The Ethics of Defense
In my opinion, Aikido is a defensive martial art. Its techniques are primarily for neutralizing various attacks like holds, grabs, punches, kicks and various combination of them. I like Aikido because of that. In Aikido, I learn how to subdue aggressive attackers with effective and efficient techniques. Aikido is not totally defensive though. There are some basic strikes like shomenuchi (strike from the top to the head), yokomenuchi (strike from the side to the head) and tsuki (thrust); and some basic kicks like mae-geri (straight kick), yoko-geri (side kick) and ushiro-geri (rear kick). There are also various atemi (strike to the openings to make the attacker off guard).
I read an interesting topic in my Aikido book titled “Aikido and the Dynamic Sphere” about the ethics of defense. It is very interesting to me. I’m always thinking, what if in the real world I have to face a situation where there is physical conflict and I’m forced to defend myself. What kind of defensive action can I make? The topic in the book above gives a little perspective on that.
There are three kind of situation. The first, in the middle of a conflict one person suddenly attack the other person. The other person defends himself by applying a technique; the attacker is subdued and injured. The second, in the middle of a conflict one person provokes the other person. The other person becomes provoked and attack the provoker. The provoker defends himself by applying a technique; the attacker is subdued and injured. The last situation, in the middle of a conflict one person suddenly attacks the other person. The other person defends himself by applying a technique; the attacker is subdued and not injured.
In the first situation, the defender reacts to protect himself and the end result is the attacker is injured. In my opinion, the defender can not be blamed although the attacker is injured in the end. In the mind of the defender, his safety is the first priority; that is basic human instinct to survive. In the perspective of martial arts, I think many martial art techniques fall into this category. Forceful and lethal techniques are used to disable attacker that can cause serious injury to the attacker. Striking and kicking are trained to the level of being able to break bricks. Throwing and locking techniques are done in a way that if the attacker doesn’t know how to perform ukemi (falling safely), he will be severely injured. Lethal points of human body are being targeted for striking or kicking. I think even if the techniques themselves are lethal, the one who has mastered them should be able to control them at appropriate level so that the attacker will not be severely injured.
In my opinion, in the second situation the defender is the attacker because he is the one who starts provoking. It is not right and not gentle to do that and to injure the provoked person. It is even more not right if the provoking person know that he could handle and he has the intention to injure the provoked man. I had a little conflict long ago with my neighbor over small misunderstanding. There was arguing and intense emotion; it was irritating. At that time I tried not to provoke the irritating and intimidating man; I knew if I did so there would be physical conflict. I did so not because I was afraid. I was confident I could handle the man physically with my level of training at that time. And so the conflict ended with some understanding. I think no martial art teaching teaches provoking.
According to the book, the third situation is the most ideal. It is the purpose of an Aikidoka to subdue an attacker without causing severe injury to the attacker. I agree to that. In fact, many Aikido techniques reflect that philosophy. For example, ikkyo (first control) based techniques. When performing ikkyo, nage (defender) pinned uke (attacker) to the ground, controlling the back of one of his arm by grasping the wrist with one hand and pressuring the elbow with the other hand. In ikkyo, nage can give uke a choice: to surrender and go away or to suffer the pin further more. Ikkyo can injure the elbow if further applied, thus it is called elbow break in other martial art if I’m not mistaken. Ikkyo in particular or osae waza (pinning techniques) in Aikido reflect the same philosophy.
In my opinion, it is rather difficult to be able to apply the principle in the third situation. We tend to act like in the first situation, especially in life threatening situation. I read it in one of my Aikido books that to be able to apply that principle, one has to be strong. To be that strong, I think it can be achieved through our daily practice. From my books again, I think it is “The Principles of Aikido”, when practicing we should treat every attack that uke delivers as a deadly attack. Uke has the responsibility to make his attack like one. Consider shomenuchi, we should not treat uke’s shomenuchi as it is. Shomenuchi itself, in training, is not a dangerous attack; we could let it through and can suffer the blow. We should instead treat it as if it were a blow to our head with a baseball bat maybe. If we practice that way, we develop our awareness and we learn to harness the instinct to over-react when attacked. That is what I’m still practicing to achieve.
Merry Christmas 25 Dec’ 2005 and Happy New Year 1 Jan’ 2006!
|
