Stop playing games.

 

Miyamoto Musashi and Sasaki Kojiro were famous samurai from the late 1500s.  Their match was arguably Musashi’s most famous duel.  It was also apparently one of Musashi’s last lethal duels.  Eiji Yoshikawa tells the story very well, but his version is still historical fiction rather than 100% fact.

What interests me about the story is that centuries later, Kojiro still has his defenders.  He was famous, and very skilled.  He lost.  Most versions of the story still temporize and somewhat dismiss Musashi’s victory.  Depending on the version you hear or read:

-          Musashi showed up late

-          He insulted Kojiro to drive him more crazy

-          One version, Musashi waited until Kojiro had his famous “Drying Pole” cut shorter – Kojiro was using an extra long battle field sword for years, then had to switch to a shorter Iaido type blade largely out of social pressure.  Kojiro’s skills were with a longer blade.

-          Musashi whittled a bokken that was longer than he knew Kojiro’s sword would be, allowing him a lethal shot while Kojiro couldn’t quite reach him.

-          Some versions say Mushashi positioned himself so that the sun was in Kojiro’s eyes.

 

Musashi was famous for using every advantage, so he probably made sure he was close to the surf with the firmer sand and tried to leave Kojiro either in the water or in the dry sand.  Kojiro had spent extensive time in the city at this point, and not on the beach.

So, Musashi was not credited clearly with the win, and he was also declared a coward for jumping back in his boat the second Kojiro hit the ground, making a quick getaway before Kojiro’s students could take revenge.  Musashi was a “cheater.”

The various versions out there are statements on Musashi’s time.  Wartime had passed.  The samurai’s abilities were about politics and social stature.  Victory and defeat were secondary to Honour.  Honour was a form of social control that those in charge could bend to their needs.  Rules could be broken.  Someone could train for years under their superiors to develop a weakness that their superiors could exploit in a second.  Low ranked samurai had their weapons removed and were left in Seiza while their superiors had cushions, chairs, or the right to stand.  Paranoia was a virtue.

Why is Musashi not simply the guy who killed Kojiro?  Why is Kojiro not simply the loser? 

Why qualify successful combat at all?  This comment on my blog about Tomiki and Ueshiba O Sensei:

A little known fact is that Ueshiba trained in judo under Kiyoichi Takagi from age 24 to 26 (before taking up Daito Ryu). Thus Ueshiba had an advantage because he knew the judo repertoire and how a judoka moves, whereas Tomiki knew nothing of aikido. A good guess is that Ueshiba neutralised Tomiki by preventing him from taking a jacket grip.

Not what you would call a 'win' by normal standards

 

Kenji Tomiki lost.  Tomiki decided, and apparently his primary teacher Kano Jigoro agreed, that Ueshiba O Sensei was someone worth studying with.  Respecting Tomiki Sensei is not reason enough to denigrate Ueshiba O Sensei.  Ueshiba had more education?  That's not cheating.  Ueshiba didn't play the Judo game rules and fought like an Aikido person?  That's not cheating.

I remember watching the Olympics last summer.  The female Gold Medal Heavy weight match had two experienced wrestlers who had faced off many times.  The Japanese wrestler let the Canadian wrestler hit her in the head several  times.  Her head was down and far forward, her hands and knees were back.  There were penalties for not attacking, so both would wait until one or the other would face a penalty.  To touch someone’s hair or head or perform a striking action was a penalty.  Finally, the Canadian could not afford another penalty, and faced with losing to the rules she held back, and soundly lost.  So, sticking your head forward at waist height with your hands unable to defend yourself against blows is a “Good Strategy.”

One of the Judo silver medals was won by a young man who defended himself by landing out of a throw on his face.  A point is won by having someone land on their back (full point) or on their side (half point).  So, landing on your face is a “Good Strategy.”

Boxers can enter grappling range and hug someone, because throws and sweeps aren’t allowed, knees to the groin aren’t allowed.  So, hugging someone and standing still is a “Good Strategy.”

Olympic Tae Kwon Do was frustrating to watch.  Two seconds of movement, a split second close enough to make contact.  A foot flies upward.  Someone demands a camera replay and everything stops.  The foot is seen to brush a single toe against the head gear; the person “kicked” in the head has not been moved, nor stumbled nor suffered any apparent trauma nor even impact.  Victory!  Nevermind the part where high kicks are more points than sensible combat, throws are illegal, contact below the waist is illegal (but your opponent has a large below the belt surface area effectively above the belt for a large portion of the match.)

In our combat games, there has always been a problem finding a way to make training safe for both partners.  Someone who cannot fight their way out of a wet paper bag in their 40s because they were too brutal in practice in their 20s missed the boat in my opinion.  Just like training for rules, training to be a cripple is training for eventual incompetence in combat.  MMA started as a relaxing of the rules, but now has safe terrain, no weapons, one on one, illegal techniques, weight classes, gender classes…mostly driven by a need for safety, but some rules like maximum grappling time limits were because the crowds found it boring to watch two sweaty guys laying on top of each other.

I am not questioning the athletic ability of these Olympians, nor the effectiveness of their arts.  I certainly don’t want to fight them.  It’s the rules so solidly in place that they are now defining dogmatic characteristics of who we are as martial artists.  It’s the lack of acknowledgement by some to say that all combat games are faked; whether to focus on a specific skill, or for health or safety.

Now, the people with nuclear stockpiles that can obliterate the planet have decided that chemical weapons that could obliterate the planet are “cheating.”  Same with biological weapons and plagues.  “We don’t have it so you better not.  Fair combat is what we can do to you, and you better not even try to develop the ability to do what we can do or we’ll call a foul and bomb you before you can challenge us on equal footing.” 

I think this is one truth that Morihei Ueshiba was absolutely correct about:  testing, competing with and criticizing others weakens us.  Legislation, sanctions, “limited” military action and speeches are not peace; they are a substitute form of violence.  When the first atomic bomb landed on Japan, I believe O Sensei learned we can’t always hide behind the “rules.”  Treating life like a damn game is a way we try to pretend there are no consequences to our actions and choices (and non-action is a choice!)  There is no referee to call foul, and there is cold comfort in having our friends write a favourable obituary.

 

It's not a game.  Stop acting like it is.