自己啓発 Jiko Keihatsu (Self-development)

自己啓発 Jiko Keihatsu (Self-Development)

  A teenaged student of an old-fashioned Jujutsu system, after reading about Aikido sought clarification during his next class.

 Student:

Sensei, what about self-development in (the Jujutsu system that he was learning)?

 (Japanese) Teacher: (without pause, in English)

You kill him.  So that you can live... and develop...

That teacher's (only partly) tongue-in-cheek response to his young student*'s question changed the framework of the dialogue.  That level of bluntness stands in stark contrast to all the noise made about the (near-magical) properties imparted through participation in combative arts from Asia (far fewer make these claims about western wrestling, fencing or boxing, although a strong case should be made for them as well) the term 'self-development' remains ambiguous.  Certainly, one can observe physical changes from regular training (improved strength, flexibility, endurance, etc.), but the implication seems to be that these changes run deeper; that the alterations happen on a 'transpersonal' level.

So, how does it follow that learning to maim or kill by striking, grappling, or using weapons more effectively makes us better humans?  And, if it really did work as simply as that, why are there so many creeps, weirdos and wannabes in the 'martial' arts world?

Let’s step away from that for a moment.  Imagine, for a moment, being invited to eat at the home of someone who posts amazing photographs of the food that they prepare, on their social media.  You anticipate the evening knowing that, whatever else happens, you will be presented with carefully prepared, well-seasoned, and properly cooked food.  After you arrive, things take a turn.

Though the food on the table maintains the level of visual appeal, your host serves gritty/sandy greens, dressings that lack any discernable flavor and proteins that are either too dry and tough or unsafely undercooked.  Even if the plating is beautiful, that’s not enough to offset the lack of edibility.  Okay, so that stinks, but at least you survive, (hopefully without food poisoning.)  As you prepare to leave, as if in anticipation of negative feedback, your host tops off the assault on your palate and stomach, with the justification, “I cook for self-development; it’s not about whether or not it’s edible, it’s about how I feel while I’m making it and how it looks on the plate.”  Dollars to doughnuts, you’d think that person is a loony and (maybe not so) politely decline future invitations to dine at their home.

Just because a thing ‘looks’ alright from the outside doesn’t make it sound. It is only through not just the ‘practice’ of cooking, but checking each ingredient to ensure quality and probing the process (to determine what worked well, what failed, if tasting happened at each step, etc.)  It is much the same for any other art, craft, or way.  Each thing that we study has a(n ideal) context in which it ought to operate well. If it can't or doesn't, there are problems.

Pursuits that offer many facets (as do the bugei- ‘martial’ arts) are powerful tools.  As practitioners, we experience regular exposure to extremes of discomfort and fear; allowing us to not only see our innate reactions to stressors but to reshape those responses to be more beneficial.  Using the example of cooking, it is in this way that we take the ingredients (of body/mind) and through the application of technique and heat (pressure) create change. 

So, to go back to the quote from the beginning, we who study combatives (historical or modern), must each at some point make peace (pun intended) with the notion that full expressions of violence are horrific.  Through practice, kihon (basics) and kata (forms) become so ingrained that we don’t have to give them much conscious thought, and therein lies the danger.  Possessing the skills to maim or kill without empathy and an ethical framework creates monsters; moralizing, absent capability to harm, is sophistry.  Only when the extent of how bad things can get (and how quickly they can get there) is a known quantity, does one possess a real choice to pursue 'non-violent' resolution.  Failing to acknowledge the possibilities of mayhem and death (for all involved, especially when weapons are involved), keeps the stakes low and encourages a kind of casual foolhardiness.  Having a clear sense of our art(s) working in their contexts (by first knowing what and where that is), all of the strategy, techniques and conditioning in the world won't render better people, only ones with unjustified confidence who, by dint of poor training, will crumble at the slightest whiff of an unscripted circumstance.  And that’s not development, it’s a delusion.

Happy holidays and best wishes for the new year,

Jigme

Jigme Chobang Daniels, instructor

Aoi Koyamakan Dojo

*Full disclosure, that student was my teacher whose instructor, an older Japanese fellow, who was given to rather terse responses, particularly when responding in English.

遠近 Enkin (Distance/Perspective)

遠近 Enkin (Far Near)

Distance/Perspective

Part 1

(Chicago Tribune, Monday, 4 January 2019)

Homeless Artist, Former Gang Member, Found Dead

Born in Marseilles, Illinois in June of 1958 and orphaned at age 9, Marshall Marseilles, rose to prominence as a member of Chicago’s notorious Clear River Gang from age 13 until he joined the Army at 17, and then again after discharge.  Following his service, Mr. Marseilles did not maintain a fixed address and appears to have spent much of his time living nomadically.  His body was found at the camp near Bullfrog Lake/Palos Preserves where he'd made his home for the last few years since retiring to semi-seclusion.  He was 60.

Marseilles, who took up writing and various art media later in life, received acclaim for his autobiographical prose and essays on surviving violence while his sketches, paintings and sculptures are prized by collectors.

Although never prosecuted, Marseilles (by his own estimates) injured or killed more than 60 individuals in violent conflicts, starting at the age of 13 when he fatally bludgeoned a man as part of a gang initiation.

Mr. Marseilles’ two sons have scheduled a private memorial service and request that donations are made to Veterans' causes in lieu of flowers.

Does the (fictitious) obituary above describe a person who suffered from untreated brain-chemistry issues (and probably PTSD)?  Was it someone who managed to shape a role for himself in a culture of pervasive violence… or, maybe, it’s the heartwarming story about the redemptive power of art?  It is, to some degree, a combination of (and far more complicated/nuanced than any single one) of these answers.   Historically, you may recognize similarities to the Kensei (sword saint), Miyamoto Musashi*, author of the Go Rin No Sho (the Book of Five Rings/Spheres) and founder of Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, often (wrongly) credited with pioneering ryoto (both swords) or nito (two swords- wielding the long and short swords in tandem).

The obituary helps to illustrate the (often extreme) dichotomy that most of us experience between how we see people, based on their proximity to us (physically or temporally), and our perceived differences or similarities to the person or group.  It also points to how critically narratives affect the way that we view historical figures- for example, who would you rather find yourself seated next to on a crowded train or bus, a giant** homeless veteran (with hygiene issues and a history of violence/mayhem/murder) or a wise master of swordsmanship noted for his keen insight, tactical skill, and physical prowess?  It is complicated to acknowledge that they are, at least potentially, the same person.  Which brings up some questions about that split in thinking:   

1)     Is it fair to apply modern standards (of conduct, mental health, etc.) to people from antiquity?

2)     Would we accept the same level of 'eccentricities' seen in many historical figures in modern ones?  If so, what is a 'bridge too far' and if not, why?

3)     Can we find aspects of these figures admirable despite vehemently disagreeing with them on certain, key, issues?

A. If so, does it mean that we ought to disregard sections of their works that espouse beliefs that don't align with our own (or those of our culture)?

4)     Finally, and possibly most importantly, who is the arbiter in these matters- does it fall within the orthodox structure of our art(s) or is it the duty of individual practitioners, to decide for ourselves?

Investigating our arts (and their history) ought not to be an exercise to find universal answers.  Let’s instead use the process to discover what we actually think about things (rather than parroting/regurgitating what we’ve heard or been told).  This pairs with physical training to develop a working epistemology, one capable of removing the separation of time and distance.  Relying on myths that have persisted for generations do us no favors and can dissuade future students from finding useful tools to interact with the world as we find it.

Yours in seeking perspective,

Jigme

Jigme Chobang Daniels, instructor

Aoi Koyamakan Dojo

    

* Please note:  I draw these parallels not to diminish or impugn his impact and legacy, but because of how widely known his biographical details are, even among those who aren't terribly familiar with the period.

** The historical Musashi is said to have stood over 6 shaku (6 feet/nearly 2 meters), far taller than average for the time; his hygiene issues, if true, may have been due to eczema.