The stories in Hindu culture are case studies to understand life experiences and perhaps identify paths to follow when times of travail are experienced at various points in an individual’s life. These stories include the various tales depicting instances from the lives of Lord Rama and Lord Krishna.

Lord Rama is called “Maryada Purushōttama”. Lord Krishna is called “Leela Purushōttama”. The word “Purushōttama” is made up of the words “Purusha” and “Uttama”. “Purusha” means human or generically “man”. “Uttama” means excellent or of the highest order. So, “Purushōttama” means an extraordinary or excellent human or an individual who is of the highest calibre.

“Maryada” has multiple meanings, from “respect” and “honour” to “norms” and also “limits”. When we say “limit”, it specifically refers to “self-control”. “Leela” can mean “play (of the divinities)” or “tale” or “story”. A story is nothing but a possible (plausible?) or potential scenario.

I had written a whole post about the “Maryada” aspect of Lord Rama, a link to which is seen below. Lord Rama was a God. He needed to follow no rules that applied to the people he lived with. He was not even subject to the laws that applied to kings who were responsible to their citizens. But he followed every rule that applied to humans diligently, even when it resulted in great personal tragedy. He followed the rules even when the rules were not just, at least by modern standards.

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

Lord Rama could have broken every rule with absolutely no consequences to either himself or anyone dear to him. He could have protected them with divine abilities. But he CHOSE a life of hardship by foregoing the abilities of the divine. This was his SELF-CONTROL, the ability to stay human by limiting the use of the divine. This demonstrated ability throughout his life is what makes him Maryada Purushōttama.

Lord Rama’s life shows the benefits of self-control despite the pain it causes. This fact is what makes his life a case study. To demonstrate some instances from Lord Rama’s life when he chose hardship due to self-control instead of the loophole divinity provided, are seen below.

Lord Rama was going to be anointed heir apparent, but he lost this position due to a promise his father had made. He further lost his home and the company of his family in the same sequence of events when he was exiled to the forest. He accepted this loss because it was his responsibility, as he saw it, to uphold the word of his father.

Lord Rama chooses to keep his father’s word despite Bharata requesting him to change his decision. Image credit – “The Ramayana”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Even when his father was no more and he could have chosen to reverse the exile, as the person whose word he was upholding was no more, he did not. His brother Bharat, in whose interest he was exiled, beseeched him to return and yet he let the exile continue, for the word of his father was a sacred contract to be upheld. It was like he was the heir apparent to even his father’s promises, even if the consequences of the promise were not in his best interests, and the promise was being extracted in bad faith. Lord Rama was not obligated to do keep his father’s word, yet he did.

Lord Rama rescued Devi Sita from Ravana. But this came at the cost of a very large number of lives. And despite all the effort, Devi Sita had to endure the Agni Pariksha to satisfy the norms of society as it existed then. He did not stop this either as a God or as a man who commanded enormous respect, because this would put him above the rest of humanity.

Devi Sita has to endure the Agni Pariksha. Image credit – “The Ramayana”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Eventually, he had to abandon Devi Sita again, to prevent setting a wrong precedent to a society that used his life as an example to cover up their mistakes. He never tried to create an exception despite his ability and right to do so. This was despite doing so would be the right thing, as we see it today. He put the sanctity of societal norms above what we would consider the “right thing”.

These events reveal that the purpose of the Rama avatāra was not just the elimination of Rāvana; it was to render a life as a case study in restraint and self-control.

Lord Krishna is the one who shows possible situations and outcomes through the story of his life. The “possibilities” that are shown highlight how rules and norms can be challenged, especially if they seem wrong at any given time. This is despite all of society or any individual of power or even a God choosing to disagree and uphold a norm that is wrong.

Lord Rama chooses to abandon Devi Sita despite knowing it is not the right decision. Image credit – “Sons of Rama”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

This act of identifying possibilities is the act of upholding Dharma (that which sustains) even when that results in actions that endanger one’s self, reputation and legacy. Some instances from Lord Krishna’s life when he chose to circumvent the “norms and rules” to sustain Dharma, are seen below.

Lord Krishna encouraged the worship of a mountain (Govarhdana) over the worship of Lord Indra, because the worship of Indra was carried out due to fear of retribution and not genuine devotion. This act incurred Indra’s wrath and Lord Krishna chose to employ his divinity to protect his fellow citizens. Not for him were the need to live as a human and suffer unjust retribution.

Lord Krishna suggests that Govardhana Giri (mountain) is worthy of worship over Lord Indra. Image credit – “Tales of Krishna”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Lord Krishna chose retreat(!) over a need for victory against Jarasandha, the mighty ruler of Magadha. Dwaraka was built on the coast, far away from the reach of Jarasandha. The people of Mathura had to endure several invasions from Jarasandha. While Krishna and his brother Balarama, with their inhuman abilities defeated each of the invasions, prosperity could only be ensured by retreating from the Jarasandha’s sphere of influence.

Lord Krishna holds up Govardhana Giri (mountain) with his little finger! Image credit – “Tales of Krishna”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Krishna used deception several times during warfare. This was despite his having to live by the code of the Kshatriyas and fight fair. Some instances when Lord Krishna chose deception to end conflicts are,

• Running away from Kālayavana, to lead him into a trap in cave where Muchukunda inadvertently killed him. This act made him earn the epithet, “Ranchod Das”, or “one who runs from a battle”, which is not really a flattering adjective.
• Krishna used the Pandavas to eliminate Jarasandha, and that was by tricking the king of Magadha into a duel against Bhima, the only person who could defeat Jarasandha, away from the battlefield.
• Krishna defeated Narakāsura by bypassing his armies and carrying out an air raid on the latter’s palace at night, where Narakāsura was sleeping! Not only did Krishna violate norms by attacking at night, but he also used Garuda, who was a divine being, to circumvent a large part of Naraka’s troops.
• During his peace mission to Hastinapura, in a last-ditch effort to prevent war between the Kauravas and the Pandavas, Krishna revealed his divine form (Vishwaroopa) to try and convince Duryodhana to make peace. If Duryodhana had been a bit more reasonable, he would have seen the futility of going up again a God.
• Krishna used an illusion to enable Arjuna to kill Jayadratha and a lie to defeat Drona during the Kurukshetra War.

Mathura survives 17 invasions by Jarasandha! Image credit – “Krishna and Jarasandha”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Thus, the Krishna avatāra was a case study in the need to uphold the essence of Dharma and not just the rituals and norms that seem to lead to Dharma. Dharma evolves and this necessitates evolution in ways of life; rigidity (rules and norms) itself could become the enemy of Dharma. This vision of what evolution could lead to is perhaps what the many “Leela” of Lord Krishna demonstrate.

Krishna runs away from the battlefield despite being a Kshatriya! Image credit – “Krishna and Jarasandha”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

The Bujinkan system of martial arts, among many other concepts, emphasizes self-control and a need to adapt. The two concepts are interlinked. In a situation of real physical conflict, one can never apply techniques as they are taught and trained in a dojo. The forms and techniques trained in class are just options that are available to a practitioner, they are “possibilities”.

The form or technique or even just a concept that can be applied in a conflict against a single or multiple opponents, is a choice to be made by the individual(s) participating in the conflict. The consequences of the choices lead to further choices and so on, until the conflict is hopefully mitigated. Each choice is like a “Leela” (though not divine) we discussed earlier in this article.

Krishna and the Yadavas retreat to Dwaraka to survive further invasions by Jarasandha. Image credit – “Krishna and Jarasandha”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

For example, if there are multiple opponents, receiving the attack by not trying to escape might not be wise. If an opponent is unarmed, strikes against this person might be viable. If the opponent is being violent and high on substances, subduing the opponent might be the need of the hour. One needs to adapt to the situation and “THE SITUATION” changes every INSTANT. This continuous adaptation is to flow with the changing situation.

This is no different than being able to see the “possibilities” at every instant. If one can train oneself to be able to see multiple possibilities at all times and adapt, one is as close to being “limitless” as possible. I am referring to a physical conflict, but the same principles will apply even if one is involved in a verbal altercation or a tough negotiation, which is nothing but a conflict over a favourable deal.

Krishna carries out an aerial attack on Narakaasura, while mounted on Garuda. Image credit – “Tales of Krishna”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

A key ingredient in being close to “limitless” and able to see several options at all times is SELF-CONTROL. At its simplest level, self-control could simply mean not expecting any form or technique applied in a fight to result in an expected outcome, specifically the outcome seen in a dojo during regular practice. Different opponents have vastly different physical abilities and skills based on their background, genetics and experience in different martial arts. This means doing what needs to be done to survive and not expect anything one does to work in a specific manner.

If any action does not have a desired outcome, one must adapt instantaneously. There is no room for anger at the opponent, doubt in the self because a technique did not work or any analytical paralysis. This stopping oneself at an emotional level and staying in the moment to stay alive and use all opportunities available is SELF-CONTROL. This needs to be applied at all times. SELF-CONTROL and FLOW (BEING LIMITLESS) are both equally important and two sides of the same coin in any situation that needs conflict management.

Krishna attacks a sleeping Narakaasura, violating the norms of war! Image credit – “Tales of Krishna”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Thus, one needs to apply the traits demonstrated by both Lord Rama and Lord Krishna during their respective lifetimes. In my opinion, the continuous application of both self-control and flow is like switching between Lord Rama and Lord Krishna incessantly!

So, practicing the Bujinkan and perhaps other martial arts as well, is akin to celebrating the interplay between Lord Rama and Lord Krisha all the time! 😊 Rama to control the self and decide when to limit one’s own “need to do” or “expect something” and Krishna to “stay limitless in going beyond form” and “seeing the endless possibilities in any movement”.

Krishna uses a deceptive illusion to enable Arjuna’s slaying of Jayadratha. Image credit – “Mahabharata 35 – Arjuna fulfills his vow”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

Krishna convinces Yudishtira to lie, against his nature, to stop Drona. Image credit – “Mahabharata 36 – The Battle at mindnight”, published by Amar Chitra Katha.

An aside – Sanjeev Sanyal, member of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council, has spoken several times about how the core of Lord Rama’s and Lord Krishna’s lives was the debate between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. Lord Rama’s life was about living a life as described by the law, even if the law seemed unjust at times, while Lord Krishna’s life was about not following the law when it went against the spirit of the justice or the law itself. What I have described about Lord Rama and Lord Krishna in relation to the martial arts is not very different as concepts go, from this view expressed by Mr. Sanyal. Seen below is a video where Mr. Sanyal is expressing his views.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITER_dobOB0