Persia, under whom he had previously served. The later Mughals were also a palace economy, but with a much smaller resource pool to go around. Abdali, on the other hand, invaded Punjab and northern India several times to acquire wealth, which was then distributed as he desired, further strengthening his palace economy. The invasions of Northern India continued until 1761 and the 3rd battle of Panipat and the invasions of Punjab continued for a few years even after that seminal event.

Abdali won the 3rd battle of Panipat, but the cost of the victory dissuaded him from ever returning to the plains of Northern India. His ravaging of Punjab is chillingly captured in the following Punjabi saying. “Khada peeta lahe da, baki Ahmed Shahe da”. It means that only what one has eaten and drunk is one’s own, the rest belongs to Abdali. It refers to the loot that ensued when Abdali attacked; people lost everything. And this kind of loot was important to keep a palace economy functioning.

The lack of this functioning in the later Mughal court required the Marathas to fight the 3rd battle of Panipat. Though they lost the battle, they successfully diminished further Afghan invasions. All further battles between Indians and the Afghans, beyond Punjab, occurred when Afghanistan was invaded by the East India Company or the British Raj. By this time, the Afghan palace economy had faltered and become dysfunctional as well. This is classic of nations where economic development did not kick off in the early modern era.

There is however a trap of exhausting one’s economy with an excessive focus on defence preparedness. I have heard a lot of people say that the USA defeated the USSR by outspending them on defence. The USSR failed economically and could not keep up with the USA. In the quest to keep itself on par with the US in defence spending, the USSR bankrupted itself.

Economic growth and development are a vital part of being able to spend on defence. The overall economy of a nation must grow continuously. When this happens, a part of the growth can benefit the defence budget. If the economy does not grow, but the defence budget keeps increasing, the country eventually ends up being a basket case. This focus on overall economic development is the reason the Ashwamedha Yajna ends up rejuvenating the national economy, because it focuses on supply chain as a whole and not just on the armed forces.

In the modern Indian context, we Indians have a threat on two fronts. Pakistan on one and China on the other. Pakistan is gradually becoming a client state of China and is being used by the latter to prevent India from becoming a competitor on the global stage for various resources. The events in Galwan in 2020 and in Pahalgam in 2025 clearly reveal that ignoring the threats will not make them go away. India will have to always be ready to militarily confront the twin threats. I include threats in the cyber and space domains when I use the term “military” here.

So, increasing defence spending is a foregone national imperative for perhaps the coming decade. This is likely what both adversaries want, to slow down India’s economic growth. China is banking on what was mentioned in my previous post, make the Indians fight themselves to keep them occupied and weakened – Pakistanis are Indians by a different name, remember**?

Will their expectation of a weaker India come to pass? Will this spending take us the way of the USSR or make our economy grow faster and become more robust? This is a question the answer to which will only become apparent in maybe 10 or 15 years. If we go about only importing technology and weapon systems, we could go either way. But if an academic, industrial military complex is developed locally, we could become a far greater economy with a stronger military and overall national power.

Notes:

* Let me elaborate with an example. We needed training katana for practice at the dojo. We could by them online, in a sports store, get a carpenter to make it or make training katanas ourselves. Back in the middle of the 2000s, an online purchase or a purchase at a sports store was out of the question. E-commerce was just beginning for only books and sports stores did not stock much martial arts equipment other than karate and taekwondo apparel and training pads. Getting a carpenter meant having a sample to go by. All of this had one serious impediment, MONEY. We did not have disposable incomes to consider this purchase lightly. We had to seriously consider if we would train the martial arts for years to come, to consider the investment feasible. Chances of continuing were always small, so the investment was unlikely as well.

That left the option of making our own training katanas. This was done with building scrap available at home, mainly small diameter PVC pipes, which were wrapped with fabric tape and held together with cellophane or insulation tape. The hardest things to make were the scabbard or saya of the sword and the tsuba or disc guard on the katana. Because these were difficult to make, the saya was given a skip and the tsuba was a piece of thermocol (polystyrene). These worked to an extent.

The drawback with the handmade equipment was twofold. The lack of a saya meant that any technique that required the drawing of a sword could never be accurately practiced. It was always an approximation. The flimsy tsuba came apart often and that led to either injured fists or to a lack of understanding of how to use the tsuba to lock the opponent’s position. So, there was pain and poor training. Both these were due to a lack of financial resources.

Our teacher back then had said that in the past, good weapons were expensive and the same was true in contemporary times as well. This was a lesson well learnt. It was as clear an elucidation of the importance of money in martial arts as any. Money leads to technology and training and both improve chances of survival.

** https://mundanebudo.com/2025/06/19/thoughts-from-op-sindoor-part-2-nothing-has-changed/

Thoughts from Op Sindoor, Part 2 – Nothing has changed

Vikram M R, , 1 Comment

William Dalrymple’s book, “Return of a King” has a very interesting statement about the rulers of Afghanistan. He says early in the book that the Kings of Afghanistan, found it hard to invade Punjab and the plains of Northern India in the first half of the 19th century. Dalrymple further states that this was a time-tested strategy followed by the rulers of Central Asia and Afghanistan for many centuries to accumulate wealth.

Excerpt from the book, “Return of a King”, by William Dalrymple

Northwestern India has faced invasion through what is now Afghanistan for millennia. It started with the Persian Empire and was followed by an invasion by Alexander of Macedon. These invasions were followed by the invasions of the Indo-Greeks, Indo-Sakas, Indo-Parthians, Kushanas and the Hunas. These invasions lasted from the 6th century BCE till the 6th century CE. What was characteristic of these invaders was that they assimilated into the local culture, while also making contributions of their own.

The next series of invasions, of the Arabs, began in the 8th century was not too successful. This was followed by the Ghaznavid invasions in the late 10th and early 11th centuries. These invasions ended Hindu and Buddhist control in what is today Afghanistan. This was the beginning of what can be considered the Turkic invasions. These invasions set the template for plunder and the loot of wealth.

Then came the Ghorid (Ghurid) invasion at the end of the 12th century CE, which led to the establishment of Turkic rule in Northern and Western India and was called the Delhi Sultanate. This was followed by the invasion of the Mughals (who were Turco-Mongol), Iranians and lastly, the Afghans in the mid-18th century. This was the end of the invasions of India from the Northwest, until the middle of the 20th century, after Indian independence.

Invasions from the Northwest, in chronological order

There was the British conquest in the 18th century, preceded by minor conquests by the Portuguese in the early 16th century. But the European attacks came from the South, from the seas and are not relevant to the purposes of this article.

The invasions following that of Mohammad of Ghor, were unlike those in the previous millennia. The rulers chose to impose their native culture over the local populace. Yes, this is a simplistic statement, but not entirely wrong. Even the culture they chose to emulate was that of neighbouring Persia and not that of the populace they ruled over. Their contributions were not nil, but unlike those of the previous millennia, these were not entirely positive to the conquered cultures and populations.

The geographical extent of Indian culture in the 3rd century BCE extended till modern day Southern Afghanistan and Baluchistan in the West. This was a cultural extent and not a political spread. The entire subcontinent, except for the odd century, was always split into multiple kingdoms, that warred with each other. So, the conquests of the invaders were not against a monolithic “Indian” kingdom, but against individual kingdoms, who were mostly smaller than the invaders.

Both the invasions from the North and the West and the warring of Indian political entities continues to this day. With variations of course. The modern-day republic of India is one of at least 3 political entities that exist within the historical cultural spread. If one considers just 3 countries formed out of British India*, the pattern of Indian states fighting one another and the invasions from the Northwest, both persist unabated.

India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are the modern countries most associated with British India. Pakistan, by dint of its birth and historical association with Buddhist and Hindu cultures, is India with a new and different name. So, every time Pakistan attacks India, either with conventional forces or through its terrorist proxies, it is an instance of Indians fighting Indians. Exactly like in the past few thousand years.

Pakistan is India’s western neighbour, and the union territories of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) and Ladakh are India’s north. So, every time there is a terrorist attack in J&K or a war with Pakistan, like in Kargil in 1999, the invasion is still from the Northwest, just like in millennia past. So, the pattern holds, nothing has changed. The difference is that Pakistan now tries hard to associate its identity with Turkey & the broader region of West Asia, contrary to the facts of history.

This is not new either. The Mughals, despite having Rajput Hindu mothers, identified themselves as Timurid after Timur the Lame, who hailed from Uzbekistan. Today, Pakistan, fills the dual role of an Indian entity identifying as foreign and that of an invader from the Northwest. Neither role is something that modern Indians can be happy about.

But about the reason for the invasion/attack? In the past, it has mostly been about controlling the wealth generated from the fertile plains of the Sindhu and Ganga river systems. The Sindhu river system includes Kashmir, Punjab and Sindh, while the Ganga river system includes all of North India excluding modern day Rajasthan. Today, large parts of the Sindhu system are in Pakistan. Also, Pakistan cannot hope to plunder wealth like the invaders of the past, nor can it take over any part of North India. So, why bother with the attacks?

The answer is likely the control of wealth within Pakistan. The leadership of the Pakistan army is the leadership of Pakistan, for they control the political leadership and are strongly associated with the business elites as well. These 3 groups control a lot of the wealth in the country as they control a lot of the agricultural land, and the prime real estate used for other purposes. For the army to stay powerful, they need the enemy in India, even though India neither wants any part of Pakistan, nor a war with it, not even a minor one.

So, if there is no powerful enemy in India, a powerful army is not really needed. There is a saying I have heard from many people in India. It goes, “The Indian state has an army, while the Pakistani army has a state”. This explains the situation beautifully. The army is like a parent to the Pakistani state. Keeping this image leads to power, which fuels budgets, prestige and wealth.

So, the “wealth” that the Pakistani army hopes to earn is power at home and that is achieved every time India is demonstrated as an existential threat to the state. An attack on India triggers a counterattack, which demonstrates a threat to the state, and this leads to the importance of the army. And from this importance flows everything else mentioned earlier.

For India on the other hand, the situation is still the same, Indians are still fighting Indians called Pakistanis, who have chosen to the take on the role of the Northwestern invaders, for the original invaders have either weakened to insignificance or just disappeared altogether.

This post is different from my usual articles. I almost always describe connections between traditional martial arts, Hindu culture, Indian history and modern Indian life. This article though, is entirely focused on Indian history. This is because of thoughts I have had post the actions taken by the Indian military during Operation Sindoor between 7th May and 10th May, 2025. Including the content of this post with another post (the next one) was making the other one too long and expansive in scope. The next post after this one, will go back to the usual pattern of connecting dots.

Notes:

* Burma, Aden and parts of Somalia were also administered as parts of British India

Thoughts from Op Sindoor, Part 1 – Sutemi Waza and Mission success

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

The first strike of Operation Sindoor was carried out in the early hours of 9th May 2025. This attack was carried out against 21 targets in 9 locations in Pakistan and Pakistan Occupied Jammu & Kashmir (POJK). The attacks were carried out by the Indian Air Force (IAF) and supposedly units of the Indian Army. The attack by the IAF used precision munitions.

The munitions used supposedly included the Scalp cruise missile, the Hammer, the Rampage and perhaps the Crystal Maze and Brahmos as well. The details are not officially made available as yet. The platforms that deployed these munitions include the French Rafale, the Indo-Russian Su30MKI and others, including the Russian Mig 29 and French Mirage 2000. None of the aircraft crossed into Pakistani airspace. All munitions were launched from Indian airspace.

All 21 targets were successfully destroyed with video evidence. All 9 targeted locations were terrorist bases or headquarters that were known and identified. There was no collateral damage, either civilian or military. And this LACK OF COLLATERAL DAMAGE is a VERY IMPORTANT POINT that leads to several amazing observations, from an operational perspective, from an Indian societal perspective and form learning for martial artists, specifically those are not experienced in the defence services.

Pakistan claims to have shot down 5 Indian aircraft during this strike on terrorist targets. Indian forces have not officially released any details of what the losses entailed were. It will be revealed in due course, as the Indian defence establishment does not hide its losses. This information is not revealed as Op Sindoor is not yet officially declared as completed. Unofficial sources claim that India lost 3 aircraft, one Rafale, one Mig 29 and one Su30MKI.

What is clear is that no Indian pilot was lost. The Director General of Air Operations (DGAO) has made it clear that no human life was lost during the strike on terrorist targets. This means that even if the aircraft were lost, the pilots were safe. The DGAO also made it clear that as part of achieving mission objectives, losses were to be expected and were acceptable. This statement means that AIRCRAFT WERE EXPENDABLE, THE PILOTS WERE NOT.

So, why were these losses acceptable? Could they not have been prevented? The events of the early hours of 10th May 2025 answers the second question. Yes, the losses could have been prevented. On 10th May, the IAF struck several Pakistani Air Bases and air defence installations. Between 11 and 13 bases were hit, again with precision strikes, using pretty much the same munitions as earlier, including perhaps the indigenously developed SAAW (Smart Anti Airfield Weapon).

DURING THIS SECOND PHASE, NO AIRCRAFT WERE LOST. Why was this? Because this time around, the IAF carried out what I have come to learn, is called SEAD and DEAD actions. SEAD stands for “Suppression of Enemy Air Defences” and DEAD is “Destruction of Enemy Air Defences”. Once Pakistani air defences were eliminated, the IAF could take out the air bases with no losses.

The strikes on air bases destroyed runways, command and control centres, staff waiting centres and hangars (or hardened shelters). This rendered the Pakistani Air Force incapable of any retaliation for the next few days at least. This gave the IAF air dominance. Once this was achieved, Pakistan asked for cessation of hostilities and India agreed as the objective of striking terrorists had already been achieved.

It must be said, both Pakistan and India attacked each other with several drones as well. Pakistan also used ballistic missiles of varying ranges. Pakistani drones and missiles were intercepted and destroyed by integrated Indian Air Defence systems. But Pakistani Air Defence systems failed. The defence in India was all along the Pakistani border. The strikes Pakistan endured, was along its entire length; some say the attacks inflicted damage to its nuclear weapon storage and integration facilities (this is not admitted or confirmed). The strikes were sufficient to end further hostilities after 10th May 2025.

The attacks by Pakistan on the nights of 7th and 8th mostly included various types of drones. On the night of the 9th the attack included ballistic missiles. The targets of these attacks included Indian military installations, religious sites and civilian areas along the border. This convinced the Indian side to escalate and not limit itself to terrorist targets. Pakistani military installations were now legitimate targets, WHICH THEY WERE NOT IN THE FIRST PHASE, ON THE 7TH OF MAY.

Once the military was a target, India carried out SEAD and DEAD operations, which allowed further strikes on Pakistan with NO LOSSES. This shows that the losses could have been prevented on the 7th of May as well. Why the losses were deemed acceptable earlier is also answered here.

The object on the 7th of May, as stated earlier were terrorist bases. Terrorists, in the case of those supported by Pakistan, are weapons of the state targeting India and her citizens. This makes the terrorists, tools of the Pakistani state. The state in Pakistan, is its military, specifically the Pakistan Army. The civilian Government of Pakistan, according to several commentators, is one that is selected by the Army and not elected by the people. This was done by manipulating the election results. So, a tool of the Pakistani state is essentially a tool of the Pakistan Army.

As mentioned earlier, on the 10th of May, the IAF attacked Pakistani air bases. Air bases are places from where aircraft and other weapons are launched. So, the base by itself is a weapon, or maybe a weapons platform. In this same vein, the terrorists, being tools of the Pakistan Army, are weapons of an unconventional kind. It was these “weapons” that India targeted on the 7th.

Because only these weapons (terrorists) were targeted, and not the conventional military, SEAD and DEAD actions were not conducted prior to the strikes. This gave the Pakistan Air Force an opportunity to retaliate. INDIA CHOSE TO ACCEPT LOSSES RATHER THAN ATTACK MILITARY TARGETS! THIS IS A MESSAGE THAT SHOWS RESTRAINT AND DISCRETION. This self-imposed restriction was lifted when Pakistan chose Indian military and civilian targets. The fact that potential losses of expensive aircraft was seen to be acceptable but not the lives of the pilots shown incredible foresight, planning and execution of the Indian military establishment! This fact is mind-boggling!

Why though, did India accept this possible loss of air assets? This is because India, unlike its hostile neighbour is a mature civilian democracy. India wanted to punish terrorists that murdered its citizens, not invade Pakistan or cause harm to its citizens. This maturity in the Government meant that it was willing to sacrifice its military assets. If the Government had chosen to conduct SEAD and DEAD operations on 7th May, these losses would not have occurred, but hat action would also have made India an aggressor against Pakistan, rather than a country seeking justice.

This entire episode where India accepted potential losses in aircraft and perhaps did indeed lose a few, while not sacrificing its pilots is a fantastic demonstration of a concept that many martial arts teach. The fact that it was applied in modern day aerial warfare makes it all the more incredible, giving practitioners of the traditional martial arts no excuses to not train this concept. This is the concept of SUTEMI WAZA.

I am familiar with the Bujinkan system of martial arts, so I shall explain this concept from this perspective. I expect that most martial arts, whether they train armed or unarmed combat, will have a similar concept, and methods to practice the same. Sutemi in Japanese means “sacrifice” and waza means “technique”. “Sutemi Waza” thus stands for “sacrificial techniques”. But what is being sacrificed and how is it a technique?

The best way to describe the concept of Sutemi Waza is with the form called “Tomoe Nage”. “Nage” here means “throw”. “Tomoe” means “comma”, like the punctuation mark. So, when one executes a “Tomoe Nage” on an opponent, one drops one’s own body to break the balance of the opponent and throws her or him over oneself. The image below shows the execution of the tomoe nage and explains the situation far better than any words can.

Hatsumi Sensei, Soke of the Bujinkan, performing a “Tomoe Nage”. Image credit – “Unarmed Fighting Techniques of the Samurai”, by Sensei Hatsumi Masaaki.

In this form or technique, the person executing the throw sacrifices her or his own balance by dropping down to the ground and this sacrifice enables the throwing of the opponent. One likely scenario where this technique is used is when both opponents are evenly matched or when other forms are not possible in the given situation. However this technique is executed, the objective is to break the opponent’s flow by sacrificing one’s own balance.

One of the martial schools (ryuha) studied as part of the Bujinkan system is the “Takagi Yoshin Ryu”. This is a school that was historically practiced by bodyguards. Hence it involves a lot of subduing and immobilization techniques. This was done in the past to capture someone for further information gathering. Of course, the techniques in this school can be used to lethal effect, but the objective was to capture wherever possible.

One of the 9 sections of the Takagi Yoshin Ryu is called the “Tai no Kata”. This can be roughly translated to “The form of the body”, “tai” being the body and “kata” being the form. There are 15 techniques as part of this section, and 10 of these end with a variation of the tomoe nage, where the opponent is thrown over oneself to nullify the threat.

The concept of sutemi or sacrifice can also be applied in a more generic manner, which is also common to all martial arts. This involves “Letting go”. Whenever there is a situation where one’s attack is successfully blocked by the opponent or if the opponent is too strong for a given attack to succeed, there is no point in continuing with the same. One has to let go. This “letting go” of the attack allows one to move around and find another opening to exploit and if nothing else conserve energy by not wasting it on pressing a fruitless attack.

In the case of Op Sindoor, this concept of “sutemi” was executed flawlessly by the Indian Military. By accepting potential losses, they gained so much more. Not only was their performance as a defence force appreciated the world over, but it also cemented India as a responsible nation that can be depended upon to not violate the peace. It also demonstrated that India could achieve any offensive mission at will, tailored to the conditions that are prevalent.

This focus on the mission brought home another interesting distinction between the Indian and Pakistani air forces. On an episode of the “Carvaka Podcast”, a YouTube channel run by Kushal Mehra, the host Kushal was discussing Op Sindoor with defence analyst Angad Singh. A link to this video is seen below. Angad Singh had an observation that is fantastic. He said that the Pakistani Air Force had a mindset of “Knights of the Air”. They are more focused on facing off against the Indian Air Force than on a given mission objective.

Video of the interaction between Kushal Mehra and Angad Singh. Watch between the 36 and 43 minute marks.

This mindset makes the Pakistanis focus exclusively on the number of aircraft lost in any given engagement. Hence, they were flaunting the fact they shot down some Indian aircraft. They completely missed the fact that the Indian Air Force successfully completed all its mission objectives, of destroying terror targets with no collateral damage and with no loss of life for itself. This was in stark contrast to the mindset of the Indian Air Force, who let go (sutemi) of the need for a “clean scoresheet” to achieve the mission objective. Of course, it is now well known that Pakistan also lost multiple aircraft, both on the 7th and on the 10th of May. So much for keeping score over achieving what their mission should been, protect targets in Pakistan.

I have one last observation to make in this article. Sutemi Waza is an old concept in the martial arts, but is visible even in modern hi-tech warfare. In this same vein, I recently understood the use of Vyuha that were used in the Mahabharta War at Kurukshetra in modern warfare. Major General G D Bakshi (Retd.) was speaking at even to launch his own book, “Indian Strategic Culture: The Mahabharata and the Kautilyan Ways of War”. The link to the YouTube video of his speech is seen below. A Vyuha is a battle formation from ancient or historical times. It is how troops are arrayed in a battle or the formation they assume as a battle progresses to achieve certain objectives.

Video of the speech by Major General (Retd.) G D Bakshi. Watch between the 19 and 21 minute marks.

During his speech, General Bakshi explains how the Ardha Chandra Vyuha (crescent moon or half moon formation) was used in modern warfare. He mentions that this formation was used by India against Pakistan during the tank battle at the battle of Assal Uttar, in 1965. This battle was a severe defeat for Pakistan. The crescent moon formation in my understanding, is what is also called the “pincer movement”, where an enemy is enveloped and attacked from multiple sides.

A representation of the Ardha Chandra Vyha (Crescent moon formation). Image credit – “The Mahabharata – 37”, “Karna in command”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

When I had seen a representation of the Ardha Chandra Vyuha in a comic format back in the 80s, it had seemed like a static formation. But after listening to the General, it seems that this is a formation that is formed in response to an attack. The crescent is formed as part of receiving an attack from the enemy. When the enemy is enveloped and the pincer attack happens, the formation looks like a crescent moon. It need not have started out like that!

While we speak of the Mahabharata, it must be said that the epic also cautions against seeking glory and focusing on the mission objectives. This contrasts with the psyche of the Pakistan Air Force as described by Angad Singh, which I mentioned a few paragraphs earlier. The image below, of a panel from the Mahabharata published by Amar Chitra Kata, clearly illustrates this point, even if warriors back in the day did break this rule. Personal glory it seems, has always been intoxicating.

Image from the Mahabharata cautioning against duels seeking personal glory. Image credit – “The Mahabharata – 38”, “The Kurus routed”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

In a more recent historical context, Shekhar Gupta, in a video of his mentioned that the use of massed artillery by India during the Kargil War of 1999 was inspired by the same tactic used by Maharaja Ranjit Singh in the 19th century. Maharaja Ranjit Singh was the founder of the Sikh Empire that was a major power in the 19th century. Shekhar Gupta is the Editor-in-chief of The Print, a well-respected news media organization in India. The link to the video in which Mr. Gupta mentioned this is seen below. He mentioned that this fact will be part of a soon to be released book by Major General Lakhwinder Singh (Retd.) of the Indian Army.

Video of Shehkar Gupta speaking about the use of artillery in the Kargil War being inspired by the tactics of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. Watch between the 13 and 15 minute marks.

So, modern military engagements demonstrate that concepts developed over centuries of marital practice continue to endure, while the technology used to put the concept into practice has changed continuously. I expect I will post a few more articles based on the thoughts that Op Sindoor has left me with.

These are just my thoughts as a layman with no military experience. I could be wrong about many things written in this post, including the actual events that took place and the thinking behind the same. This is partly because all details of Op Sindoor have not been officially revealed yet.

On 31st May 2025, the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General Anil Chauhan, in an interview with Bloomberg accepted that there were aircraft losses, but the numbers were fewer than six. The CDS also mentioned that any tactical errors on the 7th were fixed right away. This is perhaps his way of saying that Pakistani air defences were eliminated before any strike, after the 7th. This could mean that Pakistani military was a legitimate target after the 7th and not on the 7th. It could also mean that the Indian military, after the events of the 7th has decided that not only is the successful completion of the mission important but ensuring that no assets are lost is equally important. Either way, there are likely to be more aspects to learn from the operation in the weeks and months to come. A link to a snippet of the CDS’ interview is seen below.

Video which contains a snippet of CDS Genral Anil Chauhan’s interview with Bloomberg. Watch between the 3 and 4:30 minute marks.

Lord Narasimha – A treasure trove of martial concepts

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Vikram M R, , , , Leave a comment

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The head of a Poleaxe

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes:

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

Why the Prince can’t be PM, yet

Vikram M R, , , , , 2 Comments

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes:

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