Sensei never really tells someone if they are going to test, and people who are in the know, don’t ask. However, three days before the 1999 fall exam, Sensei turns to me and says ” Uchi Deshi at Hombu dojo were sometimes held two ranks below their actual ability. They were a sacrifice in the raising of the bar at the dojo. So, if you were a regular student–at, lets say Nidan level–and you saw an Uchi Deshi of the same rank, the difference would be so stark that you would want to try harder. This Friday I’m going to test you. You are going to give one of the best tests that people have seen in a while . . . and I am going to fail you.”

Seeing the look on my face, Sensei continued “An okay test is not enough. Like Kamikaze, it has to be done with spirit and precision. Only then will people understand.”

After Sensei finished speaking, I sat there for a few seconds before telling him, “I need to prepare.”

Then, I put my unfinished drink down on the bar, handed my car keys to a friend, and bolted, in full work attire, three miles home to get ready.

Adam Pilipshen
Long Island Aikikai

For previous post, please see The Way to Mastery: Criteria #1.

The following is another except from Erich Fromm’s The Art of Loving.  In his book, Fromm discusses many criteria that are needed by the practitioner if they truly wish to master an art.

“That concentration is a necessary condition for the mastery of an art is hardly necessary to prove.  Anyone who ever tried to learn an art knows this. Yet, even more than self-discipline, concentration is rare in our culture.  On the contrary, our culture leads to an unconditioned and diffused mode of life, hardly paralleled anywhere else.  You do many things at once; you read, listen to the radio, talk , smoke, eat, drink. You are the consumer with the open mouth, eager and ready to swallow everything-pictures, liquor, knowledge. This lack of concentration is clearly shown in our difficulty in being alone with ourselves. To sit still, without talking, smoking, reading, drinking, is impossible for most people. They become nervous and fidgety, and must do something with their mouth or their hands. (Smoking is one of those symptoms of this lack of concentration; it occupies hand, mouth, eye, and nose.)”

“Concentration is by far more difficult to practice in our culture, in which everything seems to act against the ability to concentrate. The most important step in learning concentration is to learn to be alone with oneself without reading, listening to the radio, smoking, or drinking. […] Anyone who tries to be alone with himself will discover how difficult it is. He will begin to feel restless, fidgety, or even to sense considerable anxiety. He will be prone to rationalize his unwillingness to go on with this practice by thinking that it has no value, is just silly, that it takes too much time, and so on, and so on. He will also observe that all sorts of thoughts come to his mind which takes possession of him. He will find himself thinking about his plans for later in the day, or about some difficulty in a job he has to do, or where to go in the evening, or about any number of things that will fill his mind—rather than permitting it to empty itself. If would be helpful to practice a few very simple exercises, as, for instance, to sit in a relaxed position (neither slouching, nor rigid), to close one’s eyes, and to try to see a white screen in front of one’s eyes, and to try to remove all interfering pictures and thoughts, then to try to follow one’s breathing; not to think about it, nor force it, but to try to have a sense of “I”; I = myself, as the center of my powers, as the creator of my world. One should, at least, do such concentration exercise every morning for twenty minutes (and if possible longer) and every evening before going to bed.”

- Erich Fromm from The Art of Loving

When I first started to teach Aikido, I felt I was fulfilling my role simply by demonstrating techniques and helping my students recreate those techniques.  However, over the years I have become increasingly disappointed with this teaching method as I couldn’t help but notice that students were become so dependent on kata that they were failing to understand Aiki.  This realization has forced me to rethink my teaching style and to align my efforts more accurately to what I really wanted my students to learn.  Although I still feel that the transmission of kata is important, these days my goal is to help students decode and master themselves through Aikido techniques; a quality that is more universal than mere Ikkyo or Iriminage will ever be. Although I am far from achieving self-mastery, I hope that by sharing my own successes and failures, I can help students find a way that will work for them.

A few years ago I was given Erich Fromm’s The Art of Loving and, while I didn’t realize it at the time, in it was a very interesting section that I would later include in my study of pedagogy (the art of teaching).   In his book, Fromm discusses many criteria that are needed by the practitioner if they truly wish to master an art. Below is just one of them, and in the coming weeks, I will present the others.

I hope you find his writings as helpful as I have.

Adam Pilipshen
Long Island Aikikai

Dojo-cho

Criteria #1: Discipline

‘The practice of any art has certain general requirements, quite regardless of whether we deal with the art of carpentry, medicine, or the art of love. First of all, the practice of any art requires discipline. I shall never be good at anything if I do not do it in a disciplined way; anything I do only if “I am in the mood” may be a nice amusing hobby, but I shall never become a master in that art.  But the problem is not only that of discipline in the practice of the particular art (say practicing everyday a certain amount of hours) but it is that of discipline in one’s whole life.  One might think that nothing is easier to learn from modern man than discipline.  Does he not spend eight hours a day in the most disciplined way at a job which is strictly routinized?  The fact, however, is that modern man has exceedingly little self-discipline outside of the sphere of work.  When he does not work, he wants to be lazy, to slouch or, to use a nicer word, to “relax.”  This very wish for laziness is largely a reaction against the reutilization of life.  Just because a man is forced for eight hours a day to spend his energy for purposes not his own, but prescribed for him by the rhythm of the work, re rebels and his rebelliousness takes the form of an infantile self-indulgence.  In addition, in the battle against authoritarianism he has become distrustful of all discipline, of that enforced by irrational authority, as well as of rational discipline imposed by himself.  Without such discipline life become shattered, chaotic, and lacks in concentration. “

“How does one practice discipline? Our grandfathers would have been much better equipped to answer this question. Their recommendation was to get up early in the morning, not to indulge in unnecessary luxuries, to work hard.  This type of discipline had obvious shortcomings.  It was rigid and authoritarian was centered around the virtues of frugality and saving, and in many ways was hostile to life.  But in reaction to this kind of discipline, there has been an increasing tendency to be suspicious of any discipline, and to make undisciplined, lazy indulgence in the rest of one’s life the counterpart and balance for the routinized way of life imposed on us during the eight hours of work.  To get up at a regular hour, to devote regular amount of time during the day to activities much as meditating, reading, listening to music, walking; not to indulge, at least not beyond a certain minimum, in escapist activities like mystery stories and movies, not to overeat or overdrink are some obvious and rudimentary rules.  It is essential, however, that discipline should not be practiced like a rule imposed on oneself from the outside, but that it becomes an expression of one’s own will; that it is felt as pleasant, and that one only slowly accustoms oneself to a kinds of behavior which one would eventually miss, if one stopped practicing it.  It is one of the unfortunate aspects of our Western concept of discipline (as of every virtue) that its practice is supposed to be somewhat painful and only if it is painful can it be “good.” The East has recognized long ago that that which is good for man-for his body and for his soul-must also be agreeable, even though at the beginning some resistances must be overcome.’

- Erich Fromm from The Art of Loving

So one day, out of the blue, you find yourself charged with assault for putting a guy (who, by the way, totally deserved it) in the hospital, and you claim it was in self-defense.  Unfortunately, unlucky comrade, the way the self-defense claim works is that the onus is on you to prove that to the court. You will need to explain what happened, why it happened that way, and why you had no other option, or you’ll find yourself spending an uncertain, possibly dangerous, definitely uncomfortable amount of time in your local neighborhood prison cell.

Force justification, put simply, is the necessity to explain and justify why you did what you did. While there are variations from state to state, the baseline of force justification is usually defined as “an individual may use the minimal level of force that he/she believes is needed to safely resolve the situation.” Although it sounds simple enough, if not somewhat disappointingly bland, you’ll need to tread cautiously, because there are many legal (as in subtle and often damning) concepts in that definition. Three particularly ambiguous but important concepts are alluded to with the words “may”, “minimal level of force” and “needed”.

The first of which is the presence of the word “may.” You are not a officer of the law (and no, despite what the media will have you think, leotard wearing vigilantes do not count), you are just a common citizen of the United States and therefore do not have the special privileges that are afforded to members of law enforcement. You “may” use force in certain situations but you are not required to.  Only police officers are “required” to  use force due to their legal duty to keep the peace.  What this means is that although force is an option, if you find yourself in a situation in which it is one of the likely choices, you should walk away whenever possible.  If not, (meaning you engaged) and ended up in court, you must show that what you did was not only necessary but just enough to stop the attack and end the situation.

This leads into the next phrase–”minimal level of force.” In this hypothetical situation, an unprovoked attacker took a swing at you, and not only were you able to dodge the punch but proceeded to beat the living tar out of the guy, then based on the law you didn’t use the “minimal level of force” no matter how well deserved the beating was. In this case, chances are you’ll be convicted of battery because your roles of attacker and defender reversed.  Likewise, if you “got into words” with someone at a bar and it escalated into an actual fight, you “defending” yourself (as in physically retaliated against your attacker) may not be self-defense, even if he did swing first.  This is due to the fact that the physical show of force on your part was not “needed,” since you had every chance to disengage before it exploded into a debacle. This brings us to what is “needed” for you to legally be allowed to use force.

Four things are needed for there to be a valid need for force. These are: intent, means, opportunity, and preclusion.  First, the threat must show their intent that they wish to do you harm.  It might be something as obvious as a verbal death threat or something as subtle as someone blocking your path of escape.  Whether it’s verbal or non-verbal, this is something you must be able to explain in court.  Second, a person must have the means to do you harm as well. Whether it’s their size, the weapon they are holding, or just their blatant insanity; the person threatening you must have the capability to harm you.  A buck-naked man threatening to shoot you is not good enough (unfortunately, it is likely that he can still do a fair amount of damage, so be careful.) Third, the person threatening you must be able to reach you with his means. If someone is threatening you from outside your home, it is your first responsibility to call the police as the person doesn’t yet have opportunity to hurt you. However, if the person somehow gained entrance into your house before you either had a chance to call law enforcement or law enforcement has yet to arrive, that individual now has opportunity, and if he/she has also demonstrated the first two requirements, then you have a real “threat” on your hands and you are in danger.

Whether or not you were justified in your use of force often lies on the shoulders of the fourth and final component, which is your inability to avoid or get away from the threat.  In the case of self-defense, you must convince the court that you exhausted other possibilities of escape and that your response was the best one. Whether you couldn’t run away, get to the phone to call the police, or calm the threat down, these are the types of options a court would expect you to try before using your fists or weapons.  While you and I know that sometimes a situation calls for expediency, you must be able to articulate why the other options were just not possible for you to walk out injury-free.

That said, if there is too much wiggle room in the interpretation of the above four elements, you are going to have a difficult time in court. So it is best to consult an attorney before discussing the details of the event with the police.

Adam Pilipshen
Dojo-cho
Long Island Aikikai

Bay Shore, NY

I am not a lawyer and any advice I give is for informational purposes only.  My opinion is based on self-study and experience. Always seek the advice of a professional before acting on something that you might hear from anyone other than those with experience in law. Please also be mindful that the law is open to interpretation, and as such, one situation’s legal ruling may not apply to another, given the variety of outside factors and influences.  Always proceed with caution.

For those teaching martial arts, it is extremely important that you educate yourself and your students about Force Law.  While there are similarities from state to state, you must read, understand, and communicate the particular statutes for your state (or city) to your students.  Not doing so may put the fate of your students in jeopardy, especially if you are teaching a martial art that predates our modern legal system.

The following link will take you to New York Penal Law - ARTICLE 35, “DEFENSE OF JUSTIFICATION.”  While this does not cover everything you will need to know, it will give you a basic understanding on the specific instances where use of force is acceptable in the eyes of the law.

ARTICLE 35, “DEFENSE OF JUSTIFICATION.”

A fundamental thing to understand is the concept of affirmative defense.  Self-defense, like an insanity defense, is an affirmative defense. If you claim self-defense in a court of law, you are accepting the facts of the case as true.  So if your self-defense claim does not hold up in court, you may have just pleaded guilty to assault or murder.  When you claim self-defense in a court of law, the onus is on you to prove it.

In my next post I plan to discuss the elements of force justification and why I believe Aikido practitioners might (and I stress “might”) fare better when making a self-defense claim.

Adam Pilipshen
Dojo-cho
Long Island Aikikai

Bay Shore, NY

I am not a lawyer and any advice I give is for informational purposes only.  My opinion is based on self-study and experience. Always seek the advice of a professional before acting on something that you might hear from anyone other than those with experience in law. Please also be mindful that the law is open to interpretation, and as such, one situation’s legal ruling may not apply to another, given the variety of outside factors and influences.  Always proceed with caution.

The following is an excerpt from an upcoming autobiographical book detailing Hagihara Shihan’s life and teachings. It will be available for purchase soon. Limited quantity.

I was born in Manhattan in the year 1935. My birth certificate says it’s the Lutheran Church near Amsterdam Avenue, but I am not sure of the exact address. Both my parents are now gone, my parents passed away at age 56 and my mother passed recently at age 92. My mother was born in Hawaii, but moved to Japan and lived for some time with her parents in a town called Yokohama, near Hiroshima. There, she met my father and married him, her first marriage, his second, and later traveled to the United States where they stayed until after my brother and I were born.

My father was very interested in coming to the US and that was one of the reasons he pursued my mother. He had always wanted to become an American citizen because he had grown up hearing about how his father had immigrated to Utah (although I never knew how he managed to get there) during the construction of the transcontinental railroad. Nowadays, you see the “Chinese” migrant workers in historical western Kung-Fu movies all the time, but we (the Japanese) were Chinese to the Americans too. Japanese, Chinese, all of us Orientals looked the same. So while my grandfather was in Utah, he made a lot of money, went back to Japan and built a large house in his village where he was very much respected. Because of this, my father always had the dream to come to the United States and with his marriage to my mother, he was able to realize it.

The years after my birth were difficult, especially since it was during the Great Depression, with Germany and Japan in the midst of conflict with the rest of the world, and the threat of the US becoming involved getting closer to reality. So many things were happening politically where people hated those with my kind of face, and discriminated against the Chinese and the Japanese, whether we were citizens or not. Even though we didn’t think there was going to be a war, I believed my father somehow perceived there might be problems in the future, and sent my brother and I to be with our grandparents in Japan over the mountains near Hiroshima. At the same time, my mother wanted us to go to Japan to be educated in Japanese culture so she looked at this as an opportunity for us to become familiar with our ancestral country. Soon after, as my father had probably predicted in his heart, World War II began.

The following is an excerpt from an upcoming autobiographical book detailing Hagihara Shihan’s life and teachings. It will be available for purchase soon. Limited quantity.

“I believe discipline is the most important thing–without it, we’d be like cats and dogs. It separates man from animals, then man from gentleman, and then gentleman from spiritual individual. This division goes level by level, and the higher you go, the more you contribute to those around you. If we were into fighting like every other martial art, then we would just be doing technique. We will fight, and it is of no benefit for other people. So with Aikido, just throwing and falling is not enough–you can do that in Judo too! You throw me and I throw you, I do this technique and you do that technique, and that’s fine! But it is not Aikido because nothing is taught about ki and harmony. They don’t teach the difference between hard ki and soft ki, they don’t differentiate between giving life and taking life, and so they can’t differentiate between good and evil.”

Essential Principles of Judo
by Kyuzo Mifune

Pliable action of mind and physique surpass stiffening and sturdiness.

True spirit of Judo is nothing but the gentle and diligent free spirit. Judo rests on flexible action of mind and body. The word flexible however never means weakness but something more like adaptability and open-mindedness. Gentleness always overcomes strength.

To display best vitality in the worst plight.

A danger is apt to be unforeseen, and in such a case the worst possible plight will show itself. Judo should present its most substantial meaning in such a case. Judo’s specialty is quick shifting disadvantage to advantage, and freedom of action in the worst situation by detecting the opponent’s unguarded point quickly and changing your own position to overcome the danger.

To be careless is equal to lack of fixed principle.

You must give full attention and energy to studying Judo with zeal and sincerity. Shifting disadvantage to advantage is a subtle art and not an ounce of inattention is allowed.

Never stick to a fixed idea, but be in a self-annihilating state.

To be flexible requires a lack of consciousness of life and death. If you are not afraid of the stronger opponent but a naive mind of selflessness is maintained, your activity will be hindered by nothing, and infinite change and adaptability can be displayed.

Never despise trifles but keep faithful mind.

The mind, if slackened even a little, will cause defeat the same as fearing the opponent will make you unable to use full strength. If you are in a hurry to win the match, you will not grasp the truth of the moment. Truth is a free factor, not planned but found when the mind is in its natural state. It can be said that everybody is always with truth but your sincerity will enable you to get it without labor.