Attack as defense: The sword as the mirror
In many modern schools it is taught that martial arts are for defense only but what constitutes defense? It is for each warrior to decide the answer to that question and what calls for that defense all the more so. If a warrior is aware of a threat to himself, his family or community and takes steps to negate it, is that not defense? From the most intimate of circles to the wider circles of the community is the warrior not responsible to take, or not, an action in defense of himself, those under him and the community he is a part of. It is defense not to allow one’s self to be hurt, it is defense to not allow one’s things to be stolen or one’s home to be breached. It is defense to see to the border of one’s nation as well as preventing other nations to attack one’s own. For that defense one must be willing to ruthlessly attack without regard for the pretense of being civilized. It is true that war is never the answer or even a good thing, however a war in defense is a war that has proven itself a needed evil, made needed by those that demand such a defense as war. It is taught in the Komuso Ryu of Nin Do that “the sword reflects the spirit of its master thus it is the key to Heaven or Hell.” To know one’s self one must acknowledge what one is willing to defend and that way one well know what one values and thus lend one’s strength to the things one would cultivate and see more of in the world. The things one is willing to defend points to what or whom one is willing to attack.
If one grasps what one is willing to attack in order to defend one can also grasp the things that others can use to compel one to attack and thus allow the enemy to claim self-defense. If one finds that one is always on the attack it would be a show of the warrior’s discipline to ask one’s self what am I defending and why? If one finds that one is always under attack one must ask what one has that is so valuable to make such constant defense needed. If one is always finding attackers in one’s life one must ask what is one not defending, what is one doing to expose one’s self to attack and who if anyone is finding benefit in that situation? True fear is an awareness of threat, ego based fear is a conflation of actual injury with personal hurt. A broken arm is an attack, being disliked or even hated is a possible emotive hurt but it does no actual damage because ego concern the perceptions of others and the import one gives to those perceptions. In the case of actual threat the answer is to plan, practice and be prepared; in the case of emotive or ego based fear find out what aspect of one’s ego one is defending and decide if its valid or not. The confident one is can draw others to challenge that confidence because they are intimidated by it, in the same vein confidence can convince others that one has something they should have. This goes back to the teaching in the ryu that seven of the eight enemies on the path stem from fear which pulls one toward one’s base drives. Whether one is dealing with an actual threat or a threat to the ego the answer is the same i.e. plan, practice and prepare.
When one is planning, practicing and preparing one should do so on the basis of if a thing should occur and not when, because to prep and so on for when is to create an expectation for what one is aiming to negate or avoid. The sword is a mirror, both for the one holding it and for the one facing it; the one holding it must ask why is it being used and the one facing it must ask am I facing my foe or my perception of them? The warrior must stare into the mirror of his own sword and thus make himself aware on if one is responding to an actual threat or a threat to the ego and in either why is one responding as one is if at all. To know what one would defend and thus attack for shows what one values and knowing what one values will enable one to know what to engage and what one should avoid.
Comments
Comments are closed.