Image credit: Original art by Vishnu Mohan (Goobe Art) , above rendition by Chirag Hasyagar (Goobe Art), art concept by Vikram M R
Today is Aayudha Pooja and tomorrow is Vijayadashami. Aayudha Pooja is celebrated on the ninth day (Navami) of the Dasara festival and Vijayadashami on the tenth (Dashami – it is built into the name) and last day of Dasara. Dasara is pronounced Dussehra by many. I use “Dasara” instead of “Dussehra”, thanks to my heritage in Karnataka. In some parts of our country the festival of Dasara has a lot of association with the Ramayana, while in others it is associated with Mahishasura Mardhini. Culturally of course, it is simply awesome; with festive fervour, great food and school holidays. If one is an adult and not in school, at least one of the two days are off, if not both. Many people go on leave on the day that is not off.
Aayudha Pooja is the day when tools and implements that either allow us to earn a livelihood or allow us to lead a comfortable life are shown the gratitude and the respect they are due. Vijayadashami is simultaneously a celebration of the victory of Lord Rama over Ravana in Lanka and of Devi Durga over Mahishasura.
The Goddess Durga had access to the weapons of all the other Gods and Devatas. She used all of these in the fight against the Asura Mahisha. The weapons include the Trishoola of Lord Shiva, Sudarshana Chakra of Lord Vishnu, the Vajra of Indra and a whole host of others. It was these weapons that aided in Durga defeating Mahishasura. Hence, the occasion when Durga’s victory is celebrated is used as an opportunity to offer prayers, gratitude and respect to the “weapons” that we use in our daily lives, which are the tools of our trade. These include our vehicles, laptops, pumps, electrical equipment, the practice weapons we use as martial artists and just about anything we think are important to us. The choice of the “Aayudha” selected for Pooja is a personal one.
Aayuda is generally used to denote “weapon”. But it also refers to tools as mentioned above, which we might not consider weapons. A “Shastra” or an “Astra” specifically denotes a weapon, where a “Shastra is a handheld weapon and an “Astra” is a weapon that is discharged. With that said, as martial artists, everything we use to train becomes an aayudha, like the training mats, punching bags, weights, practice weapons, protective apparel, the very space we train in (dojo/Kalari/akhada/gym) is something that is deserving of obeisance on the day of Aayudha Pooja.
None of this of course, is special or specific to practitioners of the martial arts. A look at any plant in the manufacturing sector or anyone in the transportation sector shows how important a festival Aayudha Pooja is. The shop floor and all machines are cleaned. The same goes for vehicles and mechanic shops as well. The cleaning might happen a day or two before the Pooja itself. Vehicles of course are decked up in the day of Aayudha Pooja.
Aayudha Pooja as a whole is a very grounded and simple act. Use the opportunity provided by the victory of Goddess Durga to appreciate and offer gratitude and respect to the inanimate objects that make our lives and livelihoods possible. If one is a martial artist, the analogy is exponentially greater, for the closeness to weaponry and their knowledge are that much greater, and the opportunity to explicitly remember/observe this fact is what the festival is all about.
Vijayadashami is an out and out celebration of victory, whether it is of Devi Durga over Mahishasura or of Lord Rama over Ravana. However, there are other aspects associated with this festival that make it all the more important. In Karnataka, a concept called “Seemollanghana” is associated with Vijayadashami. And this concept is the reason everyone is always encouraged to start something new or anything that is long pending/challenging on the day of Vijayadashami. “Seemollanghana” means “violate the border”. “Seema” is “border” or “boundary” and “Ullanghana” means to “vilolate”. This is all in a very positive sense, and just because the word “violate” is used, it is not anything negative.
From what little I know, historically, the campaign season (war campaign that is) started after the Dasara festival. It is the time when the monsoon season is tapering off. So, movement of troops becomes easier, and the winter is not far away. In southern India, at least in most parts of it, the winter is not harsh, and the weather is better for a military campaign. Summers are scorching hot, and the monsoons are muddy and wet, both of which are less conducive for supply chain management and fighting. So, the post monsoon season and the winter are better suited to military action. I am not aware if the same pattern was followed in northern India, as the weather patterns there are a little different. Either way, as part of the campaign season, geographical and political borders were crossed or violated. So, there is a literal “Seemollanghana” taking place, after the festival of Vijayadashami.
But the historical precedent is not what any of us is raised with, when the word “Seemollanghana” is used. It refers to something far more personal, not necessarily just symbolic, and definitely relates to us violating our own boundaries. We were encouraged to start something new on the day of Vijayadashami. Even if it is something we have stopped for quite a while, it would be a good time to restart the same. If there is something that we have been putting off, due to uncertainty, lack of confidence or just due to procrastination, starting that activity, even if in a small way, on the occasion of Vijayadashami is the thing to do. The general belief is that a start on this special day leads to a favourable outcome. Again, the celebration of a victory against all odds from tradition, along with historical precedent, gives an opportunity to start something new, just as Aayudha Pooja created an opportunity to give a respectful thought towards all the tools we use.
Starting something new is the same as breaking a boundary. One has to go past the jitters or second thoughts or plain old nerves. Each of these qualifies as a boundary and violating them leads to a start, which will hopefully lead to a good outcome in the future. This is why the violation of a boundary is a positive thing when considered with the festival of Vijayadashami+.
In my opinion, Vijayadashami is a constant reminder of “Shin Ken Gata”. “Shin Ken Gata” is a test some Bujinkan dojos have their students go through. This test happens at any of the kyu levels as the dojos decide. In my dojo, it was at the 6th kyu (kyu are levels before one achieves a black belt, and dan are levels after achieving the same). Shin Ken Gata in Japanese means, “form where your spirit/will is the only weapon”. This test involves performing various set techniques multiple times against multiple opponents. In all, this comes to about 15 minutes of moving, fighting and staying alive and pushing oneself, with no breaks, while incessant attacks come from multiple opponents who are all around the one taking the test. It is incredibly tiring and scary. Shin Ken Gata leaves an exhilarating feeling of having survived, after the test is done.
One great learning from the test is that, when one has to keep going continuously against multiple opponents, even if they attack one at a time, the chances of survival are zero, if it was a real situation. One realizes that one keeps going despite this becoming clear, hoping one comes out alive at the end of it. This is the will or spirit of the person driving her or him. This is why the spirit or the will to live is the only weapon; hence the name Shin Ken Gata.
When one takes the Shin Ken Gata test, one has to go past the fatigue, self-doubt, giddiness, exhilaration, rage, fear of the opponents, fear of failure and a whole host of limiting factors. Each of these is a boundary violated as the test progresses. And this is reason why “Shin Ken Gata” is a wonderful exhibition of “Seemollanghana” in real life.
I will make a pop culture reference here. I stated earlier that Shin Ken Gata makes one realize that in a real fight there is a good chance that one might not survive. Yet one strives to achieve that goal no matter what, until the very end. This is very close to the “Kobayashi Maru” test in the Star Trek franchise. The Kobayashi Maru is a test that cadets in the Star Fleet Academy have to go through. It is a test which has no success or passing. It is designed such that one will always fail. It is meant to teach cadets that despite the realization that there is no success or victory and the certainty of defeat, even death, one has to keep going and do one’s best as a leader and to save as many crew mates as possible. This objective and its realization make the Kobayashi Maru test almost identical to the experience of the Shin Ken Gata; only one of these if real though. 😊
The Shin Ken Gata test reveals two other concepts. One is Ganbatte and the other is Gaman; both are Japanese words. Ganbatte is used to mean “keep going”, “keep fighting”, “good luck”, “all the best” or “do your best”. It is used to cheer someone on in any activity of theirs. I have also heard the term “Ganbatte Kudasai”. My friend Santosh*, who knows Japanese, tells me that this is used while addressing someone senior (Senpai). So, it is a slightly more formal usage of the word. It is used to mean, “keep your spirits up”, again a form of cheering someone on.
Gaman, as I have heard it, means, “take the pain” or “endure the pain”. Santosh tell me this is used to mean “endure your suffering with patience”. Also, “gaman” is supposedly used more as a term with spiritual significance.
So, the two words signify endurance, or forging ahead however one can in the face of adversities, irrespective of whether they are internal or external. This, in my understanding, is very close to the third of the five gojo1, “Shizen no niniku”, which is “forbearance of nature”. It suggests that one should forbear troubles like nature itself does, with no complaints. This in turn leads into the term “Ninjutsu” itself, where “nin” refers to perseverance (jutsu being “art of” leads to Ninjutsu to being the “art of perseverance” or “art of persevering”)**.
Back when I was a beginner, I was advised by my teacher to consider injuries as an opportunity to learn and hence try to attend classes while nursing or recovering from injuries, irrespective of whether they were sustained while training in the dojo or outside, while going about one’s daily life. This was because, being conscious of an injury forces the body to adapt; to protect the injured part of the body and to stay safe, to avoid further aggravation of the injury or the possibility of a new one. This also inspires the body to move more efficiently, which has many revelations that can hopefully be used when one returns to normalcy. This entire exercise is nothing but violating the boundaries set by worry, fear and pain, either due to our own preconceptions or those we have imbibed from others around us.
Enduring hardships and hindrances is nothing but breaking boundaries of concern and fear and moving ahead, both of which dissuade one from doing or starting something one either needs or wishes to. In this sense, the festival of Vijayadashami addresses the very heart of what the Bujinkan represents, to keep going, enduring and achieving flow in the face of adversity. This makes Vijayadashami perhaps the most important festival for practitioners of the martial arts, as it is a reminder of all things this art stands for.
Thus, Aayudha Pooja is a reminder to be grateful to our surroundings (dojo, implements) and Vijayadashami is a reminder to respect our own selves, by going past limitations and constantly expanding our abilities.
Notes:
*I would like to thank my buyu (martial sibling) and friend, Shihan Santosh Nagasamy, for sharing his knowledge of the Japanese language with me.
**My teacher and mentors used to change the forms we used often. My teacher said that this is to enable neuroplasticity. I am no expert on this topic and hence am adding this point in the notes. When one trains the same forms multiple times, changing it and exploring it differently after a duration of time leads to new learning and fine-tuning of the same forms, with each iteration of training the same. Also, moving differently in response to the same initial attack also leads to different outcomes and the form being practiced leads to interesting revelations. This continuous change helps overcome any reliance on form and technique, while also mitigating a worry of what could happen against an unfamiliar attack or in a real situation. In other words, it helps one accept that in the real world, one needs to adapt to what is faced and not believe in the techniques as a textbook. It is fine to rely on the basics and concepts, but not to trust the forms as a religion.
+The story of Durga defeating Mahishasura itself is seen in a symbolic manner by some. Mahishasura is seen as an embodiment of animalistic tendencies (Mahisha means buffalo) in humans, like ignorance, a focus on desire and the like. So, these are boundaries that are holding back the progress of individuals as humans. And the breaking of the barriers present due to these tendencies is seen as the victory of Durga (the divine mother) over Mahishasura.
“Kirik” in colloquial Kannada means, “deliberate mischief”, maybe with malicious intent
Training of any traditional martial art system involves learning to use weapons. Generally, practitioners learn the use of weapons based on the reach of the weapon. The range a weapon can affect is based on its reach. A simple classification of weapons based on their reach is,
Unarmed combat – the human body is the weapon
Short range – weapons like knives/daggers, Vajra/yawara stick, bagh nakh, loh mushti/knuckle dusters
Medium range – weapons like batons, hanbo, jo, gada/mace , swords
Long range weapons – bo, quarterstaff, spears, all other pole weapons
Discharged weapons – weapons with a range greater than those mentioned above, including all missile weapons, like bows and arrows, javelin, slings, chakra, shuriken, and all modern weaponry
The weapons in short, medium and long range, as far as Indians are concerned, are classified as Shastra, weapons that are hand held. Discharged weapons are Astra, weapons that are discharged with either the hand (javelin, chakra) or through a device that is handheld (arrows through bows, stones through slings).
The reach of a weapon is the distance at which it can affect an intended opponent/target. The range of a weapon is the area that can be influenced by a weapon. Reach is two dimensional, whereas range is three dimensional. For example, the reach of a sword would be the length of its blade if the wielder of the same does not extend her or his arms and legs. The range of the sword would be a sphere, whose radius is the length of the blade. The sphere is generated when the sword’s wielder turns around and moves the weapon over the head and below the waist.
When we consider modern weaponry like missiles, bombs and the like, the range will be the area around the point of impact where the destruction occurs, while the reach is the distance the missile can travel. Of course, in common parlance we refer to this as the range of a missile and the area of impact or blast radius as the range of the warhead the missile was carrying. There could be even more technical terms used which I am not aware of.
In the Bujinkan system of martial arts, Soke Hatsumi Masaaki had designated as the “theme of the year” for the years 2002 and 2003 respectively, the concepts of “Sanjigen no sekai” and “Yugen no sekai”. These concepts were the point of focus in the training of practitioners for those years respectively. The result of this training would be improving the movement of budoka with the addition of these concepts to their existing abilities and experience. “Sanjigen no Sekai” is “the world of three dimensions” and “Yugen no Sekai” is “the world of elegance”.
In simpler terms, Sanjigen no sekai reminded budoka (practitioners of budo, one of the systems of which, is the Bujinkan) to remember to also use the third dimension in their movement. As beginners, we tend to focus on angles and distance to learn the basics. This is facilitated by the dojo being a flat indoor space. Over time, one needs to learn to use one’s legs better to lower one’s centre of gravity to achieve better stability and power by the use of potential energy. It also gives extra space to protect oneself when there are attacks (a diagonal requires an attacker to traverse a greater distance). An additional aspect that my mentor explained while training this concept was that a real fight need not be on a level ground. It could be on uneven terrain or even a slope (think stairs). This changes the distances and needs adaptation in one’s movement and the use of weapons. In other words, the reach and range vary with the terrain.
Yugen no sekai by its name is very poetic. But in reality, it is a lot simpler, based on my understanding. The application of sakkijutsu over Sanjigen no sekai should lead to a realization of Yugen no sekai. Sakkijutsu refers to using intuitive abilities as a guide to move, instead of only relying on the other sensory cues from opponents. It is using one’s gut feel to move in a conflict situation. So, if one can move when the intent to attack is felt and also move in 3 dimensions, perhaps then, one has experienced the concept of Yugen no sekai in the movement.
Sakkijustsu*, as described in previous articles of mine, is generally expected to help gain a fraction of time in facing an attack and this tiny bit of extra time hopefully saves one’s life or mitigates injury. Thus, Yugen no sekai introduced the element, or dimension of time into movement during a fight. This is perhaps logical as Sanjigen no sekai was all about space (three dimensions and their efficient use). Maybe if one used Sakkijustsu, the movement would appear effortless and hence seem elegant, as a consequence of being in harmony with the opponent and the surroundings, leading into the translation of Yugen no sekai in the first place. Of course, harmonizing with the opponent by nullifying one’s own motivations in a fight is a key to practicing Sakkijutsu. So, it is a virtuous cycle (when I read “The Final Empire” by Brandon Sanderson, and the main characters are fighting by using the abilities bestowed by the fictional metal “Atium”, Sakkijutsu was what I always saw+).
Now that we have brought time as a dimension in a fight, it leads us to another concept. Just as there are “long range” weapons, can there be “long time” weapons? A “long range” weapon is with respect to space; a weapon which can strike a target at a distance and maybe also one that has a destructive impact on a much larger area. These might be weapons like today’s stand-off range missiles and bombs. A “long time” weapon is with respect to time; it would be one that has an effect over a long duration of time, irrespective of the physical space where its effect is felt. It could also be a weapon that takes a longer duration to show its effect. The term “long time weapon” is something that I am using here, it is not a real, established word. The concept is relevant and any term can be applied to it.
So, what could constitute “long time” weaponry? One thing that comes to mind immediately is “narrative”. This is a term used very often in all forms of media today. There is discussion of having national narratives where a populace feels pride in its nationality and civilizational history and how this drives confidence in citizens to take risks without fear of failure. There is also talk of “foreign interference” through media to set a narrative inimical to the progress or achievements of a society by highlighting only its negative aspects.
Before exploring this further, one thing has to be said. Long range weapons have an impact over varying durations of time and “long time” weapons have impacts over varying regions of space. If a region of a city is destroyed with bombs that region is lost for the citizens until the reconstruction takes place. How long this takes depends on the duration of the conflict that caused the destruction and the nature of the weapon used for the same. So, apart from the space destroyed, there is a duration for which the effect of the destruction persists (effects of nuclear weapons being the extreme). Similarly, if a specific narrative is set, irrespective of the intentions behind the same and the correctness of it, the effect of that narrative can shape societies for many generations, lasting decades or perhaps centuries. This narrative, can spread to different regions through various means and have an effect to varying degrees. So, even “long time” weapons have a spatial impact. That said, let us return to exploring the idea of “narrative” as weaponry.
In his book, “Japanese Sword Fighting, Secrets of the Samurai” Soke Hatsumi Masaaki, states that one should “aspire to the arts of both the pen and the sword”. This is mentioned early in the book, in the preface. He is making a point about sword saints (kensai) and this is one of 5 aspects related to them. But it is not a concept intended to be relegated for use only by the sword saints of old.
This concept of “the pen and the sword” is referred to as “Bun and Bu” in Japanese, as I have heard from my teachers. The “bun” here refers to the pen or the literary arts in general. It also extends to learning and acquisition of knowledge. The “bu” refers to war and the martial arts which is represented by the sword. This concept is mirrored in Hindu culture by the phrase “Shastra and Shaastra”. Shastra as described above are handheld weapons, which represent the fighting arts. Shaastra is a collection of knowledge which leads to and is generated from wisdom through experience.
So, the idea of knowledge beyond just the martial arts has always been recognized as a necessity for survival and conflict management, which is life in general. It is also recognized that the pen and sword go hand in hand and complement each other. An additional point is that the transmission of both “bun and bu” is couched in tradition. In Hindu culture, this would be “Sampradaaya” which is tradition being the container used to transmit knowledge** (this is beautifully put by Dr. Aarati V B in the video which is linked below).
There is another concept called “Kyojaku jyugo arubekarazu” which is practiced as part of the Bujinkan system of martial arts. It states that there is no hard or soft and no strong or weak. It means that there are no dualities. This is used to remove certain misconceptions that practitioners might have after the basics are trained. One of the ways an individual receives an attack (Ukemi) is to absorb the same. This is saying that the defender moves to a position where the force of the attack is low or has been expended. Thus, that particular attack is nullified. So, a hard attack was received and mitigated by a soft response. It is also the same as keeping the joints loose while falling. This allows the impact to be absorbed and distributed instead of keeping them stiff and causing damage to the joints. After this learning, it is possible that practitioners might think of specific soft options against an attack, as against a hard option which could be a block or counter to the attack. This concept is meant to dismiss the artificial distinction. In a real situation, one does what is necessary, absorb, block or counter as the situation demands. There is no distinction or even the need to consider the same.
If we apply this concept to the pen and the sword, knowing that they can complement each other, it is also clear that they can be applied to oppose each other. This aspect of using the pen and the sword against each other and the concept of “kyojaku jyugo arubekarazu” is explored further in my earlier article titled “Might is Right, always”. The link to this is seen in the notes below1.
Thus, if knowledge or “bun” or “shaastra” and their medium of transmission, traditions, can be applied as weapons, will an attack on the traditions and knowledge systems not be a valid counter to the weapons? Is this not exactly like attacking the supply lines of an enemy to diminish their fighting ability over time? Just as denying food and ammunition to troops to get them to stop fighting is a long known tactic, diminishing a society by messing with its culture, identity and traditions is also a long used strategy. Culture and identity are deeply influenced by “bun” or shaastra, and affect the application of bu or shastra in defence of the same. If these can be defeated, maybe the source of the conflict can be eliminated. And the origin of the ability to use the shastra can also be defeated at the same time. In any case, knowledge and traditions are legitimate targets in a conflict and also valid and useful weapons.
Narratives are the tools of “bun” and “the pen” in the modern world we currently live in. They are vastly more acceptable, and more importantly, cheaper than actual weapons that cause physical harm. It is acceptable to attack culture and civilization as it not harming an individual’s person physically, at least in the near term. It is however unacceptable to cause physical harm in the world we live in, at least in the countries that have functioning democracies. This is true even though an attack on culture and identity might be equally devastating with effects lasting over a long time. Of course, the effect of the narrative also takes a longer time to reveal itself. And there we have it, weapons of “long time”. This is clearly visible in the points in the previous paragraph. Attacking the knowledge, traditions and identity of a society with a series of narratives, yields results only after a consistent attack of years and perhaps even decades, and might only be evident after a century. Thus, it is a weapon that shows its effects after a long time. Similarly, the effects of this weapon will last a long time, as a counter narrative has to be designed and applied to nullify it. Even realizing that an insidious narrative was at work might take time and any counter comes about only after this. So, the weapon causes damage unopposed and unmitigated for a long time before it is countered.
I have to share a point about “shastra” here. Narratives and “the pen” are tools, which can be used to cause damage. If a tool can cause damage, it becomes a weapon and can be called a “shastra” or an “astra”. There is another term we use in India, called “Aayudha”. An “aayudha” in the Kannada or “aayudh” in Hindi, is a commonly used term for “weapon” in India. But, “aayudha” can also be used to refer to “tools”, as in, “tools of the trade”. We have a festival called “Aayudha Pooja” in India. “Aayudha Pooja” is the festival celebrated on the ninth day (Navami) of the Dasara (Dussehra) festival. On this day, everyone pays their respects to the tools that allow them to earn a livelihood. All of us clean and perform rituals where out tools are considered Gods. We all clean our vehicles, engineering equipment, laptops, pumps, machines, switchboards and of course, weapons and training equipment. We then offer our gratitude to these object for their part in supporting our livelihoods. I am not going into the story about the origins of this festival here.
This shows that an “aayudha” is a tool first and a weapon, if necessary. An aayudha becomes a shastra or astra based on the objective of its use. Based on this observation, a narrative is an “aayudha” more than a “weapon”. It is a tool first; the application of the narrative to specific objectives determines if it becomes a weapon or not.
Earlier, I mentioned that using a narrative as a weapon is not entirely different from attacking the supply lines of an enemy. Achieving this could involve subversion, guerrilla warfare, militia and the like, if not conventional military means. This is classified as “unconventional warfare”. Another example of using unconventional warfare would be misinformation campaigns of various hues. One example of this is the use of the fake army by the allies to make the German troops not be sure if the invasion would begin in Pas de Calais and not Normandy. A similar method is supposedly suggested by Chanakya where one should use the bodies of dead soldiers on battlements to make the troop numbers seem larger than what they really are. Apparently Russia is currently using inflatable tanks to fool Ukranian drones.
Also falling under unconventional warfare is the use of psychological warfare. Examples of this include dropping pamphlets to make soldiers and civilians think their army or country is losing a war and break the morale of the society. If I recall right, US forces during the First Gulf War used audio recordings of artillery and tanks to make Iraqi troops abandon their positions and retreat. This allowed a faster and bloodless capture of territory.
Using narratives as weapons would fall under this category of unconventional warfare. It can be used for all of the above – misinformation, psychological assaults, subversion, misleading populations etc. An example of this that is quoted often in India these days, is how the idea devised by Thomas Babington Macaulay was used to destroy India’s traditional education system in the 19th century, first during the Company Raj and later during the British Raj. Traditional education systems being replaced by a British one with elements of it aggrandizing Western Christian culture caused the populace to gradually accept British superiority and lose pride in its own. This is a problem to this day in India and narratives are bring changed after nearly 200 years of the speech by Macaulay in 1835 in the British Parliament where this attack started. Macaulay apparently wrote in a letter in 1837 that Hindus who receive an English education rarely have reverence towards their own religion.
People who toe a line that looks down upon Indian culture as a whole (nobody says it was all hunky dory in the past or that current Indian society is perfect) are derisively called “Macaulay putras” (sons or more appropriately, Children of Macaulay) in today’s India.
Coming to contemporary times, we are currently in election season in India. Everything is political and everyone is an intense political animal whether or not they openly share their opinions. And this means an intense “war” of narratives is on in our country on all forms of media. And this media conflict includes both domestic (includes Indian media with foreign investment) and foreign media (media originating outside India).
Currently India has what many call a pro-Hindu or a “Right-wing” government. Many others say it is a “Left-wing” government with a veneer of being right-wing. Many a time, it is also called a “Hindutvawadi” or “Pro-Hindutva” government. Both sides (maybe many more than two if we consider the minutiae and nuances of the data used) are convinced they are right.
One major achievement of the current government as seen in all surveys time after time, is that it has made Indians a lot more proud of themselves, their country, their history and their culture. This also means that any doubts that Indians might have had about the positives and glory of their identity and past are diminished if not gone. Further, Indians no longer consider western culture as superior even if the quality of life as seen by various indices of human development are better for the western nations. This aspect is visible in the assertiveness of Indians in various walks of life, governance and foreign policy. Of course, all of this is built on continuous economic development.
As a counter, the outfits opposing the government say that India is not doing great. And the main aspect where India is supposedly not doing great is in “democracy”, “human rights” and “equality”. There are umpteen articles that refer to “India backsliding” in the area of democracy. It is claimed that democratic principles and institutions are under attack in India by the government and that press freedom is reducing as well.
One of the evidences quoted routinely to prove the above are the reports and ratings from Freedom House, V-Dem and the World Press Freedom Index (by Reporters without (Sans) Frontiers – RSF). It is interesting to note that the World Press Freedom Index ranks Afghanistan above India. 😛 As is to be expected, stories and articles using these three sources are considered part of a narrative with the reports being components of the same.
Considering what was just said about Indians being more assertive and confident, there is pushback to the above narrative. And the counter is not just to the articles specifically, but against Freedom House, V-Dem and RSF. The methods used by these organizations is questioned and their motives are under scrutiny. This treatment is true for all the western universities and their statements perceived as “anti-India” as well, especially those emanating from the social sciences and humanities departments (history departments receive special attention). When I say western universities, think Oxford, Harvard, Princeton and the like. Indians rarely take these reports at face value or ascribe much importance to them.
That said, the awareness of narratives and other tools of “the bun” and their potential to affect the progress of a nation is considerably higher these days in India. I am linking a few videos and an article below that exemplify this much better2. These are interviews with Mr. Sanjeev Sanyal, who is a member of the Economic Advisory Council to the Government of India. The article is also co-authored by him. He is a very respected thought leader in the country these days, not just in economics but also in aspects of history. In the video he speaks of how he does not accept the reports mentioned earlier and also how he is trying, unsuccessfully so far, to counter their methodology.
Mr. Sanyal also explains why Indians need to learn to counter the “bun” from the west as it could have an adverse impact on our economic progress. He picks out how a new narrative is being built by western think tanks to ensure that their ideas of democracy and human rights are imposed on the world. He specifically mentions the Open Society Foundation, Ford Foundation and USAid as three organizations funding efforts to impose their ways of thinking on the world. He further mentions how the notion of ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) is one such concept they are pushing to control the direction which the world intellectual and economic progress is taking.
How exactly can think tanks influence how people think and how economic progress happens? I will quote an example from my personal experience for this. 20 years ago, I was working in the automotive industry. While there, my colleagues and I were working towards achieving the certification “TS 16949”. I am not sure if this certification is still relevant or used anymore. One of the requirements to achieve this certification was that all our suppliers (vendors) had to adhere to and achieve the certification ISO 9001. In case they were not already certified, we needed to get a confirmation from them that they would do so in a defined time.
So, not only were we as an organization committing to practice certain processes defined by an organization that is not our own, we are also ensuring that our suppliers follow certain practices defined by a certifying organization. This was all supposed to be in favour of having uniform practices that improves the industry as whole. The idea is great as a concept. But there is a hitch.
This certification process forces certain behaviours on organizations. And once an organization commits to it, its employees need to too. And to facilitate this, there are training programs that are put in place. And training is like education, it changes the behaviour and way of thinking of those who undergo the same; it makes them CONFORM. There is no guarantee that this adherence to a process does not limit progress in ways that might have happened if left unfettered.
Also, there is the question of who devised the processes defined by the certifying organizations and what their motivations were. They might have all been good and altruistic, but that is not necessary. Ulterior motivations might have existed, or not, but do we know that ulterior motives might have existed that even the ones who had those did not realize? This is the crux of how think tanks can come to control knowledge, its generation and behaviour.
Consider a think tank with massive resources. They can design processes and behaviours and get governments to subscribe to the same. They can do this with pressure through educational institutions and other “intelligentsia”. Governments can get business houses to follow these new norms. These norms can force businesses to only invest in other countries with “specific rankings” in “select reports” generated by “reputed organizations”. Also, they can mandate that businesses only partner with other businesses overseas who also adhere to these norms. And how does one know if the norms “as desired/expected” are followed? Device certifications to ensure the same. And thus, control is achieved as described in the earlier paragraph. When business do not get certified, they lose out on the potential opportunities and over time the economies of nations get affected unless they and through them their businesses fall in line. Once businesses and the economy falls in line, so does the society, if a little later.
This entire process is all about devising and delivering weapons of “the bun” or Shaastra. Once this is achieved, the tools are in place to build new narratives and deliver opinions that are more judgements, which those at the receiving end might never have asked for. Of course, the new narratives use existing ones to build and further themselves. No one has opposition to ideas like ESG. But once the process to achieving them is revealed, the weapon takes shape. Once the weapon exists, a counter to it comes into being by default.
The previous paragraphs represent the “waza” and “kata” (techniques and forms) of narrative weaponry. Before the above few paragraphs, we discussed how there is a counter in India to the narratives using the reports on Indian democracy coming from abroad. This growth of the counter is also understood by the ones peddling it. A great example of this is seen in the video linked below3. It is a video showing a well-known journalist and columnist in India, Mr. Vir Sanghvi. Mr. Sanghvi states that people on the “liberal” side should avoid making statements that provide “ammunition” to the side that espouses “Hindutva”. And there we have it again. He actually calls statements “ammunition”. Of course, he is saying this in the context of a war of narratives, with “Hindutva” on one side and “Liberalism” on the other. Do we need any further evidence that narratives are weapons and have time based outcomes, considering he wants the ammunition to not be provided while we are in election season?
I am sharing the link to two articles below that could add to the narrative of negativity towards the current government. One article speaks of how ethics in the art scene in India is troubled due to the current government and the other one speaks of why nationalism is a bad thing (based on the writer’s personal life experience). My opinion on both articles is irrelevant, these are just used as examples4 5. The links are seen in the notes below.
Coming back now to actual physical conflict, like tense standoffs and wars between nations, I will quote some examples of how narratives and in general “bun” or “shaastra” are used are weapons. Journalist Pravin Sahwney recently wrote an article on the news portal, “The Wire”. Mr. Sawhney is a well-known journalist and domain expert who writes on matters of defence and national security, specifically from an Indian perspective. He recently published a book titled “The Last War: How AI will shape India’s final showdown with China”. I have not read this book6 (link to the book is seen in the notes below). I have read and seen reviews of the book on other news portals and their respective YouTube channels. In the book, Mr. Sawhney supposedly explains how China is far ahead in terms of technology compared to India in matters of defence and will have a massive advantage in the very near future.
Mr. Sawhney, in his article on “The Wire”, was responding to an article by General Naravane on another news portal, “The Print”. General Naravana is a former Chief of the Indian Army. There is a video on the YouTube channel of “The Print” where Genral Naravane details his article7. A link is seen in the notes to this video. A link is also seen in the notes to the article8 written by Mr. Sawhney. In the article, Mr. Sawhney says that apart from the three conventional arms of the armed forces, the Army, the Navy and the Air Force, China also focuses on 3 others areas, namely, cyber, electromagnetic spectrum and outer space. He further states that in case hostilities breakout between China and India, China will severely affect data in cyberspace, to the extent that it can bring civilian life to a halt and cause extreme confusion in the political decision making sphere. This is by making everyone unsure of what data to believe, misinformation in other words. It will supposedly be impossible to trust any data online. I personally understand his observations as an exponential increase in China’s information and propaganda war.
Based on my understanding, the effect on the government and civilians will happen in a short time and the attacks on data will also happen very quickly. So, this is still using “bun” as a weapon, but it is now not necessarily a “long time” weapon. Maybe this is an evolution of narrative weaponry where it can also double up a quick use conventional weapon.
On the YouTube channel of the news portal “The Print”, the chief editor of the same, Mr. Shekhar Gupta, another very well-known journalist of India, had carried out an analysis of the report by the Special Competitive Studies Project’s (SCPI) on future war and how to confront China. The link to this video is seen in the notes below9. In this video, Mr, Gupta explains, from the report of course, that currently persistent conflicts exist below the level of armed clashes. The report essentially states that information and data warfare is constantly on in the world we live in. Perhaps then, even if the weapons Mr. Sawhney mentions are not necessarily “long time”, if they are to be applied and defended against incessantly, they do constitute a “long time” weapon, because, it is operational for a long duration, which is literally always! A link to the actual report is also seen in the notes below10. This report is truly fascinating and I would recommend that everyone, specifically martial artists, read it.
Another term that keeps coming up when looking at the use of information and data warfare is “intelligentized warfare”. It is used to refer to the use of AI and other latest information technology, which affects the understanding abilities of adversaries. This again goes back to “bun” or “shaastra” or knowledge, which evolves into technology and eventually to intelligentized warfare.
A simple example of this from Hindu tradition is when Lord Krishna used a solar eclipse during the Kurukshetra War in the Mahabharata. Arjuna was supposed to kill Jayadratha before sundown or give up his life. When the eclipse occurred, Jayadratha came out from behind the layers of warriors protecting him assuming the sun had set. But alas, it was an eclipse and not the sunset. Arjuna killed him before the actual sunset. This use of the solar eclipse is also seen in the old Tintin graphic novel, “Prisoners of the Sun”, but is a lot more condescending and racist manner. It is this use of information and a narrative that leads to the weaponization of data. In the case of the Mahabharata, the narrative was that Arjuna was doomed as he had failed, since the sun had set, and the precursor to this was spreading the information that Arjuna had taken a vow to kill Jayadratha before sunset.
In the Bujinkan, there are two concepts that are taught. One is “Kasumi no ho” or “the way of fog”. The other is “Kyojitsu tenkan ho” or “switching between truth and falsehoods like either side of a pivoting door”. Kasumi no ho was the theme of the year in the year 2004, the year after “Yugen no sekai” was the theme. Both these concepts refer to causing confusion, doubt and a lack of trust in one’s own ability to achieve an objective (like a hit or a cut or any other attack). I will not delve into these concepts in detail here. But the negative objective of narratives or “long time” weaponry is essentially the same as that seen with these two concepts.
The above examples refer to the use of “bun” or “shaastra” as weapons against “bu” or “shastra”. In other words using narratives to counter conventional war fighting or just fighting ability. This is as simple as laws (read constitution) being a deterrent against physical violence in societies. But there can be cases where “bu” or “shastra” can be applied to counter “bun” or “shaastra”. Physical violence can be used as weapons against narratives. This is especially true when physical violence can be used against individuals or groups that generate or perpetuate ideas, knowledge and narratives.
Consider that the author Salman Rushdie had to face threats of violence for several years. Also, some years ago, there was a spate of murders in Bangladesh, of bloggers. These bloggers were supposedly rationalists and promoting ideas against the dominant religion. In India a few years ago, there were murders of individuals who were considered by many to be rationalists and atheists. These individuals were promoting views against traditions by what many considered belittling the same. This hurt many who had faith. Also, these individuals were widely known to have leftist associations. In all these instances, ideas of a certain kind, which could morph into narratives were stopped or at least slowed down by applying “bu” against “bun”. For details about the example from India I mentioned, I would suggest a book titled “The Rationalist Murders” by Amit Thadani. Again, I have not read the book, but seen a discussion about the same between the author and a popular podcaster. It was a fascinating listen and I hope to get to this book soon. A link to this book is seen in the notes below11.
I have discussed the application of an ability that is different from the one possessed or used by an opponent in my previous article titled, “Might is Right, Always”. A link to this article is seen in the notes below. It could serve as a precursor to this article.
In conclusion, I opine that a narrative is an aayuda, which is “bun” in nature with characteristics from “yugen no sekai”. We humans being tribal creatures, are always looking to achieve superiority or power over the other, whether it is as and over an individual or a group. The reasons may be myriad, but usually involve personal gain or satisfaction or both. In trying to achieve superiority, I would think that the application of violence is the primal expression of us humans. So it is perhaps the very first of the arts, considering even hunting is the use of violence. This violence changed over time, starting with physical violence to being emotional violence and now, intellectual violence, which is what narratives (“bun” and “shaastra”) are fine tuning in our times. Perhaps, this will lead to spiritual violence when “intelligentized conflicts” make us doubt who we are.
Personal note: I post on alternate Thursdays. But I am posting this on a Sunday instead of a Thursday, so it coincides with the start of the Dasara (Dussehra) festival. The next couple of posts are also likely to not follow the usual Thursday pattern, as I would like them to coincide with the end of the Dasara festival and to be during the Deepavali (Diwali) festival.
+In the Mistborn trilogy written by Brandon Sanderson, “The Final Empire” is the first book. In the series, some characters use a magical ability called “Ferromancy”, which allows the use users to ingest different metals and this act, depending on the metal manifests differing magical abilities. The fictional metal “Atium” when used, allows the “Ferromancer” to literally see the next move an opponent makes. This makes the fight seem one-sided and also like the Atium user is dancing effortlessly and elegantly around the opponent(s). A link to the first book is seen below.
Kaitatsu Gairoku means “do it indirectly”. This is just a phrase from the Japanese language. But it is also a concept that is trained in the Bujinkan system of martial arts. It is understood and applied differently based on the depth and duration of experience of a practitioner in the Bujinkan. Further, this concept is not specific to the Bujinkan. Many martial arts would have this concept with differing descriptions and nomenclature.
As a very simplistic example, consider this. One wants to punch another person in the face. If one has fists raised, the other person does the same, simply to protect one’s own face. In this situation, hitting the other person in the face is difficult, especially if the other person is purely defensive and has no intention of fighting. In case one does throw a punch, the hit might end up on the hands at best, and not on the face.
If however, in this situation, one kicks the other person in the groin, the he or she might double over and also lose focus on the defence of the face. In this situation, the person who threw the kick, might not really need to throw a punch at the face, he or she just needs to keep the fist in the right place, and the other person in the act of doubling over, smashes his or her face against the fist in space. In a way, the person punched himself or herself; it could even be that the person hit the fist with his or her face (obviously, this might never be an excuse with the law! 😛 ). In short, to punch the face, one kicked the groin – the objective was achieved indirectly, by not really attacking the face at all.
Of course, if the person defending moves out of range of the kick, the situation changes. Also, one could punch the hand of the defender and that in turn hits the defender’s face. But the example above was meant to be overly simple and not an exploration of an exact situation.
If we consider this in a more generic manner with training, beginners are taught to move their entire body to effect any movement against an opponent. This is natural where there are no weight categories or rules to control a training encounter, except one’s own awareness to avoid injuring her or his training partner. It is also important as one might be training against a larger, taller, heavier individual. Each situation is unique and requires application of learnings specifically to that encounter.
In such a training scenario, in order to affect the attacker (uke), one should strive to apply minimal strength, and use body movement to cause her or him to be at a disadvantage. This is training to ensure reliance is not only on one’s strength or speed. This is also Kaitatsu Gairoku in a roundabout way. The obvious manner to disadvantage the attacker is to counter attack with strength if necessary, but one uses movement as a substitute. This therefore is doing it indirectly, even if this seems counterintuitive at that instant. Of course, in a real situation where one is in danger, this training is hopefully useful in protecting the person with the training. Also, there is no restriction against using strength or any direct action to save or protect oneself when in real danger. It serves as an added advantage.
When an experienced practitioner is training, other aspects like kyojutsu or distraction techniques, or feints could be considered. Concepts like using timing to “cut the space” to mitigate an attack can also be used. It could even extend after many years of practice to “put something in space”. This refers to doing something, but not specifically to the opponent, it is just done in space, to see if an opening can be revealed that can be exploited. This concept of Kaitatsu Gairoku for experienced practitioners goes hand in hand with concepts like, “do not try to do a technique”, “do not finish the movement”, “keep the connection” (En no kirinai*) and others.
It is essentially a reminder that one needs to stay in the moment and do what is necessary to stay protected and nullify the attack. It is also a reminder to not fall in love with one’s own abilities and knowledge and not try anything actively. This is because an experienced attacker need not leave obvious openings, and worse, he or she might do that to set a trap! It is to remind a practitioner that there is no necessary difference between attack and defence and that one should not label things with past experiences. One only does things indirectly and incompletely at this level with staying alive being the only objective. This realization becomes exaggerated when there is more than one opponent and if weapons are involved (mainly traditional weapons that are not discharged in training, but of course firearms might be involved in real situations).
This realization leads to an iterative understanding that one needs to learn to trust one’s gut feel (Sakkijutsu+), move as necessary (Taihenjutsu) without pride or ego and assimilate the idea that there is no victory or defeat, only survival, so just stay protected (Goshinjutsu). This is doing it indirectly because, now there is no fight or opponent, just a situation to avoid at best or survive at worst. One survives by not being in a fight! This is the epitome of doing it indirectly as one survived a fight by ensuring that the fight did not happen! Not by being there and doing things to survive. Of course, this is a beautiful concept which is incredibly difficult to apply in daily life, not just in training. But it is also intuitively understood by most of us, even without martial arts experience (it also reveals that luck is important in life 😀 ).
So then, how does Kaitatsu Gairoku help with influencing the Gods? In my recent articles**, I have mentioned and discussed how stories from Hindu culture show individuals performing meditation, penances, yajnas and other activities to obtain boons, mainly from Lord Brahma. This boon (vara) grants great abilities to the individual on whom it is bestowed and also protection from various life-threatening people, weapons and situations. These “Blessed” individuals many a time give in to their egos and cause havoc on the planet. Lord Vishnu manifests on Earth in one of his avataras to exploit the “opening” or “loophole” in the Vara and puts an end to the adharmic (I feel it is simplistic to use the word ”evil” instead of adharmic or non-dharmic) activities of the individual.
The path to gaining a boon is very long, hard and even torturous at times. I have gone into this in earlier articles and will not repeat the same here. Anyone who has even a faint idea of stories from Hindu culture would be aware of this. However, there is one aspect of the whole process of Tapas performed by an individual that is not considered in my earlier articles, which I will delve into here.
Many a time, when a determined individual performs severe tapasya (can also be called tapas) for a long period of time, the stories tell us that their efforts cause extreme weather events. Two examples of this would be the tapasya of Hiranyakashipu, father of Prahlad and that of Arjuna, the third Pandava. After Hiranyakashipu had performed tapas for a long time, the whole world started experiencing extreme heat. This caused the Devas, his mortal enemies, to request Lord Brahma to put an end to the tapasya by granting him an audience and hence the boon he desired. Lord Brahma acquiesced and granted Hiranyakashipu an audience and the boon he desired.
Image credit – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
Image credit – “Prahlad”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
When Arjuna was meditating on Lord Shiva in his quest to attain the Paashupatastra, his meditation caused the areas around his place of tapas to become perpetually covered in clouds. This caused the Rishis who lived in the region to request Lord Shiva to end Arjuna’s tapasya by granting him an audience. Lord Shiva relented and stopped Arjuna’s penance with a physical test. The passing of the test led to Arjuna gaining access to the use of the Paashupatastra.
Image credit – “Mahabharata 20 – Arjuna’s quest for weapons”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
Image credit – “Mahabharata 20 – Arjuna’s quest for weapons”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
In both these cases, the Gods might not have been ready to appear before the individual performing the tapasya. But the effect their tapasya had on the weather caused those who were affected by the extreme weather to beg the Gods to get the tapasya to end. In other words, both Hiranyakashipu and Arjuna worked to affect the weather and thus got the Gods to grant them an audience. They even ensured that those who had regular access to the Gods to further their cause by requesting them to not test the person performing tapasya anymore. So, the tapasya, whose objective was to please the Gods, did so, by causing climate change which affected those who had access to the Gods. These individuals or groups either ratified or provided credibility to the tapasya with their own requests. Did this make the tapasya easy? Definitely not. But did it reduce the duration of the tapasya? And thus the duration of enduring great hardship? Perhaps yes, by a little bit at least. Either way, the demonstration of Kaitatsu Gairoku is clear. To impress the Gods, affect something else (weather) which will affect those with regular access to the Gods and get the tapasya fast tracked. 😀
A few additional points need to be considered regarding the examples mentioned above. The first is that the people who requested the Gods to stop the tapasya of the individuals in essence added their own tapasya to that of the person in question. Is this ability to gain the support of others without meaning to (indirectly 🙂 ) a criterion that the Gods would have considered? I have no idea. The second point is that the effect caused is on the weather, and this is one phenomenon that impacts all life on Earth. So, there is no way the Gods can ignore it and in their concern are given to acquiesce to the requests of the many and the tapasya of the one. This in itself could be a huge relief, as some individuals sacrificed their own body parts as part of the tapasya! &
Was the causing of extreme weather events a deliberate ploy in getting the Gods give the one desiring a Vara an audience? Was this a strategy to decrease the duration one spends in activities that allow one to be in the presence of the God one is trying to please? I have not seen or heard of any explanation that it was. But then, I might be overthinking this. So, I do not suggest that it was a deliberate ploy, nor can I assume that affecting the weather was a required demonstration of the powers of one’s tapas. It is just something that happened. But that does not take away from the fact that, there was a means to indirectly influence the Gods. 🙂
Now we must address the elephant in the room. An individual through human actions plays truant with the weather. This is not in any way possible for normal humans either today or in the past. So, it is possible to dismiss everything in the stories as pure fantasy. But all stories in Hindu culture, apart from the obvious entertainment and explicit transfer of knowledge, also serve as case studies, meant for discussion and assimilation of ideas generated from the same. This identification of Kaitatsu Gairoku in the stories is a case of such a realization, at least for me.
To expand further, this is not unlike the strategies in manuals of war and statecraft. Ideas of opening up a new front to cause the enemy to reduce strength in any theatre of war or waiting out the enemy for winter to damage them, and the use of allies or embedded sleeper agents to weaken enemies, are all known from history. All of these are about affecting an opponent(s) in ways other than a direct attack. So, the notion of Kaitatsu Gairoku is not just a part of stories. I have alluded to all asymmetric strengths in a previous article of mine called “Might is right, always”2.
A non-military or non-martial example of Kaitatsu Gairoku from recent Indian history would be the growth of ISKCON. This example is based on the video, the link to which is given in the notes below3. The video is from the YouTube channel “The Carvaka Podcast”, where the host Kushal Mehra has a conversation with author Hindol Sengupta about ISKCON. The conversation is about the book written by Mr. Sengupta called, “Sing Dance and Pray”1. The book is about the life of the founder of ISKCON, Shrila Prabhupada. According to the discussion, the founder of ISKCON Shri Shrila Prabupada was given a task by his Guru to take the word of Lord Krishna to the whole world. While Shri Prabhupada set about the objective, he apparently had little success in India. Later, he moved to the USA in 1966 and founded the ISKCON as we know it today. It found great success in the US and later this success replicated itself in India. The author and the host on the video agree that the success of ISKCON in India would not have occurred without the same in the USA.
In this scenario, ISKCON had to spread the word of Lord Krishna in the US for the same to happen successfully in India, which is the land of origin of the message sought to be spread and of Lord Krishna himself! This is counterintuitive, as one would expect the otherwise. The general thinking for this is that India at that time at least, sought (and maybe still seeks) Western validation and the USA was the epitome of all things Western. Of course, the USA was and still is a cultural powerhouse and wields enormous soft power the world over. So, ISKCON being embraced by the Americans was validation for Indian culture and hence was embraced here as well. This is perhaps the greatest instance of Kaitatsu Garoku I have come across. In simpler terms, Shri Prabhupada had to conquer foreign lands to conquer (for his ideas of course) his own! Plant a home grown idea far away from home, for the idea to take root at home!!
Of course, this extrapolation of mine relating to Kaitatsu Gairoku is not specific to Hindu tradition alone. I notice and expand more on it, with respect to India, is all. One of my current favourite examples about this concept is that mosquitoes evolved and became the human nemeses that they are, because of a change in the tilt of the Earth’s axis! This is beautifully explained in the short video seen in the link in the notes below++. It is a video from the Youtube channel “PBS Eons”.
The other one is from the movie “Django Unchained”. The character played by Christoph Waltz explains to Django (played by Jamie Foxx) how they cannot go to the slave owner played by Leonardo Dicaprio and say that they want to buy his wife’s freedom. He says that if one wants to buy a horse from a farmer, that might not be keen on selling the same, one does not go asking to buy a horse. For if the farmer refuses, all one can do is walk away. One needs to approach the farmer for something else and in the course of the transaction see if the horse can also be bought, maybe as transport for the individual or the commodity being bought. Buy the horse, but do it indirectly. Eventually they go the dastardly slave owner looking to buy a fighter and try to create a situation which would result in their “accidentally” buying his wife. Thus, buy something else to buy the lady in question, indirectly! (buying and selling people is horrifying even when used as an analogy!) Yes, I am using a fictional example from pop culture. This is just to illustrate that the concept of Kaitatsu Gairoku is considered the world over and in multiple walks of life.
Two personal notes –
With this post, I am completing a year of posting on this blog. I sincerely thank everyone who has read the posts, just visited, helped me with feedback & technical suggestions and just been a part of my life in general and budo practice in specific for making this possible. THANK YOU ALL! I hope I have several opportunities to express my gratitude related to this blog (and otherwise) in for a long time to come! 😀
This post will be go online close to my birthday, and I am someone that loves and appreciates gifts. So, while writing this article, I was wondering how I can indirectly (without actually discussing it) get people to give me gifts 😛 . As it happened, I got a gift I needed and a gift I wanted. A close relative of mine gifted me with an investment opportunity and a buyu identified a source to procure some training equipment I wanted. In both cases, the gifts just happened, with no active planning of the same. It was not magic, but in hindsight, a consequence of research, effort and communication on my part with the individuals concerned, though not with this outcome in mind. Guess the training, effort and luck really do pay off, indirectly. 🙂
Anyone who has read stories from Hindu culture or watched TV series based on the same, would have heard of the ability called “Shabdavedi”. This is the ability of an archer (either a hunter or a warrior) to accurately strike a target purely based on the sound it makes, with no visual input at all. It is a highly revered skill and individuals who could accomplish this were considered great archers. I am not aware of how rare this skill was. It essentially means that an archer, even when blindfolded, hears a sound made by a target and shoots an arrow, which unfailingly strikes the target. This is something archers with this ability can always do, and it is not a fluke or a one off.
I am aware of three examples from stories which demonstrate this ability. Two of them are from the Epic Itihasa poems of India, one each from the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. The third is from the historical Epic poem, “Prithviraj Raso”. Interestingly, the use of Shabdavedi in all three examples is related to tragedy; in two of the examples, success with Shabdavedi leads to great tragedy in the future and in the third, it is used in an extremely tragic situation.
In the Ramayana, King Dasharatha (father of Lord Rama) is out hunting at night. He hears a sound that seems like an animal is drinking at a waterhole. As it is dark, he cannot see the animal. So, he shoots an arrow at the animal using his Shabdavedi ability. He successfully strikes the target, but then, tragedy strikes. The target he has hit is a boy named Shravana Kumara. Both of his parents are blind, and in their old age cannot move about on their own. So, being a dutiful son, he carries his parents from one place to another, like a water-carrier, where his parents are seated in two baskets tied to the ends of a pole, which Shravana Kumara carries on his shoulders.
On that day, the parents are thirsty, and the son is filling a vessel at the waterhole to quench the same. Dasharatha’s arrow kills the boy. He begs the distraught parents for forgiveness. But they curse him, stating that just as they would die pining for their son, so would Dasharatha; he would die wishing his son was with him. This curse sets up the events of the Ramayana, where Rama is exiled to the forest and Dasharataha dies unable to bear the separation and his role in all the hardships his two sons and daughter-in-law have to endure for years in the forest. The exile in the forest also leads to the several tragedies that occur in the Ramayana.
In the Mahabharatha, King Pandu is out hunting. He hears what sounds like a deer. He cannot see the animal though. But he uses his Shabdavedi skill and shoots an arrow at his target. The arrow strikes its mark, but then, so does tragedy. Pandu realizes that he has struck not one, but two deer which were in the act of mating. But it turns out that it was a sage and his wife who were being physically intimate in the form of deer. So, Pandu has mortally wounded the sage and his wife. Pandu begs for forgiveness, but the sage curses him. The curse is that if Pandu ever tries to be physically intimate with either of his wives or if he even has thoughts of the same, he will immediately lose his life.
Image credit – “Mahabharata 3 – Advent of the Kuru Princes”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
In repentance of his act, Pandu relinquishes his throne in favour of his blind older brother Dritharashtra and retires to the forest with his wives. Later, he succumbs to the curse in a moment of weakness. This act of Pandu’s sets in motion a whole chain of events, which along with the actions of his grandfather Shantanu lead to the great war of Kurukshetra which resulted in the loss of life and suffering on an unimaginable scale.
In the Prithviraj Raso, after Prithviraj has been defeated at the battle of Tarain, he is imprisoned, blinded, and taken as a prisoner to Ghazni, by Mohammad of Ghor. Prithviraj is humiliated, his armies destroyed and his kingdom is reduced to being a vassal state and has suffered great losses. While in prison in Ghazni, Prithviraj’s close friend, court poet and minister, Chand Baradai, finds him and they hatch a plot to avenge their defeat by killing Mohammad Ghori. Chand Bardai extolls Prithviraj’s ability with Shabdavedi. So, Ghori wants to see a demonstration of the same. An arena is set up and a goat is let into the arena. Prithviraj is also brought in and handed a bow and arrow. The goat is made to bleat, thus providing a target for the arrow. Prithviraj says he will only shoot the arrow on a command from Ghori. Ghori does so and this allows Prithviraj to shoot Ghori instead of the goat as his location is now revealed. Then Chand Bardai and Prithivraj both commit suicide. Thus, they have avenged their defeat despite being severely weakened by circumstances. Of course, this story is not actual history, but epic poetry.
The circumstances of all three examples above might be tragic, but the ability of Shabdavedi was coveted and deeply respected. This is obvious, because any ability to shoot targets without the use of sight is indeed extraordinary and takes a lot of practice to achieve. It is mastery despite the absence of the most vital of human senses, sight, required for archery.
In the Bujinkan system of martial arts, there is a concept called “Sakkijutsu”. This refers to “intuitive ability”. This is among the most important precepts of the Bujinkan. It is referred to most often when practitioners of the art with a lot of experience practice or teach. Sakkijutsu relates to responding to the intention of the opponent(s) and not the action of the opponent(s). Intention occurs before action and hence, responding to the intention gives an extra fraction of time to the defender, which might be vital in saving oneself (or anyone else).
There is no scientific measure that I am aware of to measure the “Sakki” or intuition. The use of intuition is also not something that is taught. It is described and demonstrated, and this allows the ability to be learnt. The ability is learnt and refined over years of training. It is purely experiential learning and requires training physically with fellow practitioners, mentors, teachers and students. But the centrality of this concept in the Bujinkan never changes, even when one is not yet able to express Sakkijutsu.
Since Sakkijutsu relates to intuition, the experience of getting a feel of the situation where the conflict (physical or otherwise) is occurring in, is very important. This includes, the context, individuals, groups of individuals and the overall atmosphere of the place (time & space). All of this adds to the abilities, past experiences, life experiences beyond the martial arts and general wisdom of the individual. These aspects inform one’s intuition, which could also be referred to as “gut feel”. This is very important as one should also realize what cannot be done in managing a conflict and should avoid acts that lead to injury (including psychological, emotional and spiritual ones) and death.
I have referred to intuitive ability and Sakkijutsu in multiple other articles as well. The test to achieve the 5th Dan in the Bujinkan is called the “Sakki test”. It involves one demonstrating intuitive ability and at the same time realizing for oneself that he or she has the ability, and it should be applied in all situations in life. I have described this test in the article related to “Boons, Blessings and Curses” *. The link to this article is seen in the notes below.
The concept of Shabdavedi is offensive in nature, as it is used by the attacker to target a hidden opponent (or quarry). I suggest that the counter to this ability is Sakkijutsu. Sakkijutsu is protective in nature, as it allows the target of the person using Shabdavedi to survive the attack, irrespective of whether it is a human or an animal. If the target can sense the malicious intent of the person shooting the arrow, at the moment when the person decides to shoot as he or she has got a target lock due to Shabdavedi, the target can move in that small instant of time. As the time between the decision to shoot and the release of the arrow is small, if the target is no longer in the same space which is targeted, it is almost impossible for the archer to track and change the targeted space, thus allowing the quarry to survive. Of course, for this to work, the target should also move only when the decision to shoot is made. If it is too early, the archer can sense the movement through Shabdavedi and change his or her target. If the movement is late, well, it doesn’t matter anymore. So, Sakkijutsu is no magic survival card. It is just one extra opportunity to survive, which can hopefully be exploited successfully.
I am not aware of the right word to use in either Sanskrit or other Indian vernacular languages (mainly Kannada in my case) for Sakkijutsu. Antahprajne, Saakshaatkaara (could also mean epiphany), Aparokshajnana, Asaamanya Prajne, Ola Arivu and one I like best, Antarbhoda are the words I found online as a translation for “intuition” in Kannada. The word I found online most often, from Sanskrit, as a translation for intuition, is “Pratibha” (apparently according to the 5th century Sanskrit scholar Bhartrihari). But this also means ability or skill in some cases. So, I will say “Antarbodha” is a counter for “Shabdavedi”, just to square off words from the same language. 😛 But I will use the word Sakkijutsu itself in the rest of the article simple because I am neither satisfied nor convinced with the other words I have found.
A couple of additional points about Sakkijutsu here. Firstly, Sakkijutsu is NOT magic. It is a natural ability which we all possess. The key in its practice is to build trust in one’s own intuition and not second guess its drive. Imagine walking alone in a dark place with no people around. We feel our senses are heightened and are very aware of our surroundings, as threat perception is high and we are in self-protection mode. Similarly, when we are driving through heavy traffic, we get the feel that we need to change speed, change gears, or avoid moving into an empty space on the road. We involuntarily slow down more at some blind turns than at others. Similarly, if there are two roads that can be taken to the same destination, we take one without analysis based on the “gut feel” in that moment. All of these are examples of us using our Sakkijutsu, even if our life is not on the line in many of these cases. There are also cases when we know of a call coming through just before the phone rings. This also happens at work when we realize that someone is looking for us or looking at us just before the person arrives. It is this ability that we apply, train, and refine. I have described this in slightly greater detail in a previous article of mine**, the link to which is seen in the notes below.
The examples of Shabdavedi with which I am juxtaposing Sakkijutsu are from the past. But the practice of Sakkijutsu and instances to elucidate the same I am using are from the present. The second point is relating to this discrepancy. In current times, while Shabdavedi still exists, the levels of technology and the availability of the same make the need for the Shabdavedi fairly unnecessary. So, if we consider an exact situation from the modern day, snipers and their modern rifles can target individuals at ranges greater than ever before. Add to this the use of drones and this range increases even further+. The drone operators need not even be on the same continent. Does Sakkijutsu work in such cases? I do not know. I have heard it said by some practitioners of the Bujinkan who are also veterans of the armed forces that in the case involving snipers, it might. This is because the weapon and its human operator are just like an archer. But I cannot vouch for this information as I have no experience regarding this.
When it comes to drones, the person with the intent to kill is nowhere near the drone. So, is there an opportunity for the quarry to sense the intention of the attacker/hunter? Again, I have no idea. Since there are so many layers of technology, is it the drone or any other form of technology doing the targeting? If yes, as it is not sentient in the same way as a human or any other animal, can it have the same intention? If not, how can Sakkijutsu work, as there is no malicious intent to sense? After all, Sakkijutsu is our ability from when we were prey animals and it is just like a herbivore at a watering hole which is skittish and ready to bolt based on Sakkijutsu, when it gets a sense of danger based on the intentions it feels, and not just based on any of the other senses. If Sakkijutsu is not of much use against drones, is the next step to train and heighten the five conventional senses? Or just start applying other principles of the Bujinkan and other martial arts with drones as the weapons (drones vs drones with martial concepts as the differentiator)? I do not have answers to these questions and would be grateful for any light thrown on the same.
But then, there are a couple of examples that come to mind from ancient times, of Sakkijutsu being applied. These again are from the Mahabharata, and both involve Krishna when he was the charioteer for Arjuna during the Kurukshetra war. Krishna had agreed to be Arjuna’s charioteer and a guide to the Pandava side. But he had sworn that he would not raise any weapon or get involved in the fighting himself.
On the 12th day of the war, the king Bhagadatta, mounted on his elephant (the most fearsome beast in the war) fought Arjuna, who was on his chariot, with Lord Krishna as his charioteer. During the fight, Bhagadatta invoked the Vaishnavaastra. This was a celestial weapon originating from Lord Vishnu. There was no way Arjuna, despite all his abilities and the assortment of astras at his disposal, could counter this weapon, let alone survive its onslaught. But Krishna realized this when the astra was released by Bhagadatta and instinctively stood up in the chariot, letting the astra strike him, thus protecting Arjuna. Of course, Krishna, being an incarnation (avatar/avataara) of Vishnu, could bear the attack of the Vaishnavaastra unlike other mortals. Thus, Krishna, while not breaking his vow of not being involved in the fighting, still saved Arjuna while not raising a weapon. He did this by putting himself in harm’s way.
Image credit – “Mahabharata 33 – Dorna’s Vow”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
I opine that this is an example of applying Sakkijutsu. Sakkijutsu is intuitively doing what needs to be done in a given situation to prevent injury or harm to oneself or anyone else. In this example, in the very short time between the astra being discharged and it striking Arjuna, Krishna intuitively realized a lot of this and acted on the same. He realized that it was the Vaishnavaastra that was invoked, and that Arjuna was helpless against the same. He also instinctively knew what he needed to do as a charioteer, to protect his warrior. He stood up and put himself in harm’s way. It would all have happened in the blink of an eye, and so, it is an instance of Sakkijutsu.
On the 17th day of the war, Karna used the Nagaastra against Arjuna. This astra was infallible and would always strike its intended target, no matter how it was countered. So, Arjuna was in great danger. In this instance, Krishna maneuvered the chariot such that the horses buckled, and the chariot was pushed down by a few finger-widths/inches. This was done at the very last instant. The astra was discharged with Arjuna’s neck as the target. When the chariot was lowered, the astra struck the base of Arjuna’s crown/helmet and knocked it off. The astra did not miss, it struck the space where it was supposed to, only that the space which was occupied by Arjuna’s neck was now replaced by his crown. Thanks to Krishna’s action, Arjuna was saved again.
Image credit – “Mahabharata 37 – Karna in Command”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
Here also, Krishna knew intuitively that he needed to intervene to save Arjuna, and the action that needed to be taken, in a an extremely small duration of time, thus making it a demonstration of Sakkijutsu. Of course, it can be said that Krishna is a God and hence his divine abilities allowed him to do what he did. Add to this, the magical aspects of the weapons involved, and the examples can be considered fantasy. But then, the nature of the actions taken by Krishna in the spur of the moment was instinctive. Plus, the same could be done with none of the magical aspects of the astra by any charioteer to protect the warrior for any number of reasons, thus making them intuitive and not divine intervention. The explanation for the actions were also given after the act, and it was not planned. These aspects make the actions of Krishna in both cases, examples of Sakkijutsu.
Speaking of Lord Krishna as a charioteer and his actions while being one, is a good segue to have a look at charioteers and their abilities during the days of the Mahabharata and maybe in general in India during ancient times. We know the names of famous charioteers and some famous individuals who excelled at charioteering, other than Krishna himself. Some famous charioteers we know of are, Sanjaya, charioteer of Dritarashtra, Daruka, charioteer of Krishna and Maatali, Indra’s charioteer. Other than Krishna, Yudishtira was a great charioteer and so was King Shalya. Shalya was the king of Madra and an uncle of the Pandavas (specifically only Nakula and Sahadeva) as he was the brother of Maadri, wife of Pandu. He was one of the greatest mace fighters of his time, on par with Bhima, Duryodhana, Jarasandha and Keechaka. His excellence as a charioteer is attested by the fact that he was requested to be Karna’s charioteer on the 17th day of the Kurukshetra war. This was when Karna was commander-in-chief of the Kaurava armies and needed a charioteer who could match the abilities of Krishna when Arjuna and Karna faced off. This shows how incredibly important charioteers were and the great regard in which they were held.
Image credit (L) – “Mahabharata 37 – Karna in Command”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
Image credit (R)- “Mahabharata 35 – Arjuna fulfils his Vow”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
When Arjuna fought against the Nivaatakavachas and Kaalakeyas, as repayment for receiving celestial weaponry (and the knowledge for their use) from the Devas, much before the Kurukshetra war, he was granted use of Indra’s chariot, with Maatali as the charioteer. Maatali served as both guide and friend to Arjuna during this time. Daruka, Krishna’s charioteer was tasked with keeping his chariot ready for war in case Arjuna failed to fulfil his vow on the 15th day of the war. And lastly, Sanjaya, apart from being Dritarashtra’s charioteer, was a trusted confidante and advisor to the king. This is why he, of all people, was granted divine vision by Maharishi Veda Vyasa, so that Sanjaya could narrate the events of the war to the blind Dritharashtra. All of these extend the idea that charioteers were respected individuals and important members of the social circles of famous individuals.
Image credit – “Mahabharata 22 – The Reunion”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
Image credit – “Mahabharata 30 – The War Begins”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
I suggest that the reason for this deep respect that charioteers commanded in the society of the Mahabharata was their importance in warfare. I also opine that Sakkijutsu was vitally important for charioteers, or as they are called in the vernacular, Sarathis (Sarathi for singular)++.
A Charioteer and the warrior in the chariot would have been a team, not unlike a doubles team in badminton, tennis, table tennis or any other similar sport. They would need to understand each other and act in tandem, backing each other in case of a mistake by the other and allowing the other to express what he or she is best at. In a war, one of the chariot’s important advantages is its mobility. And when a chariot faces other chariots or cavalry (either horses or elephants) it faces off against other mobile enemies. Therefore, the warrior in the chariot has to strike opponents that are mobile and continuously moving. This is why the wheels of chariots, the horses and indeed the charioteers themselves were always valid targets.
While the warrior focuses on finding, tracking and attacking enemies with arrows, javelins or spears, it would fall to the charioteer to do everything else. In this sense, the warrior is like the weapons officer in a two-seater fighter aircraft. But the charioteer is more than a passive pilot or worse, a driver. He or she (Kaikeyi, Lord Rama’s step-mother, was a famous Sarathi and played the role when Dasharatha fought in battles) did not just take a chariot to a given place as commanded and park the vehicle while the warriors engaged in fighting.
Image credit – “Ramayana”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
Charioteers would need to have a sense of all the following.
the surroundings on the battlefield
the enemies targeting the chariot or the warrior in it or both
the condition of the structure of the chariot
the condition of the horses drawing the chariot
the targets that are feasible and the total set of available targets (like a radar on a fighter aircraft)
the targets the warrior is focusing on and the weapons he is using to carry out the attack
With all the above in mind, he or she has to pilot the chariot in a way that allows the most efficient attack against a specific opponent, while the risk to the warrior and the chariot itself is minimised. It is an act of continuous and dynamic optimization, while one’s own life is on the line. The charioteer needs to move the chariot to avoid an arrow or javelin from striking the warrior if he or she is targeted while the same individual is busy attacking another target on an ever-changing battlefield.
The charioteer also needs to put the chariot in the best place possible, from where a specific opponent can be targeted and attacked. This has to happen while being aware of the ground and if it is conducive to take the weight of the chariot and horses, for they should not get stuck or mired in the mud. The charioteer must also be aware of possible paths to take to either advance or retreat on the battlefield. He or she must also communicate effectively to the warrior all necessary information so he or she can do the job as effectively as possible. The charioteer must also know which targets the warrior can take out while the chariot is moving and when the chariot needs to be stopped to allow for the same. And then there will be idiosyncrasies and pride of the warrior to take into account, the communication of which cannot be allowed to impact their working together in the best possible way.
So, in a way, a charioteer of old is not unlike the smart mission system and electronics of modern-day weapon system (of course, it is OBVIOUSLY NOT an exact comparison). They have great battlefield awareness, inform about radar locks, approach of missiles and dispense flares or chaff or other defensive weapons. They allow electronic counter measures, electronic counter-counter measures and communicate when the firing solution is ready so that the weapons officer can choose to discharge the same. No wonder, a charioteer was revered in the ancient world, they were as important as, if not more important than, the warriors themselves. Imagine an adrenaline pumping chase and fight sequence in a Mission Impossible movie action sequence in the ancient world with chariots facing off to get a sense of the awe the situation can inspire.
In ancient India, there was a community called “Suta”. These days it might be considered an occupation-based caste. Sutas are born of Brahmin mothers and Kshatriya fathers. Several individuals of the Suta community excelled as charioteers. So much so that sometimes it is said that a Suta is a charioteer, even though that is not correct. Some famous Sutas include Keechaka, the great commander of the armies of King Virata of the Matsya kingdom, where the Pandavas hid during their 13th year in exile. He was a warrior on par with Bhima and others as already mentioned. His sister Sudeshna was the queen. This makes her the maternal grandmother of the future king of Hastinapura, Pareekshit, who is also a grandson of Arjuna on the paternal side.
Another revered Suta is Ugrashrava Lomarshana Sauti. He is a deeply respected bard/storyteller. His recitation of the story of Pandavas and Kauravas to Rishi Shaunaka and his students in the Naimishaaranya forest is what is today considered the Mahabharata00. Sutas also excelled as story tellers/bards and warriors as seen from the above examples.
Thus, a Suta (which can also be written Soota to be closer to the vernacular pronunciation) was a very respected and multi-skilled community of the past. But most of us associate the word with the word Sutaputra used in the televised versions of the Mahabharata. Karna, is adopted by the charioteer named Adiratha, who is a Suta. So, Karna is called a Sutaputra as he is the son of a Suta. This term is used by the Pandavas in a derogatory manner towards Karna a lot of the time in the Mahabharata TV series. I am not sure if this is a correct reflection of the original written by Veda Vyasa, in the number of times this term is used in a derogatory manner towards Karna. Considering that Karna is also made a more sympathetic character on TV than he was in the original epic, it is a possibility. This in turn makes one wonder if the Sutas not being as respected on the TV series as they were in the past, is more a result of virtue signalling in the modern-day.
It is indeed a joy to be able to move from Shabdavedi to Sakkijutsu to realizing how important this skill might have been to charioteers and to realize how virtue signalling might keep us from discovering the same.
+There are missiles today that have no explosive warheads, but blades that open out, making mincemeat of the target. This is essentially a very high-tech arrow!
++One of the many names of Lord Krishna is “Parthasarathi”. Here “Partha” is Arjuna as he is the son of Kunti, whose birth name was Pritha (son of Pritha is Partha – pronounced Paartha). “Sarathi” means charioteer. So, as Krishna is a charioteer of Arjuna’s, he is “Parthasarathi”. Also, Sarathi is pronounced “Saarathi”.
00The Mahabharata is three narrations nested one inside the other. The “Jaya” was composed by Maharishi Veda Vyasa and this contained a conversation between Dritharashtra and Sanjaya about all the events that led upto the war, while the latter is narrating the happenings on the field of battle, thanks to his divine vision, which was also granted by Veda Vyasa. The “Jaya” was narrated in a conversation, by Vaishampayana, a disciple of Vyasa’s to King Janamejaya, during the Sarpa Satra conducted by the latter. Janamejaya is the grandson of Abhimanyu, son of Arjuna. Ugrashrava Lomarshana Sauti was present at the Sarpa Satra and witness to this narration. He in turn narrated the narration that he had heard, to Rishi Shaunaka and his pupils at their ashrama in the forest, Naimishaaranya. This is what has come down to us as the Mahabharata.
Today is “World Lizard Day” (August 14th). Tomorrow is the Independence Day in India (August 15th). So, the two were connected (in my head) with a nice little legend from Indian history and I felt like sharing the same. This is unlike my usual posts where I explore the intersections between Hindu/Indian culture and the martial arts (mainly the Bujinkan system of martial arts). I had no idea that there was a day to celebrate lizards! I was told that today was Word Lizard Day by Windows and this new learning triggered this article. There is no specific link between this article and the Bujinkan or any other martial art. But I will definitely make a stretch and try to connect this legend with the martial arts. 😛
In India we share space with a species of monitor lizard called the “Common Indian Monitor”, also called the “Bengal Monitor” (Varanus Bengalensis). It is seen in almost all parts of the country. Along the east coast of India there is another larger species called the Asian Water Monitor (Varanus Salvator). The Common Monitor lizard grows to be between 5 and 7 kg and grows to a length of around 4 feet or a little more. The Water Monitor is almost one and a half times larger in size.
Image credit – someone from my family
The Common Monitor eats small birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians and eggs of all of these. It is in turn eaten by many species including humans, especially when it is young or in its juvenile years. Young monitors have spots while adults are more a uniform grey. It is not a threat to humans. The largest extant monitor lizard is the Komodo Dragon that inhabits a few islands of Indonesia. The largest ever monitor to have existed, as known today is the Megalania, which once inhabited Australia, but is long extinct (early humans who entered Australia are likely to have encountered this monster).
The Indian Independence Day is celebrated to mark the occasion when the British left our country after nearly two centuries. But the notion of Independence is older as I have learnt it, as India has been invaded by outsiders several times over the last 2,500 years. Most of the invaders assimilated into the existing society and culture after capturing parts of the geography. But some over the last thousand years did not and tried to impose external culture, ideas and ways of life on the existing society. And there has always been an attempt to restore self-rule or uproot the invading powers.
During the time when the Maratha empire was being established, as modern history and popular consciousness teaches us, there was a notion of Swaraj or Swarajya, (I have heard it sometimes referred to as Hindavi Swarajya) which means self-rule or more appropriately as I understand it, “our own rule or our own kingdom”. This notion was to ensure that the lands where the Maratha lived were free from the rule of the Mughal empire and some of the Deccan sultanates. Both the Mughals (Turco-Mongol Timurids) and the Deccan sultanates were of foreign origin and Islamic in nature. The Deccan sultanates were far less foreign, but were defeated and supplanted by the Mughals and the Nizam of Hyderabad (a vassal of the Mughals, who later became independent).
The Marathas fought all these powers over several decades and emerged victorious, supplanting or at least subduing all of them. They were the pre-eminent power in India when the British East India Company started having ambitions of power and grandeur. The idea of Swaraj that the Marathas aspired to is the one I am referring to in the title of this article.
One of the great generals of the Marathas was Tanhaji Malusare, about whom a popular and successful Hindi movie was produced in 2020. He, along with his troops captured the fortress of Kondhana, but Tanhaji lost his life in this battle. The fortress is called Sinhagad today in honour of Tanhaji (he was a lion, which is a Sinh and hence Sinhgad, fortress of the lion). This battle was very hard and the Marathas scaled the sheer walls at night, an act of great daring, before defeating the garrison to take fortress.
There is a legend that Tanhaji and his troops used a monitor lizard to scale fortress walls. I am not sure if this legend is specific to the battle of Sinhgad or if they are supposed to have done so in general, in other campaigns. A monitor lizard has very powerful claws and are good climbers. This is a known fact. So, the Marathas are supposed to have tied a rope to a pet monitor (monitors are kept as pets even to this day in many parts of the world), which then scaled the fortress wall and with its strong claws held on as some soldiers scaled the walls and then helped the rest of the troops do the same. The monitor was, in essence, used as a living, trained grappling hook.
Of course, this is a legend and not real history. I have even seen a name that the pet monitor is supposed to have had! A monitor lizard is called a “Ghorpad” in Marathi. Ghorpade is also a last name used in Maharashtra to this day, and obviously it is used in other parts of India as well with migration over the last few centuries. So, from what I have learnt, it is likely that there was a group of people from the Ghorpade community, who were expert rock climbers/boulderers. This team of climbers scaled the fortress first and led the rest up. The climbers were so good that either they were compared to a monitor, or vice versa. This is an explanation for the legend. Considering that the Marathas were successful in achieving Swaraj, the legend of the monitor lizard is inextricably linked to the creation of the same 🙂 . This is the connection between “Swaraj and the lizard”.
The martial arts of the Bujinkan system are sometimes referred to as “Ninjutsu”. “Nin” refers to “perseverance”. So Ninjutsu is “the art of perseverance (or persevering)”. The Marathas, all through their existence as a power centre in India, from being a small one in the mid-17th century all the way till their fall in the early 19th century, fought in different terrain and against all odds. They mastered guerrilla warfare apart from fighting pitched battles and fighting in the forests and mountains. They also developed a very effective navy.
During the time when Mughal emperor Aurangzeb fought them for twenty six years, most of which he spent in the south, the Marathas fought a running war. Many of their commanders were examples of “living in the saddle”. To fight a numerically superior force, they were extremely mobile and fought as light cavalry, leaving behind their artillery. The Marathas eventually wore down and defeated the Mughal invasion.
There is a wonderful book called “Battles of the Maratha Empire” by Aneesh Gokhale*. In the appendix of this book, Mr. Gokhale lists the battles fought against Aurangzeb. The battles fought were from central India all the way to Tamil Nadu. The Maratha troops literally rode across peninsular India to fight battles. They did this week after week, all their lives, for multiple generations. This is the very DEFINITION of perseverance. Add to this their ability to fight in different terrain and different foes, from the Deccan sultans to the British, each in a different manner, and across two centuries, they are the very picture of the “art of persevering”. So, purely as the definition goes, they were true practitioners of Ninjutsu. Of course, this is only with the benefit of hindsight, but the concept holds as far I am concerned.
Now, I have one last point, on a lighter note. The popular image of the Ninja is that of a black clad warrior who is doing secretive activities like a spy or Special Forces operatives. The ninja is seen in a solitary manner or in small groups. One tool that is fairly often associated with the ninja is the “kagi nawa”. The kagi nawa is a rope with a hook, a grappling hook, used to scale castle walls in Japan (or elsewhere in modern movies). This tool also doubles up as a weapon if the situation demands.
Considering that this article is about a grappling hook (!) albeit a legendary live one in the form of a lizard and an oft represented ninja tool/weapon is the grappling hook (kagi nawa) as well, just revisiting a legend of how a lizard aided in the formation of Swaraj, turns the Marathas into Ninjas! 🙂 Of course, as already stated, this last bit is in a lighter vein and should only be considered inasmuch that it brings one to smile.
I usually post on alternate Thursdays. But considering the Independence Day tomorrow, I am making an exception and posting on a Tuesday, two days before schedule. I will revert to the usual Thursday posts from 31st August.
Some absurdity – If I had to stretch the connections above further, I would link the monitor lizards to martial arts as well. Monitor lizards are found in most of Africa, West Asia, the Indian Subcontinent, South East Asia, East Asia and in Australia as well. Many Monitor species, when they need to establish a pecking order or fight over mating rights, wrestle each other. They grapple while standing on their hind legs with support from their tails. Across almost all the territories they inhabit, humans also have strong traditions of the martial arts, if not specifically unarmed wrestling itself! So, the lizards are as martial as the humans. 😀
The test for the fifth dan in the Bujinkan is also called the “Sakki” test. Sakki here generally refers to “intuitive ability”. For those that are not a part of the Bujinkan, I am describing the test. The test involves two people, one administering the test and another who is being tested. There are other people around who determine if the person passed the test or not. The person administering the test and those determining if the test was a pass or not are all holders of the 15th dan, which is the highest rank in the Bujinkan system (there are a couple of other higher administrative ranks).
The person taking the test sits in an approximation of the Vajrasana and the person administering the test stands behind her or him. Both the individuals have their eyes closed for the duration of the test. The person in Vajrasana is hopefully in a meditative state. The person standing behind her or him cuts down at her or his head with a padded/training sword. The expectation is that the person in Vajrasana should sense the attack based on the intent of the person cutting and move out of the way just in time (not too early either). If he or she moves in time and does not get hit, the test is a pass, else it is a fail, and the person has to try again. When it is said “move”, it could be a roll, break fall, getting up in time, or anything else. The “pass or failure” in the test is determined by the other 15h Dans who are observing the test or by the Soke, Hatsumi Sensei himself.
The key for this test is to “sense the intent of the cut”. The intent is present before the action of cut and hence the person will always survive being hit if he or she moves in response to the intent and not in response to any other of the five senses. The stimulus from these five might not allow time enough to get out of the way of the sword.
From my teacher and all my seniors and mentors, who have greater experience with the Sakki test, I am given to understand that the test is for both the person cutting and the one evading the cut. While the person who passes the test is the one who evades the cut, the true challenge apparently is for the one cutting. It is the responsibility of the person cutting to establish a connection with the one taking the test. If they can establish the connection, they are also successful in transferring the intent to the person, which triggers the movement. So, the test is more to allow the person being tested to realize that he or she has the intuitive ability and can trust the same, it is not to test the extent or timing of the same. This in turn puts the responsibility of the passing or failing on the person delivering the cut. So, if the person fails, it could mean that the person cutting did not have the connection with the person taking the cut. And this is perhaps why many people who have given many cuts to different people think it is a responsibility to “give a good cut”. I have seen people tell each other that they are sorry that they could not give a good cut as well. There are a lot of videos of the Sakki Test on YouTube, which one can look for to get a sense of the same. I am not going to link any as it is impossible to decide which one is the best representation of the same. 😊
The challenge in the test is that all external disturbances which could distract one from the task at hand, the test, is removed, as are all other stimuli like sound, sight, smell and touch. Pure instinct might be triggered if one is not thinking of the same, but just thinking about it makes it very hard and the removal of the five conventional senses acts in the same way.
Thus, the key to the entire 5th dan test is the “connection” between the tester and the tested. And this important aspect of the test led to this article. I will hopefully elucidate this key concept with what has been normal behaviour in Hindu culture over a very long period of time.
Anyone who has watched even a few episodes of the many “Mythological” serials on the various TV channels would have seen one character or the other seeking the Aashirwada (or Aashirwad) of many others. An Aashirwada can be considered a “Blessing”. The act as seen on TV would generally involve one character who is either younger by age or achievements or abilities, touch the feet of another character or perform a prostrated namaskaara at the feet of the other, either in greeting, farewell or to specifically seek the blessing of the other person. The other person obviously has greater experience or wisdom in any of the attributes just mentioned and offers blessings.
Credit for the images (left to right) – From “Enter Drona”, Mahabharata – 5 & “Hanuman to the rescue”, both published by Amar Chitra Katha
Some of the oft uttered blessings we see are (this is a very small sample set) –
Aayushmaan / Aayushmati Bhava – Have a long life
Vijayee Bhava – Be victorious
Yashaswi Bhava – Be successful
Keertiman / Keertimati Bhava – Be well known / achieve fame
These examples are from Hindi. But the same can uttered in any of the many languages in India. Most importantly, this is not an act just seen on TV or web series. Seeking the blessings/aashirwaada is an ancient practice that all of us continue with to this day. We specifically seek the blessings of elders and gurus. As we get on in our years, we might have to bless the youngsters in the family, and this need to be ready to pass on the blessings is what prompted this article.
Are the blessings just words that are uttered? Like wishing someone well? Or can they genuinely have a beneficial impact on the person who has received the blessings? And if the effect has to manifest in reality, what are the requirements on the part of the one giving the blessing and the one receiving the blessings? These are questions I do not have answers to, and any answers for the same would be welcome. But I do have some thoughts on the matter which I shall share. These are purely opinions based on personal experience, observation, and martial training.
Blessings are important to different people to varying degrees, depending on their upbringing, life experiences, association with specific individuals, association with places and objects linked to individuals and associations of many other types that people can think of. Places are considered sacred or blessed based on their association with Divinities or events that are associated with the same. Sites of old family homes are also considered blessed due to association with one’s own grandparents and ancestors. In these cases, the effort put into the journey to get to these places itself becomes achievement of an “experiential blessing”, where the experience of the journey is part of the blessing.
Either way, whether the blessing is from a person or due to a journey or a location, the connection is key. Belief is a connection, or at least the “option of giving a connection a chance”. Based on this observation, in my opinion, the blessing is no different than the ability to transmit intent in the sakki test, with the “connect” being the key aspect in both. In a conventional setting, the “intent” is the good will or desire for success of the one seeking the blessing. I opine that just as one can transmit intent in the Sakki test, the good will can be transmitted if the “connection” between the one blessing and the one seeking the same is strong. And just as the intent in the test can move a person, the will of the person blessing, can positively impact the one being blessed. This will be explored further below, with boons and curses.
Blessings of a more specific nature and perhaps of a more powerful variety can be called “Boons” and the opposite of “Boons” are “Curses”. Blessings are much simpler and seen in all human interactions where elders and teachers “wish for” or “bless” their wards, students and juniors, a favourable outcome in life. Let us consider “Boons” and “Curses” for a further exploration of connection and control.
Once again, anyone who has read stories from Hindu culture will surely have noticed the following two things. People meditate and perform penance(s) to earn “Boons” that grant them abilities beyond those of normal humans, and make the ones earning the boons almost equivalent to Gods. On the other side of the same, great Sages “Curse” people and even the Devas and Gandharvas for their indiscretions and mistakes, the consequences of which are dire and painful, and have to be endured for long periods of time.
A Boon is called a Vara in Kannada or maybe Var (if the language is closer to Hindi than to South Indian languages). Varadaana or Vardaan is the granting of a boon. A Vara is more than a Blessing in the stories. It grants the one receiving the same special abilities. These could include very long life spans, protection from harm from all but a few forms of attack, great knowledge or wisdom, incredible strength beyond that imaginable by any mortal human, or the ability to possess, use and retrieve weapons of unimaginably destructive potential.
Obtaining a Vara is no easy task. Firstly, one needs to demonstrate the eligibility to request a Vara and then also demonstrate the traits needed to wield the ability granted by the Vara. One requests the granting of a Vara by great beings that are not human or are superhuman; Varas are granted by the Devas or Lord Brahma or Lord Shiva. Even earning their presence requires expending great effort over long periods of time. Getting these divine beings to appear before one where the request for the Vara can be made is the demonstration of eligibility to ask for a Boon.
A common feature we see in many stories is that the means to request the presence of a divine being is meditation, also referred to as penance. This is shown as meditating on the God whose presence is being requested with singular focus for long durations of time, with no breaks. In the case of Arjuna when he was on a quest to acquire the Paashupataastra, Lord Shiva tested him by appearing in human form and forcing him to fight, and thus reveal his abilities, apart from just the meditation. Based on my understanding, the qualities that are demonstrated while performing Tapas (meditation) are, perseverance, dedication, focus, drive, resistance to pain, self-control and most importantly, letting go of the self **.
If the God whose presence is desired is impressed or convinced by the qualities seen, she or he appears to the person performing the meditation and grants them the opportunity to request a Vara of their choice. The letting go of the self is shown in some stories to be so complete that anthills or trees grow on the person, as if they were just a rock and not a sentient being anymore. There are also cases where there are multiple tests like with Arjuna that have to be overcome, apart from the meditation; these could be as diversions or disturbances to the meditation or something that needs to be endured in one’s life (the duration may vary).1
Image credit – “Dashaavatara”, published by Amar Chitra Katha (Kindle edition)
Many individuals request immortality and are denied the same as it goes against the natural order of things, and are told to request something else that will aid in the ambitions of their lives. A miniscule sample of Varas requested by individuals are mentioned below. Observe that these Boons could be granted to extraordinary individuals who went on to become “villains” in their lifetimes due to tremendous ego post the acquisition of the Vara.
Taarakaasura requesting Lord Brahma to be unkillable by anything other than a son of Lord Shiva (when Lord Shiva a widower and in deep meditation for ages).
Arjuna requesting Lord Shiva to grant him the ability to use the Paashupataastra.
Hiranyakashipu requesting Lord Brahma to be unkillable by any human, animal, weapon, during the day, at night, inside or outside any structure.
Mahishaasura requesting Lord Brahma to be unkillable by any male.
Credit for the images (left to right) – “Prahlada” and “Arjuna’s quest for weapons”, “Mahabharatha – 20”, both published by Amar Chitra Katha
A Curse is the opposite of a Boon. A Curse is a called a “Shaapa” in Kannada and Shraap or Shaap in Hindi. While a Vara bestows a specific ability or protection to an individual, a Shaapa or Curse causes a specific & severe problem to the individual who has been cursed. Many a time, once the curse is uttered, the person who is cursed is penitent and begs for forgiveness. When this happens, the person who has uttered the curse also states a remedy to the same. But there is definitely a long period of suffering involved before the curse is lifted.
Credit for the images – “Yayati” published by Amar Chitra Katha
In this last aspect a Shaapa is like a Vara; in one case it takes a long time of repentance with inconvenience to serve out the time of the curse and in the other, one needs to endure a long time of inconvenience to be eligible to ask for a Boon. So, in either case the qualities one must acquire and demonstrate are the same, even if the origin of the demonstration is opposite in nature. Surviving a curse has a root cause beyond oneself while the effort to gain a boon lies within oneself. In a way a curse is surviving an uke’s (opponent’s) attack while a boon is being a tori (defender), voluntarily against an uke. Striving for a boon also has an aspect of the Musha Shyugyo (warrior’s journey) in that the journey begins voluntarily and the person who ends the journey is much changed from the one who started the same, due to the trials and hardships endured during the same.
From my recollection of stories from Hindu culture, curses are uttered by great Sages or Maharishis who have several years’ worth of Saadhana (practice in the right rituals, meditation and scripture) and knowledge. They utter the curse due to a grave indiscretion or blunder on the part of the person who is being cursed. These mistakes generally stem from an inflated ego after great achievement and this mistake then messes with the natural order, or rhythm of goings on in the universe. A tiny sample set of curses are mentioned below.
Durvasa cursing Indra to lose his strength, ability and “Tejas” (radiance or vitality)
Agastya cursing Nahusha to live on Earth as a snake until he is relived of the same
Shukracharya cursing Yayati to perpetual old age unless one of his sons is willing to exchange his youth with him
Apsaras and Gandharvas are cursed on many occasions for losing a sense of space and propriety while performing the arts in the presence of others
Ahalya & Indra being cursed by Rishi Gautama for their infidelity
Credit for the images (left to right) – “Nahusha”, “Hanuman to the rescue”, both published by Amar Chitra Katha
A curse has consequences for both the person who utters the same and the one who is cursed. Perhaps this is true in the case of a boon as well, but may not be apparent in the stories as the entities bestowing the Vara are divine and there is no comparing such a being to a human, and so consequences are hard to identify. However, a curse, even when uttered by a Maharishi, is still by a human being acting against another human, even though the one uttering the curse is a highly evolved and accomplished human.
A case of the person cursing another and paying for the same is seen in the story of Rishi Brighu cursing Lord Vishnu for not receiving him as a good host should, when he visited Vaikunta (Lord Vishnu’s abode). Rishi Brighu, in his arrogance cursed a God! One of the Trimurthy no less! Lord Vishnu accepted the curse and touched the feet of the Rishi, but while doing so, he blinded the eye that existed in the foot of Brighu. This eye had allowed the Rishi to walk fast and almost float on the ground while not having to use his two normal eyes while moving about. But after this incident, he was forever slowed down and a great deal of his arrogance went with his extra eye.
Image credit – “Venkateshwara Taanada Chitragalu”, published by Pioneer Publications – above image depicts Lord Vishnu accepting the curse by Rishi Brighu as described earlier
I have not heard of any stories other than this one that explicitly mention the consequences of uttering a curse or bestowing a boon on anyone, for the person who delivers either the boon or the curse. When I mean consequence in this case, I refer to the ability or skill or strength that is expended in making the boon or a curse a reality. But this can be inferred from the story of the great sage Vishwamitra.
Before he became the Brahmarishi Vishwamitra, he was the king Kaushika. The king Kaushika wanted to become a Brahmarishi who would be considered an equal to the Brahmarishi Vasistha. So, he performed severe penance and meditated for years to achieve the abilities of a Brahmarishi, one of which was a complete control of one’s senses and desires. On three occasions, after developing great abilities on the path to becoming a Brahmarishi, he had to expend the gained abilities to succeed in activities he indulged in.
Once, his meditative focus was broken by the extremely beautiful Apsara, Menaka, which whom he later had a daughter. This was a case of not having mastered his senses and desires. Next, after achieving great prowess through meditation, he expended the same in creating a second Swarga (roughly translated as Heaven or the abode of Lord Indra) for the King Trishanku who wanted to enter Swarga without first dying. On the third occasion, he expended the abilities developed through austere meditative penance in trying to show low, the King Harishchandra, whose values he wanted to see broken (Vishwamitra failed and Harishchandra never strayed from his values).
In all three situations, Vishwamitra lost the abilities already developed and had to start with a great deficit on the path to becoming a Brahmarishi. He eventually did succeed, but the concept is quite clear. Acting on a boon or a curse, if we can consider the creation of a second Swarga as a boon and causing hardships to Harishchandra as a curse, results in the great Sage expending abilities developed over many years. It takes equally long to develop the same abilities again. I personally think a good analogy here could be an accident endured by a sportsperson or a martial artist. A lot of time is spent in recovering from the injury first and then even more time is spent is training the body and mind back to the peak they had once scaled, if this is at all possible.
Alternatively, it can be considered as the effort one has to spend in achieving a successful attack, like a flurry of punches and kicks at great speed or relentless grappling, both of which require a vast investment in money, time and effort to execute in the first place, and then to survive with successful execution; then there is the risk of injury and failure, which require more time and energy to overcome and try again later, if necessary. In a modern context, it is like investing in an expensive weapons platform like a drone swarm; losing it in a failed mission and then having to invest in a better platform and further resource expenditure in creating or refining doctrines for the usage of the new platform.
So, the boon or the curse, requires the person who bestows either to have already achieved complete control over the self and several other aspects of the universe. An extraordinary example of this would be the boon given by Maharishi Durvasa to Kunti. He was pleased with her attention to duty when she was in charge of his hospitality when he visited her father Kunti Bhoja. So, he granted her a boon which allowed her to summon the Deva of her choice to bestow a child on her, and she could do this 5 times! So, Maharishi Durvasa could grant the ability to summon a Deva to a human being! This means that we cannot even begin to comprehend the abilities that Durvasa possessed!
Image credit – “Bheeshma’s vow”, “Mahabharata – 2”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
This example brings into focus another aspect of a boon or a curse. The person bestowing either, on another individual, can actually control multiple aspects of the universe and get them to behave differently for specific individuals for several years at a time. This of course is impossible for mortals and the examples from the stories are all of extraordinary humans who are on par with the Gods or the Gods themselves, when they are uttering the boon or the curse.
But let us look at this from a more mundane everyday aspect. But before we consider examples from our everyday life, I share an opinion of mine. Boons, curses and blessings are transactional in nature. These are received in response to specific actions. The person receiving any of these will have performed a series of actions for a duration of time, which results in the person towards whom these actions were directed, bestowing the boon, curse or blessing. But there is a difference between blessings (aashirwaada) and boons (vara). The shaapa is not something one works towards but is the result of an indiscretion and perhaps a result of not letting go of one’s ego and NOT working correctly towards whatever the objective was.
A Vara is something specific that a person wants and can be granted by a superior or divine entity. In order to gain an audience and demonstrate eligibility for the vara, she or he performs the requisite actions, which can be physical or meditative in nature. But a blessing need not be something that is specifically worked towards. One performs one’s duties or responsibilities with complete focus and attention to detail. This is a demonstration of great self-control and management of one’s reaction to given surroundings. The individual(s) who are on the receiving end of this diligent activity are greatly pleased by the same. This results in the impressed person offering a blessing as a reward in return for the services or whatever else was received.
So, an aashirwaada need not be sought after, but is received as a reaction to a job or an activity well done, where as a vara is something that is sought after and activities are performed towards that objective. Consider this, the boon bestowed on Kunti was actually a blessing. Her hospitality towards Maharishi Durvasa was not with the objective of a boon, but just a job well done. In response to this, she was blessed by Durvasa with the boon. Now consider the Tapasya performed by any great Asura, say Hiranyakashipu, this was with the specific objective of achieving a boon which bestowed great abilities on him, which would in turn allow him to defeat the Devas.
A simpler example of a blessing would be an elder blessing someone younger with a long life, when the younger person touches her or his feet. The blessing in this case is a reward for remembering that this is the right way for a youngster to greet an elder. This system is also a good positive reinforcement in preserving one’s culture and way of life.
With the above observation, we can consider a few situations from daily life, which could represent boons, blessings and curses. We have all experienced appreciations and rewards at work. These range from appreciative emails to merchandise to pictures on a “wall of fame”. These are more common compared to promotions and pay hikes. They are handed out more often as they are less expensive to organizations and also reinforce (hopefully) behaviour that is preferred. We also tip generously depending on the quality of service we receive at hotels and restaurants. These, in my opinion, are analogous to blessings as they are in response to an impressive activity.
Now consider promotions and pay hikes. These are much harder to come by and are objectives which require a plan and set activities that demonstrate eligibility. An individual spends a few years understanding what the parameters needed for either of these are, and working towards the same. It requires networking, measurable achievements and the sheer effort to achieve visible experience. So, the pay hike or promotion here is a vara/boon and the activities are the tapasya or saadhana that goes into achieving the same. This is because it is a specific objective that is worked towards.
What about shaapa and curses? The explicit situations that define these are cases where one has to leave a job or bear the cost of activity or behaviour that lead to integrity issues. These can be one misusing client data or accepting bribes at work to alter expected decisions. It is a negative consequence of errors at work. When these are inadvertent, the curse could be very minor, like a mail with an apology which smooths things over.
But a curse could also be invisible and long term, which is also realized much later. These could be situations where one’s relationships are broken due to too much self-indulgence in career related objectives, or a sportsperson suffering debilitating injury due to not enough breaks or insufficient detraining time. This is akin to the statement “the path to hell is paved with good intentions”.
A last point regarding blessings here. Many of us would have experienced situations where we receive appreciation mails or certificates and don’t really care for them and are definitely not motivated to either repeat the same kind of hard work or keep up the level of effort that resulted in the appreciation in the first place. This happens for many reasons, especially if there is a statement like “we need to do even better the next time”, which makes the appreciation more of an expectation setting. This could also be as there are blessings given when one is working towards a boon (appreciation instead of a pay hike). Why would this kind of mismatch occur? I opine that this is due to what we discussed initially about blessings, boons and curses. A distinct lack of “Connect”. Individuals know when the appreciations are just a matter of course after some time and also when they come from senior leadership who have no visible impact on their work lives. All they do is append a signature to a set of words composed by someone else. So, there is an attempt at a blessing, but the lack of connect, renders it empty of any effect. This connect I am referring to is the rapport that any leadership develops with its teams and how it is nurtured through trials and tribulations at work.
Having considered how blessings can be rendered pointless, we need to consider cases even from the stories in Hindu culture where boons could end up being curses. Remember the blessing that became a boon to Kunti by Maharishi Durvasa? Kunti after the rishi had departed, either in innocence or curiosity invoked the boon, with Lord Surya, before she was married. This resulted in the birth of her son Karna, whose life was partially responsible for the great carnage in the battle of Kurukshetra apart from being an extraordinary tragedy on a personal level. So, a blessing was a boon, the use of which with no negative intentions still became a curse not only for Kunti but for entire kingdoms!
Image credit – “Bheeshma’s vow”, “Mahabharata – 2”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
Similarly, Ashwatthama is cursed by Lord Krishna at the end of the Kurukshetra war. He is denied the release of death and is functionally immortal for the rest of the Yuga cycle. An additional point is that a wound in his forehead caused by removing a jewel that was present there would never heal. This was a jewel that always granted him good health. If one recalls, all the great Asuras asked for immortality from Brahma to compensate for the Amrita the Devas had. But when the same was not an achievable boon, they asked for other great abilities that enabled them to subjugate the Devas despite the Amrita. So, Ashwatthama was granted immortality, which was considered a desired vara by many, as a curse! An extension of this could be that the boons achieved by the great Asuras always resulted in incredible pain and hardship as a result of the wars they unleashed. So, a boon for them became a curse for many others. And this resulted in the many avataaras of Lord Vishnu to slay these Asuras. So, the line between a boon and a curse is thin, but not invisible.
The means to assuage this problem also returns to the twin concepts of connection and control. One needs to continue with the self-control one possessed before receiving the boon after the act, perhaps to a greater degree. This is because the person enhanced by the boon possesses a far greater potential to cause damage to the universe around her or him. In other words, her or his ability to control the surroundings requires an equal increase in self-control to prevent her or his boon from becoming a curse for others! And in order to keep the control of others benevolent or at least less harmful, the ability to connect with others and better feel or empathize with their motivation and desires is vitally important. So, a boon or a blessing, degenerates into a curse over time with a lack of connection and control.
A modern-day example of a boon tending towards a curse is international monetary aid. We hear terms in the media of some countries being “addicted to monetary aid from the IMF (International Monetary Fund)”. In Indian media this is used in the context of countries like Pakistan and Sri Lanka. In the case of Pakistan, the country has never developed a governance system that allows the country’s economy to expand and its populace to prosper. It has approached the IMF multiple times, every few years, to save it from economic defaults. The aid package from the IMF is a boon which is used with no connect with the needs of the country and its populace, and becomes an addiction, and this is a curse.
This observation can be expanded to the economic and military aid the USA provided to the various dictators in South and Central America, Africa and the Middle East during the Cold War years. The aid allowed friendship between the dictator (not the country) and the government of the USA, but this allowed the USA to control the dictator keep the socialist and communist rebels at bay. However, this control did not allow prevention of atrocities on the population of the countries. So, the boon of aid led to “control through benevolence”, of the dictator, but the same became a curse in the long term for the populations of several countries. This is not unlike blessings from fake spiritual Gurus who are basically conmen. They have wonderful words and can connect with people, but their intent can only generate empty blessings which are definitely not boons but could be curses, as they have no control over anything, not even themselves.
The converse of this could be true as well. And we can consider something I have heard from a very senior practitioner of the Bujinkan as an example of this. My mentor says that in all your interactions with people, try to connect with them, get a sense of their requirements, what makes them happy, what really troubles them and the like. This connect is to be done in earnest, not with an objective of studying them, like one might study bird behaviour. This kind of connection could turn to a good rapport or friendship and lead to us providing really useful suggestions while not seeming superior or overbearing. This leads to them remembering the connection and might result in their feeling responsible for helping us when we need the same. This is “control through gratitude, camaraderie and responsibility”*. The words used are the same as those used in the earlier paragraph, but the context is entirely different! My mentor says that this is an objective of all Bujinkan practitioners and should be a key goal of training. He says that one should be able to control rooms full of people with this ability to connect. But of course, a connection on this level is really hard to achieve and requires self-control abilities that sometimes seem to be just wishful thinking. 😛
One last point regarding control here, at a level simpler than the one mentioned in the previous paragraph. From being generous with tips to approving promotions to enforcing a separation from a job to sending appreciation mails, all these instances stem from a connection, but can only be enacted when there is control over multiple aspects to ensure the desired outcome, be it the situation (appreciation mails), budget (pay hikes), seniority or responsibility (promotion or separation) in organizations. When this control is employed, it could lead more connect and even better control, like a virtuous cycle.
The appreciation mail that is not of any motivational value is a case of control without connect, control of the situation where one is aware of the outcome that warrants the appreciation and the ability to send the same, but no connect that adds value to the words of appreciation.
This aspect of control is also true in the martial arts. I have discussed connect and control with respect to the martial arts in greater detail in my previous article, the link to which is seen in the notes below***.
In conclusion, it seems quite clear that the concept of self-control and connecting to others and one’s surroundings as a precursor to control over others and the environment, even in a benevolent manner is something that humans have considered and chased after for a very long time. It is something that never ends and requires perpetual reinforcement, in the form of case studies which are what the stories from Hindu culture are. And their application spans everything from fighting and conflict management to daily life.
Notes:
*One of the Gojo we are taught in the Bujinkan states “Fumetsu no fusei”. This roughly means “give and give” or “endless giving”. It could mean that one thinks of giving and not the return on investment. This is one of the paths perhaps to the point mentioned above. But then, there is also a concept called “Sente” which is roughly “not making the first move” because one might then become the Uke or attacker and present openings to the opponent/defender. These two points appear to be contradictory, but they depend on the context in which they are used. So, the intent – whether it is benevolence or malice – becomes the key factor while deciding whether “fumetsu no fusei” or “sente” is in action. I have discussed the Gojo in an earlier article, the link to which is seen below.
An interesting connection between Budo and Bharatiya tradition
There are two concepts that are taught in the Bujinkan system of martial arts which are very simple to state but extremely difficult to express and achieve. The two concepts are “Connect” and “Control”. These concepts are mentioned to everyone practicing in the Bujinkan from their early days as practitioners and fairly often. But they are only expected to be practiced in earnest after several years of experience. Let me attempt to express what these concepts mean (at least to me), how they are intended to be understood and the context for the same.
I will start with the concept of “Connect”. There are four other concepts that have been shared as part of the training in the Bujinkan over the last seven or eight years. I have heard these from my teacher and mentors who in turn have heard the same from Soke Hatsumi Sensei back in Japan. These concepts are,
Do not use strength (Chikara Janai)
Do not fight (Tatakai wa Janai)
Match the Uke/opponent (Awaseru)
Do not sever the connection (En no Kirinai)
The original Japanese phrases that convey the idea are also mentioned above. There are several practitioners with vastly greater experience than I that have written about and explain each in detail. I would encourage everyone to read the same. I am not going into the etymology of the same and will stick to learning from my own personal training and experience.
When the statements “do not use strength” and “do not fight” are mentioned, they do not in any way denote or promote pacifism. They are referring to how one should not have an ego driving their actions in the fight. Using one’s physical strength might win an individual some fights. But it will not necessarily win all fights. One will always face opponents who possess greater physical strength. In a situation where there are multiple opponents, it is highly unlikely that one’s physical strength will match up to the combined strength of the opponents. Further, physical strength will wane to varying degrees for individuals with age. The well-known and obvious solution to this is the development of skill through a lot of training. Martial skills developed through training augment existing strength and also help overcome the strength of the opponent. It is also a means to reduce one’s own dependence on strength.
With the development of “skill” and a drop in the reliance on strength, one aspect that usually comes up in many martial arts, including the Bujinkan is to “use the opponent’s strength or intention against herself/himself”. This leads into the notion of “not fighting the opponent”. There are also statements that state, “Do not trouble the Uke (opponent)”, “Don’t do anything the opponent does not want to do”, “Let the opponent fight herself/himself”. All of these lead to the same aspect relating to a physical conflict; “even when in a fight, do not fight”. So, what does this mean?
Based on what I have understood, this refers more to one’s state of mind in a fight than the physical actions in a fight. It has more to do with not looking to do violence against an opponent and not refraining from the same. I have delved deeper into this aspect in my older article, “Ahimsa and the Martial Arts – Part 1”, the link to which is present in the notes to this article, seen below. Not fighting an opponent, in simple terms, means that causing harm to the opponent should not be the objective, surviving the fight with as little damage to oneself is.
The moment the objective relates to the opponent, like “causing harm to the attacker” or “winning against the uke”, the ego takes over and becomes a motive which leads one to focus on a specific outcome. This is because winning or getting the opponent to fall or be locked or hit or get injured have specific definitions which need a series of actions, all of which the opponent will also strive to counter while trying to cause harm to the defender (tori). Getting these actions right is very difficult and leads to a slippery slope which might not be possible to overcome.
However, if survival is the only objective, one only needs to focus on not letting the attack succeed. This makes a lot more space available in a fight. Also, the attacker needs to do all the work, while the defender only needs to get into a safe space, albeit continuously. This moving to a safe position opens up the opportunity to gradually move in a way that causes the opponent to just wear out and stop the attacks or lose the ability to do so, which could be due to losing her or his balance, getting hit due to being open while attacking and the like. Either way, the danger due to the attack is mitigated. In short, while only the uke was attacking, the defender (tori) was only staying alive and not fighting, even if it does not appear so to an outside observer. It was all in the state of mind.
Thus, not using strength is about using skill in a conflict and not fighting is about not having an objective vis-a-vis the opponent, but instead moving to stay in the safest possible space during a conflict. Thus, the skills to develop are, to move oneself physically to a safe place and to not have malice towards the opponent.
There are two parts to developing the ability to move in a manner that allows one to be safe. The first of course, is a lot of training, years of practice and experimentation with different people of varying levels of experience in physical conflicts. This includes armed and unarmed fights with and without armour, depending on what is available. In the Bujinkan, this generally does not include modern day firearms and historical weapons which are discharged. But there are other martial arts that do include these, based on the little that I know of these artforms.
The second aspect is to move exactly when necessary and neither too early nor too late. Moving too early means the opponent can correct or change the attack and moving too late means facing the brunt of the attack. Moving at the right time, or more practically, moving as close to the right time as possible, depends on realizing when the attack is coming and having a sense of what the attack is aiming to do. This knowledge of course, is not exact and the prediction of the same is not a precise science. It is a feeling one gets by being in a conflict and over time becomes a “gut feel” or “intuition”. Thus, knowing the timing and danger of any attack is about being aware of the opponent with the experience of having been mindful of many other opponents in the past.
All of this, in concert, means that one should be able to get a read on the opponent while being in the fight. In simpler terms, one needs to be able to “connect” with the opponent to be able to identify when to move and where to move, to stay safe during a physical conflict. If one can largely be able to connect with the opponent and move as required to stay safe, one will have matched the movement of the opponent and thus mitigated the threat posed by one. This is what is meant by the third concept above, which is “Awaseru”, or, to match the opponent.
If one does achieve Awaseru, the next harder concept reveals itself. This is to keep the connection and not lose it. This concept of keeping the connection is called “En no kirinai”, which roughly translates to “do not sever the connection”. If one can connect with the opponent and match her or his movement, the realization of the same, as soon as it occurs, triggers the possibility of breaking the connection as well.
Awaseru, when it does happen, allows one to reduce risk to oneself while the opponent is expending efforts to reverse this and in all likelihood exposing herself or himself to an attack. This might happen over the course of two or three attacks. Once an opening is exposed, there are two possible situations. The first is to exploit the opening to end the fight if possible. But then, this exploitation of an opening might not work as expected because the opponent is very good or too tenacious. In either case, the fight might not end. This is the second situation.
When the fight does not end, the defender should not press the attack unless there is another clear option to do so. If the attack is pressed without a certainty of success (which is very difficult) the uke and tori have switched roles and the opponent can now exploit openings the defender offers. So, not only has the connection been lost, but the opponent can now apply awaseru!
So, if the opponent continues the fight despite realizing one is exploiting openings he or she is revealing, the connection needs to be maintained, matching needs to continue, until a time when the fight logically ends. The realization of awaseru being successful leads to a heady feeling and a possible superiority complex of being able to carry out a successful counterattack. This needs to be guarded against and awaseru needs to hold firm. This, is En no Kirinai in practice. Of course, all this is easy to put into words, but much harder to practice, for identifying when a fight starts or ends is entirely subjective and depends on the fighters and the situation (space and time) the fight is occurring in. The fight only ends when the combatants genuinely are no longer trying to cause physical harm to each other. The connection with the opponent needs to continue until this happens and even possibly after, to ensure that the lull in the fight is not the opponent regrouping for another attack.
This continuous connect with the opponent is Shatrubodha. And Shatrubodha allows control of various kinds, both on the self and the opponent(s). This is good segue to explore the concept of Shatrubodha in greater detail. A last observation before we switch though.
The first two concepts of not using strength and not fighting are not relevant in the context of sport combat. A fight as part of a sport has many rules to protect the fighters, like time limits, a referee, a scoring system, a defined space for the fight, emergency personnel on standby and most importantly weight categories and segregation between the fighters on the basis of gender*. So, the use of strength is completely valid and fighting is the objective. These aspects relate only to a situation where there are no rules protecting individuals. Of course, this does not preclude using skill in conjunction with strength and this happens all the time. The other two concepts of matching the opponent and keeping the connection is valid irrespective of whether the fight is a sport or not. Great sportspersons use these concepts to achieve great heights in their respective fields. These concepts are useful even in non-combat sports, like cricket, badminton, tennis etc, where matching with the opponent and realizing what they might do, due a connection, helps a great deal.
Shatrubodha is a word I have heard from time to time in India over the last year or so. It is generally used by the non-left way of thinking. I heard it on YouTube first and then saw it on a few sites online. It is said by some that it was used by Chanakya in his exposition on statecraft. But I am not sure of this and have not researched if he really used it as part of his work, the Arthashastra. Nor have I spent time verifying if there is anyone who has firmly linked this concept of Shatrubodha to Chanakya.
Shatrubodha, or Shatrubodh (as it might be pronounced by speakers of Hindi) means “a sense of the enemy”. “Shatru” means enemy and “Bodh” is a little harder to translate. It could mean “a sense of”, but I have also seen it translated as “knowledge” or “perception” or even as “information”. Based on these, I opine that “Shatrubodha” could be considered as “knowing the enemy”. It could also be worded as “having a perception of the enemy” or “being aware of the enemy”.
When Shatrubodha is used in the context of an enemy of a nation or a culture or a civilization, it is used to mean that one should always keep an eye on the enemy however possible. It also means that one should study and research the enemy in all possibly ways, irrespective of whether the enemy is an individual, a group of people, another country, an organization or even just a value system or way of thinking that is inimical to one’s own culture and way of life.
From the perspective of martial arts practice, based on my personal experience with the Bujinkan, “Shatrubodha” is the same as having a feeling for what attack might originate from the opponent and when the same might happen. This is what allows us to practice the angle or distance to use and timing to apply in any movement that is made in defence or to protect against any attack. Over time this is what manifests as “Sakkijutsu” (intuitive ability) in martial movements.
Apart from the timing and distance, one other thing that is used in the martial arts is “rhythm”. Any training session or a fight between individuals or between groups has a rhythm. This is visible even in sport fighting and non-combat sports as well. There are intervals when the fight or action on the field is intense and at other times, it is visibly tentative when the two sides are probing and testing each other. There are times when one fighter is aggressive when she or he senses fatigue or confusion in the other and this could lead to an end of the fight or a change of pace if the aggression fails and the other fighter also senses the change in rhythm and changes tack.
This rhythm is keenly influenced by an awareness of the opponent, by having a perception of her or his intentions and by the experience of what she or he can throw at the defender. This sense of the opponent is Shatrubodha and is a vital part of the martial arts. It could even be expanded to say that this is very important in all conflict management situations, even if it is not related to physical conflicts, like a contentious business meeting, a dispute between relatives or friends and the like.
The “sense of the opponent” is something that needs to be obtained by being open to the opponent, her or his movement, rhythm, intentions and like. This being open to the opponent is nothing but the “connection” or “connect with the opponent” that we discussed earlier. It is not being open to the attack without any protection and thus being open to physical injury or worse.
Also, like we discussed earlier with the concept of “En no Kirinai”, this connection or Shatrubodha has to be incessant, or at least until a given fight or conflict is mitigated to an extent where the probability of any physical or other harm is miniscule. Further, being able to connect also requires not having an intention of hurting the opponent, in other words having no intention of fighting or employing strength and being able to match the opponent. So, Shatrubodha is not about defeating an enemy, but about being aware of the enemy at all times and ensuring self-protection.
We can now consider the other aspect that is key in the Bujinkan system of martial arts, which is “Control”. And “Control” begins with “Self-control”. The concepts of not fighting the opponent and not using strength against the same, is about exercising self-control. Further, matching the opponent and connecting with her or him or them while they try to do one harm is self-control that is very difficult to achieve. The urge to fight back to cause the opponent harm is extremely difficult to overcome. Hence, the need for self-control. The ability to achieve this self-control being very difficult is the reason why it is referred to as an important concept. It is a concept that one chases all through one’s training life and comes close to achieving but never does do consistently to one’s own satisfaction. This last bit is based on personal experience and there might be practitioners out there for whom this is child’s play.
Extending this a little further, the advantage of self-control and connecting with the opponent is that one is supposed to be able to nullify a fight with minimal effort, as against using strength or violence against the opponent. This is not to say that one should desist from violence even if that can save one’s life and is the only option that seems to be available. In such a situation one is of course free to adopt that approach and survive. The objective is simply that, to the extent possible one should try to minimize effort in a conflict by avoiding a fight and strength. Instead try to connect with the opponent and get the conflict to dissolve (this is not the same as defeating the opponent).
So, by controlling oneself, one gains the opportunity to achieve the first concept of “connect with the opponent”. Connecting with the opponent in turn leads to the advantages discussed earlier. A little extension here with regard to “self-control”. In order to control oneself, one needs to know one’s own desires and the need to act at certain triggers. This is the origin of deciding where one needs to control one’s actions and motivations. This act of knowing oneself is called “Swyambodha” or “Swayambodh”. This is the opposite of Shatrubodha. It means “knowing oneself” or “being aware of oneself”. So, Swayambodha and Shatrubodha lead to one another. Awareness of oneself allows self-control which allows connection with the opponent which leads to Shatrubodha, which leads to control of the conflict and hopefully its mitigation.
Like we discussed earlier, when one can match the opponent by connecting with her or him or them, one can move in a manner that minimizes the potential harm to oneself. If this can be done in a dynamic and consistent manner, the opponent has to expend a lot of effort in trying to cause harm to the defender. This effort on the part of the opponent reveals openings that can be exploited. Over time and multiple moves, this danger becomes apparent to the opponent as does the lack of success in the expended effort and hopefully leads to a diminishing of the motivation to press on with the attack. Of course, there is also the option of attacking the openings that are revealed and ending the fight. So, by connecting to the opponent, one can stay safe while making the opponent work hard and unsuccessfully. This is achieving control of the conflict situation; where one is safe and can create opportunities to end the conflict. Connection leads to control and this leads to an even better connect. So, it is a virtuous cycle.
If one has heard many individuals and researchers associated with think tanks or evocative retired personnel from the defence services in India, they all emphasize on one thing. This is that people in defence planning need to, from time to time, research and document all the threats, both internal and external, to the country. Based on this assessment, they need to plan and devise strategies to counter each of these threats over time. Considering that these identified threats evolve continuously, one needs to cultivate and work with experts on each of these identified and potential threats. This is nothing but connecting with the enemies of the country to control the threats and identify ways to mitigate the same. The identification of the threat is Swyambodha here and gathering information about the threats, Shatrubodha. The fact that one studies the threats is the act of connecting with the opponent and devising mitigation plans is the control of the risk posed.
While the above is more of a strategic activity, practicing the same in one-on-one (maybe many-on-one) martial arts training sessions is tactical in nature. Of course, in the latter scenario, it has to happen during a fight while the former takes much longer and might last years or decades. The learning from the martial arts can be expanded to conflicts one faces in life, where it is well known that one should try putting oneself in the shoes of the other, to mitigate the conflict and this starts with a realization of one’s ego.
So, in conclusion, based on the above discussion,
Connect, Control = Shatrubodha (with Swayambodha as a precursor)
Notes:
As part of Bujinkan tradition, we have a Kamidana in the dojo. The Kamidana is an equivalent of the “Mantapa” which many Hindus have in their Pooja Rooms at home. In the Kamidana is kept a mirror, the Japanese word for which is “Kagame”. One of the reasons for this mirror being present is to remind oneself when one bows to the Kagame at the beginning of every training session, that one is bowing to oneself, as the superior warrior (or at least the spirit of one) resides within and the attempt is always to reveal and express the abilities/qualities of that warrior.
A SWOT analysis is similar to Swyambodha with a bit of Shatrubodha thrown in (The “T” in SWOT), while the model of Porter’s 5 Forces could be mainly Shatruboda with an element of Swayambodha thrown in (the aspects internal to the industry or the organization).
*There are of course mixed gender events these days, though they are far fewer than segregated events.
Some senior Budoka I have trained with feel that “self-control” is the only real control there is, for one can never control anything in this universe other than oneself.
A couple of interesting observations relating to Shatrubodha that I have seen in works of fiction are mentioned below.
In the final book of the expansive Fantasy series, “The Wheel of Time”, called “A Memory of Light”, one of the main characters, called Matrim Cauthon tells another character that he needs to go out into the battlefield and be in the thick of things to get a sense of the fighting. Matrim Cauton is the finest General in the land and he says this as he feels that he needs to understand the flow of the battle to identify the best moves to be made. This is as good a depiction of “Shatrubodha in flow” as I have ever seen. This could be because the author of the series, Robert Jordan (pen name of James Rigney Jr.) was a veteran himself.
In a book written by Fredrick Forsyth, I currently cannot recall which one, a character states something on the lines of Israel’s foreign policy being that there are no countries that are friends, only enemy states and neutral states, and so they will spy on everyone. This is a wonderful expression of always having a keen focus on Shatrubodha!
If one has heard Mr. Rajiv Malhotra (search his name on YouTube and Amazon to have a look at his vast body of work) speak, he often refers to how incredible the Shatrubodha of the USA is. He says that at any time, there are universities and think tanks in the US, which are generating what he calls “disaster literature” regarding other nations and cultures. Here, he refers to how closely institutions in the US study societies and nations other than themselves. They use these observations to generate data regarding the negatives of that civilization which can then be used for information and narrative warfare as and when needed, to further US interests. The above is perhaps similar to how the British back during the days of British Raj studied Indian culture with great interest and used that information not just to govern the country but also to control the populace, by dividing and ruling when necessary and by setting up narratives that showed British culture in a superior light compared to native traditions.
Apologies for the wordiness of this article and repeating the same ideas over and over. The flow of a fight and the objectives therein were too important to not emphasize with repetition.
Early in the Mahabharata, there is an incident that occurs at the ashrama of Guru Dronacharya. He sets up a test for all his students, essentially all the Kuru princes. He has a model of a bird set up on a tree and tests the ability of the students to shoot an arrow at the eye of the bird.
To even be eligible to shoot the arrow, he asks them a set of questions to check their focus on the target. He asks each student what they see, when they have nocked an arrow and drawn the bow. He is checking if they see anything other than the eye of the bird or at least, just the bird. If they say that they see anything else, he tells them that they cannot strike the target and should withdraw.
Eventually of course, only Arjuna succeeds in the test. But what is important here is the response from Yudishtira. He can see everything even while trying to shoot the target, from the bird to the tree, its nest, the leaves and the insects on the tree (the entire ecosystem on the tree) and how he needs to be aware of all that he sees while shooting the arrow, as the action could lead to repercussions that affect these. Guru Drona, while telling him that he will not be able to strike the target with the arrow, is mighty impressed with how complete his vision is, at how he can see everything, in other words, the big picture. This was Yudishtira’s primary ability.
I am not sure if Drona being impressed with Yudishtira seeing everything is part of the original Vyasa Mahabharata or any other version. I have seen this on the Star Plus version of the Mahabharata. I am not sure if they made this up for the series or if it is taken from any original source material either. But the observations of a young Yudishtira is not a fake in any case and suffices for the purposes of this article. The link to the episode where the described event takes place is seen in the notes below1.
Yudishtira was raised to be a king, as was Duryodhana, simply because they were the oldest kids of their respective fathers. The ability to see every aspect of any situation and thus to gauge the ecosystem, is a fantastic ability for a king, who needs to be able to provide prosperity generating administration to a kingdom, and to see through the reasoning and motivations behind the suggestions of the high council (samiti).
Now, a primary difference between Yudishtira and Duryodhana is that the former is always known for his adherence to Dharma (hence the epithet Dharmaraja or Dharmaraya, raya & raja being synonyms) while is the latter is primarily a great warrior, one of the greatest ever.
The thing with Dharma is that it is not an objective quantity. It is a highly subjective thing. It can be broadly defined, at least with respect to a king, as doing that which is right for the kingdom, or society in general. And this “doing right” has to be towards upholding the natural order that permits life to survive and prosper. This includes rights, duties, laws, righteous conduct and so on.
Here, Yudishtira has what is quite literally, a superpower. From his ability to see everything even when he has to focus on the bird’s eye, it is clear that he always can look at the whole picture. Add to this, his yearning, perhaps due to his upbringing, to achieve the ideals of Dharma with every decision he makes, he really is perfectly suited to be a king.
From the Mahabharata itself, we see several instances where Yudishtira reaches out to other learned people when has a query regarding his actions and morals and their adherence to Dharma. This makes him additionally suited to kingship, because he is open to suggestions when a course of action is not really clear, a hallmark of someone who is not a tyrant.
At the same time, Yudishtira never absolved himself from the consequences of his decisions, because he was the one who always took responsibility for it, irrespective of who suggested the course of action, and how justified the ends were. This is demonstrated from his visit to Bheeshma to ask how to fell him and the lie he uttered to kill Drona during the war.
Yudishtira was the best charioteer among the Kuru princes. He was also the best spearman, and perhaps a good player of dice (what we call pagade in the vernacular). All three of these provide more evidence to his ability to be “mindful” and grasp all information about a situation, completely. Observe each of these 3 traits individually.
A good charioteer has to be able to navigate the terrain, his vehicle and the horses; an ability to be aware of one’s environment. A spear is a long range weapon, whether used in a formation of soldiers or individually. In both cases, the wielder needs to be aware of one’s surroundings. To use the weapon effectively, awareness is needed of one’s fellow troops so as not to hurt them and of the space available to effectively use the long weapon. Similarly, with a chariot, the comfort and safety (especially in a war) of the person in the chariot is something a charioteer needs to be mindful of apart from the other things. This is perhaps why great charioteers are remembered by name (Daruka, Shalya, Matali etc.)
Lastly, consider the game of dice, or pagade. This is not unlike a game of cards. You have no control over the value thrown up by the dice. But you use what is given to do the best you can to try and win the game. In other words, you need to be a fine tactician which hopefully translates to strategy when a king does the same with a kingdom. The fact that these games involve gambling does not take away from the skills needed to succeed.
Yudishtira’s skill with the chariot is not really known because there are other great charioteers in the epic, the greatest being Krishna himself. Plus, he was a king and perhaps did not drive chariots around at much himself. His ability with the spear however, is pretty well known.
Yudishtira’s skill with the dice is a tricky one. His loss twice to Shakuni surely suggests he was not very good at it, and Shakuni even says that he is not very good at it. But there is information contrary to this. During the 13th year of their exile, when they are to remain hidden from the Kauravas, Yudishtira hides in the court of King Virata of the Matsya kingdom. He takes the identity of a Brahmin named Kanka. The interesting part of this is that he joins Virata’s court as someone who can instruct Virata in the game of dice! He does indeed instruct Virata and is never caught as someone who is poor at it. Does this not mean that he was good at pagade, but just not as good as Shakuni? Or was everyone else at Virata’s court so bad at pagade that they never realized Yudishtira was bad at it as well? Considering that Kshatriyas did indulge in dice, this may perhaps not be the case. Shakini taunts Yudishtira asking him if he is scared to play during their original match. Could this taunt be effective if it was not expected that a Kshatriya participate in dice without any worry? Is it not likely that this was even uttered only because all Kshatriyas used to play pagade often? I opine this is the case. Yudishtira just came up against the greatest player of that age in Shakuni and hence lost. Hence, just as he was upstaged by Krishna as a charioteer, he was no match for Shakuni at dice and hence is considered a bad player, even if he was in fact a good one. Also, perhaps Shakuni had supernatural advantages, or was very good at cheating and getting away with it (maybe he used loaded dice?).
Image credit – Amar Chitra Katha Mahabharata – Chapter 25 – The Pandavas at Virata’s Palace
Yudishtira’s greatest failure is that he gambled his wife away like an asset. He also gambles away his kingdom and his brothers. His losing his brothers is perhaps the lesser of these evils because they were willing participants in the same game of dice. The gambling away of his kingdom and his wife are equally vile. He was sworn to protect and work towards the prosperity of both. This outcome also enhances the belief that Yudishtira was a bad player of the game of dice irrespective of his skills.
Do we also see the Kryptonite to Yudishtira’s superpower in the very same abilities? If he could see everything including the grey areas clearly, did the fact that he could see it all clearly, prevent him at times from doing the right thing? Let us look at the details.
Why exactly did Yudishtira not walk out of the game of dice? Why did he not fight using arms on the spot? Why did he even place his brothers and wife as objects to be gambled away when he had already lost his kingdom? Let us see if we can arrive at reasons to explain this behaviour of his.
Yudishtira had completed the Rajasooya Yajna successfully a short while before the game of dice. This Yagna had been performed with active support and positive participation by the sons of Dhritarashtra and all the elders of Hastinapura. This list included Shakuni. Did their participation make him believe they no longer held ill will towards the Pandavas? And did he believe that this put an end to the saga of the house of Lac from their youth? Perhaps he did.
In order to perform the Rajasooya Yajna, the Pandavas had carried out military ventures in all four directions. During these, they had militarily defeated many other kingdoms and if not, at least collected tributes from all of them. This wealth was used to perform the Yajna. During this time, Hastinapura had not taken the opportunity to cause them trouble or invade Indraprastha. This despite the land on which Indraprastha stood, was originally Khandavaprastha, a part of the kingdom of Hastinapura. The Kauravas had not attempted to reclaim a now prosperous kingdom when its greatest warriors and armies were occupied elsewhere. Could this fact also have bolstered Yudishtira’s belief in a lack of malice on the part of the Kauravas? Also, perhaps after the military success before the Yajna and the victory over Jarasandha, did he feel Indraprastha was as powerful as Hastinapura? Both the beliefs seem valid based on the facts.
Vidura, an extremely wise man, and prime minister of Hastinapura was the messenger who invited Yudishtira and the Pandavas to Hastinapura for the game of dice. He did warn Yudishtira of the plan by Shakuni to win Indraprastha as a wager in a game of dice, instead of using military might to do the same. So, Yudishtira knew of the ill will and the plan to circumvent any equivalence between the two kingdoms in military capabilities. But the invitation was from Dritharashtra, Yudishtira’s uncle and father figure. Plus there were other elders at the Hastinapura court who were capable of reigning in Duryodhana and Shakuni. So, weighed against Vidura’s warning, his recent experience, and faith in the elders could have suggested to him to adhere to Dharma. And this was very important to him as we have seen. His Dharma was to neither reject the invitation to dice and lose face as a coward nor to disrespect the invitation from his father figure and be seen as one who disrespects his elders (the one who gave him half a kingdom in this case, despite the circumstances at that time).
This overall reasoning could have led him to accepting the invitation to Hastinapura and to his participation in the game of dice. Once there, he was conscious of his duties as an adherent of Dharma to hold to his word. Hence, he stayed at the game while losing everything he never had a real right to lose (at least by modern standards), lest he be considered one who fails to stay at the game, as he had given his word to do.
Now, there could be a more mundane explanation for this. At the time of the game of dice, Indraprastha was a young kingdom, which was prosperous due to the Rajasooya Yagna. Jarasandha had been defeated, and his young son Sahadeva (not to be confused with the Pandava brother) was an ally of the Pandavas. But he was only a new king and not renowned like his father. The Matsya kingdom was not an ally of the Pandavas as yet. Manipur, whose princess Arjuna has married and had a son with, was not an actual ally as there were not relations between them and Indraprastha, and Arjuna’s son there was considered an heir to Manipur, not a prince of Indraprastha. Similarly, Arjuna’s other wife among the Nagas had not earned them an ally, as there was no relation between the Nagas and Indraprastha, and Arjuna had only spent a very short time with his Naga wife Uloopi! Also, we do not know how the other kingdoms the Pandavas had confronted militarily (extracted tribute from) during the Yagna felt towards the Indraprashta. Would they not jump at the first chance to throw off the yoke of the new emperor Yudishtira? The Pandavas had saved 84 kings from certain death when they had defeated Jarasandha, but their payback had been limited to supporting the Rajasooya Yajna, not fighting Hastinapura. So, the Pandavas had no allies to rely on immediately, when they were in the heart of Kaurava power. Add to this, the Kauravas had considerable military allies of their own.
But most importantly, all of this was before Arjuna acquired the vast array of divine weapons. That happened when the Pandavas were in exile. Arjuna acquired the Paashupatastra from Lord Shiva and a host of other weapons from all the Devas while in Devaloka assisting them in the fight against the Kaalakeyas and the Nivatakavachas. Hence, the Pandavas were not really as powerful as they would later be.
So, if Yudishtira had decided to pull out of the game of dice or decided to fight the forces of Hastinapura without any army of his own at his back in a hall full of Hastinapura forces, would they have survived, let alone prevailed? It certainly is doubtful. This could perhaps be the same reason for which they did not fight back right after the events of the House of lac, when they were weaker still, with not even Panchala as an ally. Futher, we do not know if Yudishtira had sufficient troops to help him at that point in Hastinapura. Also, if a king loses a kingdom in a wager, is his army still his own or does it now belong to the victor in the game of dice? We have no idea. But considering that even the venerable Bheeshma is uncertain of what Draupadi can expect when Yudishtira is a slave of Duryodhana’s after having lost, such a doubt is warranted regarding the army of Indraprastha as well.
Thus perhaps, Yudishtira did see everything clearly and while becoming vilified down the ages, made the right decisions to survive, while putting faith in the elders of the Hastinapura court. And his faith turned out to be correct! It was the intervention of Vidura and Gandhari that saved them all. The famous elders like Bheeshma, Drona and Kripa failed to protect the Pandavas, but the women saved them. Draupadi’s conduct in the face of the worst atrocity and the strength of character of Gandhari saved the Pandavas their lives, and even got all their losses, including their freedom and kigdom restored to them! So, Yudishtira’s big picture analysis was correct. The women of his household saved them all. It was just that their rescuers were not the individuals everyone expected, a different set of people who no one imagined would be able to do it. But the fact that they, especially Draupadi, went through the worst of atrocities, is by modern standards, unforgivable. Also, it was such a close thing, that this correctness borders on luck and enduring it can be attributed to stupidity. But is the adherence to Dharma not supposed to protect one from adversity? And is it not said that steadfast practice of Dharma incredibly difficult and it is in especially hard times that its practice is really noticeable? These are questions that everyone has to answer for themselves. But the evidence for Yudishtira’s “big picture” ability does hold forth. It was his superpower and his greatest weakness at the same time, for he and the Pandavas went through the worst of times due to the same big picture reasoning of his.
This then raises the next question of why he agreed to the next game of dice. All the points mentioned in relation to the strategic situation of Indraprastha vis-a-vis Hastinapura still hold. But there are differences. He had his kingdom, its wealth, armed forces and ability to plan for a conflict. Also, the fact that the loser of the second game would have to endure an exile of 13 years (12 in the forest and the last in hiding) was established. After this, the kingdom would be returned to the losing side, if they could escape detection in the 13th year. If they were discovered, the cycle would repeat. So, the Pandavas would be divested of their kingdom and resources if they lost. So, why agree to the game?
There is no clear answer to this. But let us consider a few details. Is it again a case where a Kshatriya once invited to a game of dice cannot decline for fear of being branded a coward? Is this more of a concern for an Emperor than for a king? Yudishtira was considered an emperor after the successful completion of the Rajasooya. So, was this concern great enough to overcome the “once bitten twice shy” learning from the previous game of pagade?
The invitation for the second game was again from Dhritarashtra. We know of the relationship between Yudishtira and his uncle. Was he indebted to him for having been responsible in returning the kingdom after the first game? So, was he obliged to play as a way to repay the favour and show respect to his benefactor? Add to this the fact that this time the game was supposed to be “fair” unlike the last time, when the game was set up for the Pandavas to lose. Was this an opportunity to avenge the defeat from last time in a like manner, an offer that Yudishtira could not refuse? Was he overestimating his ability with pagade to think he could beat a master like Shakuni this time round? Perhaps it was all of these, or maybe not. But without the benefit of hindsight, imagine what would have happened if the Pandavas had won. The Kauravas would be banished to the forest for 12 years. This means a sworn enemy is taken off the board for 12 years during which to strengthen themselves. A tempting proposition, isn’t it!?
Let is now look at the episode of the two games of dice through the lens of Budo. This might reveal some interesting explanations for the same. In the Bujinkan system of martial arts, there are two very important concepts that are drilled into all practitioners from the very beginning, and are revisited all through one’s lifetime in the martial art. These two concepts are Ukemi and Uke Nagashi.
Ukemi is the ability to “receive the ground” when one is thrown or has a fall. It is all about rolls and break-falls in simplistic terms. Uke Nagashi is about receiving an attack by an enemy in different ways. This could be simplistically called parrying an attack. But these concepts go beyond the simplistic physical practice. I remember once being told of a statement by Soke Hatsumi Masaaki made in relation to Ukemi in one of his classes. This statement by Soke said that running away and hiding are also Ukemi. I would posit that if one is protecting oneself from the elements, like saying hiding indoors from the rain or running away from working in the burning summer sun, this is Ukemi. However, I further suggest that running away from a fight or hiding from an enemy would be Uke Nagashi.
So, if Yudishtira chose to survive by not fighting and expecting someone else to save them in the case of the first game of pagade, is it not instinctive Uke Nagashi on his part? Yes, it seems wrong and cowardly in hindsight, but his being mindful and aware of the big picture as we discussed earlier did save their lives and kingdom in the end, which means the Uke Nagashi paid off. Is this not like surrendering against insurmountable odds while waiting for a favourable opportunity to escape?
Now let us consider the second game of dice. Nagato Sensei, one of the senior most teachers in the Bujinkan system has a famous saying, where he states, “Leave no opening”. This is again in reference to Uke Nagashi. Based on my experience of this statement, what he means is that when you receive an attack, your position with reference to the opponent should not only mitigate the attack that was launched, but also ensure that no second attack is possible in that instant as there is no opening for the opponent to exploit. This part is a precursor to the defender being able to negatively affect the attacker due to being a safe position from where to exploit the attacker’s openings which are exposed as a result of the first attack.
Sensei also expands by adding that one needs to lead with Sakkijutsu. Sakkijutsu is the intuitive ability to sense an attack and move to a safe position before the attack lands. This is a continuous process until the attack (not attacker) ceases to exist. So, one should be aware or mindful of one’s situation and hence be able to feel/sense/intuitively know of an attack and move to a position where one is safe from the current and future attacks and then exploit possible openings revealed in the opponent.
If we look at the situation before the second game of dice with this knowledge, things change a little. If a king has to “leave no openings” while responding to an attack against his kingdom, what does that mean? Does it mean find a safe position for himself and his family or a safe situation for his kingdom? I would suggest that it is the latter, considering that Yudishtira was Dharmaraya, who put his duty to his kingdom first.
If Yudishtira’s objective is to protect his kingdom, is it not correct to accept the invitation to dice again? If he has won the same, his greatest enemy would be out of the picture for 13 years with no cost to his armed forces and no economic cost to Indraprashta. If he lost, the negative consequences were only for the royal family of the Pandavas. The Pandavas had reaped the greatest rewards from the establishment of Indraprastha. So is it not only right that they be ready to bear the greatest cost? Perhaps yes.
Next, there is no evidence that Duryodhana was a bad ruler or a tyrant who harmed the citizens of his kingdom. He had many negative qualities, but not as a bad administrator. We will consider the negatives in Duryodhana later in this article. But considering Indraprastha would not be significantly worse off under Duryodhana, if the Pandavas lost the game of pagade, is that not a better Uke Nagashi a king should consider for the sake of his kingdom? If Yudishtira had not accepted the invitation and a war had started right then, the cost to Indraprasta would be much greater.
Also consider this. If the Pandavas were exiled for 13 years, they would have 12 years to increase their strength, plan the defeat of their cousins and retrieve their kingdom, while causing least harm to their citizens. In hindsight, only a part of this happened. Indraprastha was saved at that time, but after 13 years, the Kurukshetra war that ensued was apocalyptic. The rejuvenation of Hastinapura and Indraprastha took the investments of an Ashwamedha Yajna after the war. But without the benefit of hindsight, was Yudishtira not employing his powers of being mindful and seeing the big picture to the best possible use of Indraprastha, even if not the Pandavas? It might have seemed so at the time. The fact that Yudishtira faced up to the consequences of the Kurukshetra war much later is also testament to his being willing to live with his failures and face the consequences.
Consider this; is this whole idea of protecting people until he was able to confidently fight back militarily not similar to retreating in the face of a greater enemy until one finds favourable terrain and weather to harm the enemy with minimal cost to one’s own forces? Is this not something that Wellesley used against Napoleon at Waterloo and was this not the same tactic that resulted in the defeat of Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna of Mexico at the hands of Sam Houston of the Republic of Texas? It is not the same tactic in a battle, but it does seem a similar strategy when applied to nations a whole. So, Yudishtira might have failed in his strategy (if it was that) when he accepted the invitation to the second game of dice, but based on his abilities, it might not have seemed a set result at that time.
While discussing the actions of Yudishtira, there is one aspect that we need to consider. This is more generic, with respect to the actions of all the heroes of the Mahabharatha and all their failings. This is not central to this article and not something we can go into in great detail. But it has to be acknowledged to get an idea about their perspectives, to the extent possible. This relates to the conditioning of people in positions of power during the Mahabharata age. Let us begin with Yudishtira himself.
Was Yudishtira not aware of something called “Aapat Dharma”? The rules (or lack thereof) that come into picture when one’s life and means to survival are threatened. This would have allowed him to not participate in at least the second game of dice. From the little that I know, “Aapat Dharma” or “Aapadharma” suggests that what is “Dharma” or “what is the correct thing to do” changes from when there is no threat to life and means of livelihood to when one is desperately trying to stay alive or save one’s family and means of livelihood.
When things are not life threatening, one needs to follow rules one accepts as Dharma more stringently. When one is under threat, these can be done away with, until “normalcy” is restored. Of course, definitions of “normalcy”, “threat to life” and even “Dharma” itself are subjective and change over time and geography and also with life experiences. It is just that there are some regular practices can be let go of when there is a dire situation. As an example, one might choose to be a vegetarian in one’s own civilized state/place of existence. When this civilized state is taken away, the choice can change with no guilt attached to the same. If one is stuck in a place where there is no opportunity to find vegetarian food, for a duration beyond what one can manage with less or no food, there need be no guilt associated with consuming meat. The same goes if a meat can cure one of a terminal disease.
Was the situation the Pandavas faced during the first game of dice and while reacting to the invitation to the second one not worthy of being considered commensurate with violating Dharma and invoking the escape clause of “Aapat Dharma”? At least from our modern perspective, it would seem that the answer is a resounding YES. The fact that Yudishtira did not and none of the other Pandavas did, suggests that either the situation was not “dire enough” for them to consider putting in abeyance their personal definitions of Dharma. Or, the consequences of the loss of reputation one faced by taking recourse to “Aapat Dharma” was too much to even contemplate the same.
Consider this same situation with a few other venerable characters from the Mahabharata. Bheeshma refused to break his vow of celibacy when he knew he was the best candidate to take over the throne after his half-brothers were dead without any progeny. This was despite his step mother, Satyavati, herself asking him to do so. And Satyavati was the reason for his taking the oath in the first place!
Drona fought for Hastinapura as they helped him earn half the kingdom of Panchaala. Even before this they gave him a job when he was down on his fortunes. Kripa, Drona’s brother-in-law, stuck to Hastinapura’s side in the Kurukshetra was, due to loyalty. Neither Kripa nor Drona was bound by any oath.
Lastly, Karna stuck with Duryodhana because he had stood by him when he was insulted in the demonstration arena by the Pandavas. Even after he was told that he was the eldest Pandava in secret, and this meant he could end the war before it started did not convince him to change sides. He fought the war and died without ever revealing this fact to those who mattered in the war. Also consider another event with Karna. He was known to donate anything anyone asked for after his morning Sandhyavandana. The fact that he never refused anyone at this time was very important to his reputation and he was called “Daanashoora” Karna due to his generous nature. Indra, the king of the Devas, used this firm and predictable behaviour of Karna’s to ask him for the Kavacha (armour) and Kundala (ear rings). The Kavacha and Kundala of Karna’s were divine in origin, coming from Surya, the Sun God. These made Karna impervious to any weapon. He was undefeatable as long as he possessed these. If he had not given these away, it was very likely that the Pandavas would have lost the Kurukshetra war. Yes, he gave them away as his reputation was more important. Of course, he believed he could turn the war without the same and he also believed the Kauravas would win the war. Hence his being revealed as a Pandava was likely more trouble after the victory. But with the benefit of hindsight – he died, the Kauravas lost and he passed on the chance to stop the Kurukshetra war from happening. A lot of human misery followed.
Kunti, the mother of the Pandavas and Karna, did not reveal the truth of his birth to prevent the war either. She did this as Karna asked her not to. They had another agreement which is not very important for this discussion. Similarly, Krishna knew of this secret as well and chose to not reveal the same. He only urged Kunti and Karna to do so. Of course, Krishna is divine and made choices for which he and his clan paid, through the curse of Gandhari, many years after the great war. His thinking is not something one can attempt to decipher.
There is one common thread in all of this. All these folk are terrified of breaking an oath, or a decision, once taken, even if their choice serves something terrible about to transpire. This is because they were all obsessed with their legacies. Their reputation was more important that the consequences to millions of other common folk because of their choices. This issue is seen in Greek mythology as well, where Achilles decided to participate in the Trojan war to build his legacy and fame despite being certain that he would meet his doom there.
This is an aspect Krishna demonstrates as not really Dharmic. One needs to learn to accept vilification if that serves the greater good. He chose to be called “Ranchod”, one who runs away from a battlefield, in order to defeat Kaala Yavana. He also chose to leave his city of Mathura and relocate with the entire populace to Dwaraka. This was to protect his people from Jarasandha’s wrath. He also chose to accept the curse from Gandhari as punishment for not preventing the war. He definitely tried to make people change their thoughts and ways, but did not use his divine abilities to do so. This is apparently to let things take their course with just human actions.
In the Bujinkan, we are taught a concept called “Jokin Hansha”. This refers to “weakness due to a conditioned response”. As an example, consider the fact that we do not do something even in if we realize it to be the right thing to do. This is likely because we “think twice” and decide it is wrong as it goes against what we are expected to do or is tradition (or something similar). This could lead to an adverse outcome. This is the consequence of “Jokin Hansha”. Consider a simplistic example. You do not want to shake hands with someone. Yet if that person extends a hand, we take it. We do not do a “Namaskaara” because we assume the other person might be offended. Conditioning is as pervasive as this and Jokin Hansha refers to negative consequences that occur from actions even as simple as this. Breaking conditioning and doing what one wants to in an environment where conditioned responses rule, has consequences we may not be ready to face. This, on a grander scale is what the heroes of the Mahabharta faced and failed at.
Now, we have considered the strengths of Yudishtira, his weaknesses and potential reasons for those. His adherence to Dharma, his consultative vein and abilities are demonstrated. While all this explains his actions before the war, what makes him a better candidate to be a king as compared to Duryodhana? We shall try to explore this in the following section.
As mentioned earlier, while Yudishtira was more of an introspective person focused on the big picture and adherence to Dharma, Duryodhana was primarily a warrior, who also wanted to be king. There is no indication that Duryodhana was a bad administrator. So, where is the difference between the two?
Duryodhana had one advisor in Shakuni. Duhshasana and Karna were more members of his coterie or mutual admiration society. They were not relevant to dissuading him in any action and did not specifically point out his flaws. Shakuni’s advice was driven by a motive to destroy the Kurus from the inside in order to avenge what he saw as injustice to his sister and his kingdom of Gandhara. Moreover, from what I know, Duryodhana never considered any advice that clashed with his own world view, from any of the other elders in Hastinapura. This shows that his perspectives were not as considered as those of Yuishtira’s. They were what he wanted them to be. He also had never seen the world like Yudishtira had on multiple occasions, while living among the common folk in his early childhood and after the events of the house of lac. He had not endured the hardships of the forest like the Pandavas either.
So, Duryodhana’s vision of Dharma was not exactly based on a “big picture” but what he wanted it to be. This made him a potential agent of chaos. Also, his ego prevented the chances of his ever changing his ways. The man held grudges over a long time, and was single minded in trying to achieve his objectives. While being driven towards one’s objectives is an admirable quality, a king might not have this luxury. His drive could be dangerous to those around him and the country as a whole.
It was Duryodhana’s desire to obtain Indraprastha, subjugate and humiliate the Pandavas and not return the kingdom after 13 years that was the root cause of the destruction of a very large number of lives from several kingdoms during the Kurukshetra war. Of course, it can be said that his being laughed at in the magical hall built by Mayasura in Indraprastha was the reason he wanted to take everything away from the Pandavas. But are the cause and effect commensurate? In modern thinking they are not. But, even by the standards of the day, when personal reputation was above all else, was it warranted? Even if we assume it was, his ability to not adapt to the changing scenario of the situation and being unmindful of the consequences was disastrous. This of course was due to his not being consultative. So, he was never a big picture guy, and thus, could never put his kingdom first, and thus never put Dharma first either.
Lastly, Durypdhana had no ability to “let go”. Something we are taught as martial artists is the ability to let go of anything that is not “worth it”. This can be a position, a technique or a concept we are trying to apply to any fight. An example here might be the following. If strength is not working against an opponent, let go of applying the same and try to take her or his balance with a better position. This is true in any conflict management situation. If negotiation is not working in a conflict between nations, they will let that course of action go and consider covert application of force or an overt display of forces to nudge the negotiation back on track. There need be no guilt associated with letting go of a course of action to pursue something else which has a higher probability of ending a conflict. This was something Duryodhana never could do, while Yudishtira did it all the time.
An example that comes to me vividly about this from recent history is as follows. I remember reading an article a long time ago. I think it was in the early part of the 2000s. I think it was in the newspaper, The Hindu, but I could be wrong. It was about the LTTE failing at negotiations with the Lankan government because it was beholden to the past. Apparently some members of the LTTE felt a negotiated settlement would betray their dead and their sacrifice would be shamed by the same.
In conclusion, Duryodhana, while not being a bad administrator, was a potential source for perpetual conflict. Also, his inability to consider contrarian points of view and ego mania made him an obstacle to any positive change. This is what made him an enemy of Dharma, which, in the epic, is all important. Hence a Dharma Yuddha, with Duryodhana as the antagonist. He was not a mustache twirling villain, or a specifically bad king, but a definite threat to Dharma.
Notes:
1 Mahabharat Ep 42 (watch between the 13 and 16 minute marks)
There is one concept that is oft mentioned in a Budo class over the last few years. This is perhaps since focus on the essence of Muto Dori was started by Hatsumi Sensei, some seven or eight years ago. This is “Jibun no Kesu”. From what I understand, it means “throw yourself away” or “kill yourself” or “drop yourself”.
This obviously refers to dealing with the self in a combat situation. Of course, this also holds true in any conflict management situation. The concept tells anyone involved in combat to let go of one’s self. This is generally taken to refer to one’s ego. But that definition, while absolutely true, might be a bit simplistic.
The ego part is about not letting anything except the situation in the fight affect oneself. Worry about a plan that might not be going as expected, elation at a plan that is working exactly as or better than expected, thoughts about the outcome of the fight, consequences of victory or defeat, thoughts about reputation after the fight, planning for activities as a consequence of a fight; all of these could be attributed to the ego affecting the fight. Thoughts regarding all of these and maybe more, affect how completely a fighter is in the moment in a fight. It reflects on how well, or not, one can respond to and act towards an existing opportunity or threat; it might even affect being able to identify an opportunity or threat.
The other part of “Jibun no kesu”, could be regarding the physical body itself. While there is no real distinction between the body and the ego – they are the same – they can be discussed separately for learning purposes, like two subsystems of a whole. The ego is more the mental / emotional / intellectual / spiritual component which is not tangible. The physical body is tangible and more like the sensor package of a machine while also partially behaving as the mental component when it comes to reflex actions.
All the perceptions in a fight are from the physical body which houses the five (maybe six – intuition) senses. This also includes the feedback from joints, which can perceive the resistance to a fist strike, a sword cut or a spear thrust. This helps calibrate the flow into the next movement and the next and the next. The physical body also determines the possibilities of action and the limitation of what can be done despite available opportunities. Examples of this are strength in a strike, flexibility of joints, reach available to limbs and the like.
“Jibun no kesu” says both the ego and the physical body must be dropped. This is, in my understanding, an opening into the concepts of “not fighting the opponent”, “not doing anything the opponent does not want to do” and the world famous idea of “using the opponent’s strength against him/her”. These are not concepts I will attempt to explore here as such, for “Jibun no kesu” is proving to be a handful by itself. That said, these concepts and “Jibun no kesu” might seem counter intuitive, for if there is no physical body, how is the opponent to be dealt with? Or if there is no ego, is there a need for conflict management at all?
The nature of the contradiction mentioned above is partly the answer as well. If a lack of ego can lead to a lack of conflict, wouldn’t that be great? And if there is no need to deal with an opponent, is there an opponent at all? And thus, is there no conflict either? And if that is the way to deal with a conflict, isn’t that awesome? No effort, but conflict gone! It is like opponent comes to fight a rock, but realizes there is no need to and goes away. Perhaps, one can learn to be a rock for a duration of a conflict and revert to being human? Does this work?
The answer to the above question is twofold. On the mats, while training a martial art, the answer is a yes. It is not something that can be explained or taught. But is something than can be learnt and definitely experienced. The experience is mostly personal, but quite often is sensed by the opponent and fellow trainees around the person experiencing “Jibun no kesu”.
The answer to the question off the mats, in real life, which might involve conflicts not involving a physical fight, is maybe, and many a time, no. This is because, the definition of a conflict, where a conflict begins and ends and who is an opponent are not clear. What is a threat and what is an opportunity are also hazy in outline. And if the conflict is with people one cares about or at least does not wish to actively harm, all of this is magnified manifold.
With this longwinded introduction, let me get into some examples of what I perceive as examples of “Jibun no kesu” from stories (perhaps history) of Hindu culture. This perhaps adds to the answers or leads to interesting and revelatory questions.
All of us Indians have heard of severe Tapasya being performed by several individuals in stories from our Itihaasa and Puranas (Tapasya is sometimes translated as “penance” in English, but this is simplistic in my opinion and hence I shall not use this translation and stick to the original word). The reason for the Tapasya (sometimes called Tapas) is varied, as are the Gods they perform Tapasya towards. Most popularly, individuals perform Tapasya to please either Brahma or Shiva, in order to request boons that will enhance personal abilities of said individual that helps him/her achieve great personal power and glory. Examples of this would be Hiranyakashipu, Ravana, Rakthabeeja, Bhasmasura and other Asuras who wanted personal power enhancement and also revenge.
Hiranyakashipu loses himself in meditation & plants and anthills grow over him
Image credit – “Prahlad” published by Amar Chitra Katha
There are of course several Sages who not only perform yajnas but spend time in meditation and Tapasya (the two could be the same or different, for Tapasya can also be effort towards an objective) to understand the Universe and in turn achieve abilities that can be extraordinary as a consequence. Examples here would be the many great Sages/Rishis can curse commoners (Agastya cursing Nahusha), Devas (Durvasa cursing Indra) and even the Trimurthy (Bhrgu cursing all three of the Trimurthy) to great effect due to their abilities gained as a result of Tapasya, though the purpose of their Tapasya was never to be able to curse or grant boons to great effect. Examples of boons granted by Rishis would include Durvasa granting Kunti the ability to request children from the Devas and Parashara making the stench of fish disappear from Satyavati. Another interesting case here would be Gandhari, who, due to giving up her vision and being a devotee of Shiva, could turn the body of her son Duryodhana impregnable the one time she decided to use her sight, though this was never the purpose of either her sacrifice or her devotion respectively.
Maharishi Agastya curses Nahusha
Image credit – “Nahusha” published by Amar Chitra Katha
The person performing Tapasya, called a Tapasvi, can be a man or a woman and the motivation for Tapasya can also be revenge (Amba gaining the ability to reincarnate to avenge herself against Bheeshma) or simply personal help in a given situation (Satyavati remembering Veda Vyasa or Draupadi praying to Krishna during the game of dice) or consultation to address a problem (Bhima remembering Ghatotkacha to carry Darupadi while on Vanavaasa or Yudishtira remembering Veda Vyasa for help in planning the Ashwamedha Yajna).
Repentance can also be a motivation for Tapasya, like in the case of Pandu giving up the throne for a life in the forest to repent for killing an innocent Rishi or Duryodhana temporarily deciding to do the same when the Pandavas rescue him from Gandharvas. The hardship of life in a forest is the Tapasya in both these cases.
The one common thread in all of these examples of Tapasya is the ability to give up one or many things or let go of things, including “throwing oneself away” or “throwing one’s self away” (I am considering both the same). Let us consider a few examples of how Tapasya shows the extreme means in which “throwing away one’s self” is depicted in Hindu culture.
Tapasvis are usually depicted as being so completely lost in meditation that plants grow over them and anthills develop all over them. They become inanimate objects for all practical purposes. They have thrown away their physical existence, and perhaps their life itself. But they are not dead, for the object of their Tapasya is not lost and this throwing away of one’s self is what eventually brings the Gods they were meditating towards to appear to fulfil their wish. This shows how the objective of the Tapasya is not lost, even though the self might be. This is a classic case of being in the moment. The focus on Tapasya is the act of the moment and the objective is achieved by being in the middle of several moments.
The above example is throwing away of both mind and body, for all discomforts are accepted and endured, hunger is forgotten, breaths per minute are greatly reduced, heartbeats are supposedly also reduced. The body becomes an inanimate object for all practical purposes. This is an extreme example of the “transcendence of nature” gojo (shizen no choetsu). The tapasvi, while still focused on the objective and the point of focus to achieve the objective, has become inanimate. So much so that plants and ants treat her or him as a support structure, just as trees colonize abandoned buildings or anthills can grow over stones. The tapasvi is a stone with an objective, working with a strength of focus that is unimaginable.
There are also more tangible examples of throwing away one’s self, in the form of literally sacrificing body parts as offerings in a yajna (here a yajna should not be translated as a sacrifice but as a transaction, where an offering, which could be a sacrifice, is only a part).
Ravana, in one version of the Ramayana I saw on TV, performs a yajna to invoke Smashana Tara, an all-powerful form of Shakti who lords over funerary sites, to request a boon of protection against all attacks when he goes to face Rama and his army during the final battle. I am not sure which version of the Ramayana this story is from. To appease Tara and gain her audience by having her appear to him, he makes several offerings. All of these fail to appease the Goddess. So he offers his own heads as offerings in the yajna. He has offered nine of his ten heads and the Goddess still does not appear. He then chooses to offer his tenth head, even if that means ending his life, thus resulting in the failure of the yajna and his objective of winning against Rama. Tara appears to Ravana and grants him his desired boon as he is about to sacrifice his last head and thus his life. This is a case where Ravana is prepared to throw away everything, his life, meaning his body, and ego and also his objective itself, which ultimately results in his achieving the objective. That Ravana loses the fight against Rama is due to various other factors. An interesting aside is that this yajna of Ravana’s, is supposedly considered not in accordance with the Vedas. So, he was even prepared to violate his religious principles.
There is a similar tale about Rama as well in one of the versions of the Ramayana (not Valmiki Ramayana). Though this is not considered in violation of the Vedas, perhaps because it did not involving allying with aspects related to death. Rama has to offer 108 lotuses to Goddess Lakshmi to be able to successfully build a bridge to Lanka from the Indian mainland. He has gathered 108 lotuses, but when the offering is made there are only 107 for the Goddess has hidden one as a test of Rama. Rama has to take a call in the spur of the moment to prevent the offering from failing. He recalls that he is called “Kamalanayana” by Sita, which means that he has eyes like a lotus. So he decides to offer his eye as the hundred and eighth lotus. Again, this is a situation where a person with an objective is willing to throw away one’s self to achieve the same. Here again, Goddess Lakshmi stops him as he is about to pluck his own eye out and grants him his wish.
One needs to bear in mind here that in both the above examples the fact that Rama and Ravana were saved at the last minute is known only in hindsight. When they were in the act of making the sacrifice – throwing one’s self away – there was no expectation of salvation, they would have gone ahead with the throwing away of the self anyway.
Consider yet another example of a tangible letting go of one’s self. Gandhari gave up her sense of sight voluntarily for the rest of her life from the time of marriage, with no desire for anything in return. She was also a great devotee of Lord Shiva. Much later in the Mahabharata, she uses the power of her sight once, to look at Duryodhana, and the power of her unused/restrained vision combined with her devotion of Lord Shiva makes Duryodhana’s body impervious to injury. Another instance of her power is seen when she curses Krishna to have to see the destruction of his clan. This curse comes true some 32 years later. This is an instance of letting go of one’s self not for a specific objective, but gaining the ability to achieving something vitally important as a consequence of that letting go, without ever having wanted to!
Image credit – “Mahabharata 2 – Bheeshma’s Vow” published by Amar Chitra Katha
Some more examples that are as profound but mundane at the same time are the situations where parents can summon their extraordinary children from great distances with just a thought when in dire need. Satyavati, when she has lost both her sons and is facing the extinction of the royal line of Hastinapura, wishes for her other son, the great sage Veda Vyasa to appear to help consult with her and proffer solutions to her conundrum. She only has to wish his presence and he appears to help his mother. Similarly, Bhima, when he is on Vanavaasa with his brothers and their wife, only needs to wish for his son Ghatothkacha’s help and he appears to carry them with his companions. This is something that happens when the family was very tired in their travels and badly needed help. These two are instances in which the children could appear at will to help their parents due their own extraordinary abilities. But the examples are profound as the throwing one’s self away here is exemplified by what the parents gave the children in each case, both were cases where the parent had offered themselves up to another person resulting in their births. It is also exemplifying of parents letting themselves (their personal desires, time and resources) go, to raise and give kids a good life. This is mundane because parents all over the world do this all the time, since time immemorial. It is also profound because this is a “throwing away of the self” that is very well acknowledged.
Image credit – “Mahabharata 36 – The Battle at Midnight” published by Amar Chitra Katha
This idea of letting go of one’s self is not limited to just Bharatiya thinking. I quote here an interesting example I found in a book of fiction no less. This example is from the first book (I do not recall the name) of a series called “The Craw Trilogy”*. I never finished reading this book though it was interesting, and the example I am quoting is from very early in the story. The story is set in the Norse world and there is a situation which has to be answered by some spiritual women who are like leaders in the religion of the Norse before they converted to Christianity. These ladies realize that the situation facing them is dire and a new Rune needs to be created. This Rune will have the power to guide them towards a solution to the dire situation. In order to conceive the Rune, the leader of the ladies goes through a set of ordeals that I can only describe as Tapasya.
The leader of the ladies meditates while subjecting herself to extreme physical hardship for several days. I do not recall all the physical challenges, but the last one is where she submerges herself in flowing water with only her head out of water and that through a hole! And at the end of the meditation, the new rune is carved. The key point here is the meditation of the lady, which is no different from Tapasya. The lady has to let go of even the idea of staying alive to come up with a rune. While this is an example from a work of fiction, the fact that it is from a British writer shows that the idea of meditation while throwing away one’s self is not exactly a rare concept in humankind.
In the example from the novel, the tapasya lasts for several days. This allows a look at how long tapasya might have to last to achieve an objective. How long does one have to be able to let go of one’s self to achieve any objective? Or it is to be a practice that one follows all though one’s life? Or is it for the duration of any given conflict. Well, the examples from Hindu culture do not really offer any answers, except showing that the “feeling” of the passage of time is relative.
The tapasya of the Asuras looking for boons that grant supernatural abilities are depicted to take years and years, sometimes even being said to be tens or hundreds of years. But the lifespans of many of these tapasvis is also said to be extremely long. Apart from the Asuras tough, when one considers the great sages, whose life is tapasya, these large numbers are not common. But then, if plants or ants have to consider a human being an inanimate object, at least several days or weeks have to pass. So, just like time seems to flow very fast when one is solving a critical problem but when the same is considered in hindsight all of it would have happened in a short time, the duration of tapasya could be relative. The duration of tapasya would seem very long for the tapasvi, while it would be shorter for an observer on the outside or to the tapasvi himself or herself in hindsight. If one considers all tapasvis to be normal humans with the same frailties, this would make sense, for normal humans are pushed to the edge of life during tapasya and that does not take too long, even though the abilities gained post tapasya would make such a previous life for the tapasvi hard to imagine due to the sheer magnificence of the same person after the abilities granted by the tapasya.
Having discussed the prevalence of “Jibun no kesu” in Hindu civilizational memory, are there examples of what could affect the practice of the same? As everyone who has attempted to apply “Jibun no kesu” would know, the concept is fantastic and sexy, to be able to transcend one’s nature by throwing one’s self away. But difficult to the point of impossibility to apply and even harder to practice, for anything more than a few seconds, or minutes at best.
This same is shown in the stories from Hindu culture as well. Whenever one is performing tapasya, especially Asuras, their opponents, the Devas try to break the tapasya with distractions that satisfy all human senses. The tapasvi is distracted with the choices food and drink, the greatest comforts and an appeal to human lust; when Apasaras are sent to distract and break a tapasvi’s ability to throw away one’s self by bringing them back to their “senses” and the desires of the self.
What is interesting is that these distractions seem to be used mostly against tapasvis who perform tapasya with a focus towards a single objective, like revenge or the gaining of superhuman abilities to achieve power or wealth. They are not seen to be used against sages and especially not against tapasvis who are women. Perhaps because the duration of the tapasya is a lot longer and interspersed with normal life and thus leaves one less vulnerable towards catastrophic tapasya failure. However, it must be said that women tapasvis, at least in my limited knowledge are never vulnerable to distractions and seem to have greater focus. This is seen in the cases of Parvati performing tapasya to win over Shiva to be her husband or Amba performing tapasya to be able to guarantee a reincarnation in a form that ensures revenge against Bheeshma. I cannot recall if Holika (Hiranyakashipu’s sister) or Mahishi (Mahishasura’s wife) encountered distractions from the Devas in their tapasya for the ability to fight their foes. Perhaps it has something to do with female intuition (Ku no ichi factor?) that lends itself better to transcend challenges?
Image credits (L & R) – “Bheeshma” published by Amar Chitra Katha, “Ayyappan” published by Amar Chitra Katha
One question comes up when we speak of the distractions in tapasya and hence in practicing “Jibun no kesu”, or just when we say how it is difficult to practice – to the point of impossibility. Are there any examples of failed tapasya in stories in Hindu culture? I am not aware of any that explicitly do. However, perhaps the story of Sage Vishwamitra’s trails and travails on the path to becoming a Brahmarishi is nothing but a series of examples of failed tapasya, despite its ultimate success.
Vishwamitra first performed tapasya to acquire Divyastras (celestial or divine weaponry). With these, he failed to defeat Vasishta, who was the one person he wanted to show as beneath him. So, this is not a failure of his tapasya but of the goal he set out to achieve as a result of the success of the same. Next, he gave away the abilities he gained from his renewed tapasya, to build a second Swarga (loosely translated as Heaven) for Trishanku, who wanted a Swarga while still mortal.
After this, he performed further tapasya and yet again he had to give away a lot of the abilities gained when he failed to break king Harishchandra (an ancestor of Rama) into giving up his virtues. This is a case where Harishchandra could practice “Jibun no kesu” at all times in his life and therefore overcome the efforts of a Rajarishi (eventually to become a Brahmarishi). This is fascinating story by itself, in examining letting go and throwing one’s self away that cannot be delved into as it is a really long one.
Post this, Vishwamitra again set about performing tapasya on the path to becoming a Brahmarishi. This time his tapasya was successfully disrupted by the Apsara Menaka, with whom he had daughter (Shakuntala, wife of Dushyanta and mother of Bharatha). After these several failures, Vishwamitra did become a Brahmarishi and made peace with Vasishta, whom he came to deeply respect and become a friend of. Their relationship is borne out by the fact that Vasishta is the one who recommends to Dasharatha that he should send Rama and Lakshmana with Vishwamitra when the latter requests the same (Dasharatha was not keen on the same due the youth and inexperience of his sons).
The summary of Vishwamitra’s experience suggests two things. Except with the incident with Menaka, he always was successful in his tapasya on the path to becoming a Brahmarishi. But perhaps his tapasya on the road of life towards the goal of becoming a Brahmarishi, was not. He was unable to let go of his self in that he was trying to outdo Vasistha or deliberately achieve impossible goals against the will of the Universe. His extraordinary abilities did allow him to temporarily do that, but at the cost of the original objective. It was much later and after several attempts that he did become one of the greatest Brahmarishis, when he could give up his need for outdoing Vasishta. His real “throwing away of his self” was when he could eliminate is own need to be superior to someone else, and just be a Brahmarishi with his knowledge, experience and abilities.
So, from the above observations, “Jibun no kesu” has been prevalent across times in our country. But why was this the case? How did the practice of “throwing one’s self away” influence anyone other the one doing the throwing away? Some of the effects of the extreme tapasya by tapasvis is depicted in the way nature reacts to the same. Extreme weather events like gale force winds, very heavy rain, extending to earthquakes, volcanoes and even meteor showers are described as being caused by the focused power of the tapasya. The weather events are so incredible and destructive that people and even Devas pray to the God who is the object of the tapasya to please grant the boon of the tapasvi to put an end to the inclement weather. Perhaps the Devas who are responsible for the elements lose control of the same due to the effect of the tapasya and hence would rather the tapasya end and they regain control!
Perhaps because a tapasvi becomes a part of nature like a rock or a tree or ants in a colony as he or she lets go of one’s self, the ability to be one with nature and not apart from it allows the tapasvi to affect it more? Or maybe just by introducing an unexpected element to an ecosystem, like to an inanimate object with an objective (a tapasvi who is practicing “Jibun no kesu”), the whole system is thrown out of whack? Either way, this is what is described in some stories.
In reality, this perhaps works in reverse. In a plain old physical fight or a more complex conflict of the mind, if one can practice “Jibun no kesu”, he or she ceases to exist as an opponent to the other. So, instead of affecting nature, one becomes a part of it, like the aforementioned tree or rock or ants. So, the person fighting has nothing to fight against, just as one would not consider a tree an enemy. This greatly increases the probability of the conflict ending. So, just like tapasya might affect the weather and thus force Devas to force the Gods to grant a wish, here one nullifies a fight by removing the opponent, by removing the self, of the same (if the ego of the fighter or the need to fight is eliminated, why is there a fight!). As the saying goes, it takes at least two to have a fight, there can’t be a fight with just one.
Lastly, we observed that tapasvis might have a specific objective (service to a community, revenge, wealth, power, knowledge etc.) or one’s life itself might be tapasya (which leads to great acts when the time and space call for the same without this act being the objective of the tapasya). In both cases, a tapasvi achieves great things by throwing away one’s self.
Similarly, what could be the objective of practicing “Jibun no kesu” in a real fight or conflict with others. It does seem that the effect of tapasya in the stories and “Jibun no kesu” in reality are inversely proportionate – tapasya causes nature to react, while “Jibun no kesu” allows one to become an indistinguishable part of nature – the objective of “Jibun no kesu” is simple and small in real life. It allows one to survive or perhaps be happy, as the case may be, for another moment, and then another and then another. Hopefully one can survive a conflict for another second, minute, hour, maybe many years and perhaps forever.
* Wolfsangel series by M D Lachlan (Mark Barrowcliffe)
In the Bujinkan, we learn of the Gojo. Gojo, as I understand it, means “five treasures”. Here the word “treasure” could mean what we call, “pearls of wisdom”. So, the Gojo are five precepts of wisdom. In other words, they could be guiding principles of life. The five Gojo, in the order I have learnt them are as mentioned below. I am documenting how I understand these, with examples and analogies from Hindu culture and the history of life on Earth.
Fumetsu no fusei
Mamichi no jikai
Shizen no niniku
Shizen no choetsu
Komyo no satori
Fumetsu no fusei
Fumetsu no fusei is translated as “Give and give” or as “endless giving”. This generally means one needs to remember to always be ready to give away things and not hold on to them. It does not, however, relate to generosity. The giving is not exactly related to or proportionate to the need of another, though it could be, but that is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition.
To elucidate this further, remember the story of Karna. He was tricked into giving away his divine armour, which likely would have resulted in the outcome of the Kurukshetra war being that the Kauravas won. He was made aware that he was going to be tricked and yet, chose to give away the armour, because he had made a vow to always give whatever was requested after morning oblations, and when the same was asked for, despite being aware of the motivations and the possible result, he still gave away the armour.
Indra in disguise asks for Karna’s divine armour. Image credit – “Mahabharta 32 – The Fall of Bheeshma”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
There is also the situation with Bheeshma, who had two opportunities to break his vow of celibacy. One during the episode with Amba and more importantly when his stepmother Satyavati herself asked Bheeshma to relinquish the vow. This was a case where the cause of the vow was asking the vow to be broken for the purposes of the greater good. If perhaps Bheeshma has broken his vow, the miseries of the Mahabharata might have been mitigated.
Devavrata becomes Bheeshma, Image credit – “Nahusha” published by Amar Chitra Katha
So, with these two episodes in mind, what does Fumetsu no fusei mean, or teach? This could be two-fold, one in a more generic way and one perhaps specific to the martial arts.
The first generic one is where “give” could be “give-up”, more like, “let go” or “don’t be afraid to give up”. This give up could be applied to anything. In both the episodes mentioned above, Karna and Bheeshma could have chosen to give up the vow, not the armour or the need for celibacy. They could have let go of the need to be seen to be beholden to a promise or be honourable. This of course could have been possible if they saw the need to break the vow as the best option for a suitable course of action. Did they instead choose the path of honour as that fed the ego? Does this mean endless giving is referring to always being aware of things that feed the ego and letting them go, because that could lead to a better path in life, or in a given situation?
Image credit – “Mahabharata 2 – Bheeshma’s Vow” published by Amar Chitra Katha
The second meaning a little more specific to the martial arts is where one is told to not actively resist the opponent or more expansively to “not trouble” the opponent. Here, allowing the opponent to carry through with an attack while realigning oneself to safe position or place, is giving the opponent the opportunity to do what he or set out to in the first place, which is the attack. This realignment (kamae?) gives one an opportunity to use the opponent’s movement against him or herself or at least get to a safe position which might make the opponent less sure of or less willing to commit to the next attack. So, one gives up the need to fight the strength of the opponent while giving the opponent the opportunity to go through with the attack, while still not incurring any harm to oneself, this is endless giving. And since happens perpetually in an attack and hence is analogous to all conflict in life, this is “give and give’. Of course, all of this sounds wonderful, but is unimaginably difficult to implement in a real fight, let alone life.
Mamichi no jikai
Mamichi no jikai translates to “following the right path” or “being on the right path”. I have also sometimes heard it called the “righteous path” instead of the “right path”. This second gojo seems like a reminder of the first one and a pointer to the third one, kind of like “remember the first rule, and don’t forget to read the third rule”. I say this as, perhaps the right path is to follow the principle of endless giving all through one’s life. But as already noted, practicing endless giving is so hard that it is better not attempted. Thus, maybe it is more “enduring” the first principle than “following” it. And this points to the third gojo.
Shizen no niniku
Shizen no Niniku translates to “the perseverance of nature” or “make perseverance like that of nature your armour”. To endure anything, one needs perseverance. That said, how can one perceive the perseverance of nature? Perhaps nature is the entire ecosystem of the earth or maybe the universe. If we just consider the Earth and evolution of life here, that might be an instance of perseverance, extraordinary perseverance. Consider just two of the great extinctions of life in the past. The extinction at the end of the Cretaceous era resulted in the extinction of over 70% of all lifeforms on land. The dinosaurs, pterosaurs and saurians of the seas went extinct. But a remnant of them endured and became the birds of today. Tiny mammals of that age exploded onto all environments and created the richness of life of today.
The extinction at the end of the Permian era saw the extinction of over 90% of the lifeforms on earth. Mammal like reptiles that ruled all environments during that age were replaced by the dinosaurs, until the mammals came back millions of years later. Reptiles like crocodiles have been around in all of these ages, changing their sizes and shapes to suit the environment, and eating everything from other mammal like reptile to the mammals of today!
So, life endured, never went extinct, though forms of life did. This is like letting go or giving up that which needs to be let go of, given the circumstances. The perseverance here is to do what needs to be done, survive however possible, do what can be done, and change (evolve) endlessly. So, as the second gojo points out, this relentless enduring and evolving to survive through perseverance is perhaps the right path (or is this the meaning of righteous?!).
If the perseverance is not obvious, just consider the time scales, the Permian and Cretaceous are not even encompassing of the origin of life. That is well over 2 BILLION years ago. The Permian was between 250 and 300 million years ago, and the Cretaceous was roughly between 150 to 65 million years ago! Crocodile like reptilians have thus endured for 300 MILLION years! Mammals came back after 200 MILLION years to reclaim all environments while being in the shadow of the dinosaurs for all that LONG time! Now that is what embodies perseverance and endurance!
Above – Mugger or Marsh Crocodile
Shizen no choetsu
Shizen no choetsu is translated as “transcendence of nature”. This is like a reminder to not miss out on the nuance of the third gojo. While it is easy to be impressed with the vastness of time and the awesomeness of the endurance observed in the third gojo, consider what it took to actually endure during all that time! And that is “transcendence”.
Crocodile like reptiles, or crocodilians endured for 300 million years, but not specific crocodile species (or alligator or gharial or caiman species). Some species survived, but not as the same, they evolved and changed and became new species.
Dinosaurs are gone, but birds thrive today, and they are modern dinosaurs. But they are not dinosaurs, they are descendants of descendants. They evolved through many stages into the existing forms. This is an even greater change than the crocodilians. The crocodilians of today bear a resemblance to the crocodilians of old, but the birds bear no resemblance to dinosaurs, barring a few with a handful of species of the past. But in both cases the scale (size not the scales of the skin) of the creatures has changed in ways that are hard to conceive!
Now consider the mammals. Do any of the mammals of today bring to mind the sail backed Dimetrodon, which was a mammal like reptile (synapsid) of the early Permian. Absolutely none. Considering even a smaller time scale, the ancestors of whales were amphibious, large otter sized creatures, and lived supposedly lived at the edges of swamps. They were mammals for sure and lived after the end of the Cretaceous. But between then and now, some of them became the Blue Whale. From the size of a large otter to the size of a Boeing 747. Imagine that!
Now all of this is gradual evolution over time, doing what needs to be done; eat, reproduce, hide, hunt, survive. But over time, advantages are found, niches explored and exploited, and over millions of years, the original creature has morphed into something that would never recognize its ancestor and vice versa. This evolution, where the past or original specimens are unrecognizable as being related, is transcendence. Transcendence as result of relentless endurance through perseverance to survive, all the while doing just what needs to be done.
Thus, transcending is evolving to perhaps not being able to recognize the old self, or even remembering the old one. There is no sense of achievement at having evolved, it is just a new self, suited to survive in a new ecosystem. The new form cannot remember the old one to have pride or even learn from the transcendence, for the next evolution (read transcendence) likely will have no learning or similarity to the previous iteration. So, just follow the path you see 😊 and the learning will come. The path is to just do what needs to be done and letting go of that which needs letting go of. Maybe then, is not knowing transcendence and not having the need to know fumetsu no fusei? And only this leads to the right path? For even having a need to hold on to learning, is not being able to let go. We might have to accept that it is necessary to let go of the need to remember our learning or even think learning is important! Or does just staying the path of perseverance while letting go of that which needs to be let go, lead to learning without trying and is that a transcendence by itself?
Dimetrodon, mammal-like synapsid to Elephant, modern mammal
Komyo no satori
The last gojo is “Komyo no satori”. This translates to “the light of wisdom”. This seems to be a wink to make you realize that the end is not really the end. If the path lasts all life long and at its end there is no need for wisdom, what is the purpose of wisdom, let alone a light that perhaps signifies the gaining of it (like the light bulb in comic books 😊). Perhaps this just means one realizes that there is no end, and one has to follow the other concepts that have already been realized and that realization is wisdom in itself. Maybe it just means you smile and realize that the journey was the light and wisdom is the continuation of it without any grouse at having to endure further.
The wisdom was always in one, if one had to endure and if transcendence results in the loss of that wisdom, then that is something to give away as well, and then go again. 😊
Image credit – “Tales of Humour 3”, published by Amar Chitra Katha
Mundane Budo 