The Absence of Desire for Violence
September 23, 2012 – 7:17 pm
Asked how I justify my values with non-violence, I replied that I am first a martial artist. Non-violence does not mean pacifism to a martial artist. I don’t believe in “absolute pacifism” which Sam Harris describes as ultimately immoral. “Pacifism,” he said, “is merely a willingness to die — and let others die — at the pleasure of the world’s thugs.” I cannot accept inaction, even it offends my spiritual sensibilities.
Martial art is disciplined activism, even in the very Aikido philosophy with which I have fought in MMA and submission grappling. I describe it as physical confluence: with deeper practice comes greater responsibility to minimize harm and maximize help. This of course has been influenced by my Sambo/Judo background as I am a direct 3rd generation student of Jigoro Kano, who promoted Jita-Kyoei: “Mutual Welfare and Benefit”.
Non-violence to me, or “ahimsa” in my yogic background under my teacher from India, means something entirely different than inaction. It is righteous action to end the violence visited upon innocence, even if that violence brings harms to me, physically, mentally and emotionally. Some pacificsts wrongly assume that everyone who would be willing to move toward violence so others could be safe from it, must have violence in their hearts. Non-violence for me is the absence of the DESIRE for violence, especially if one must move into its harmful path.
I do not judge pacifists, or those who would not act as I would and do. I feel grateful that others exist who do act upon the violence, for it creates the freedom to be pacifists (and survive and thrive) without being violated for their lifestyle beliefs. I feel grateful even when “absolute” pacifists harshly stigmatize me and others like me as a perpetuators of violence for being willing to step into harm’s way so that they have the right to object with my activism.
very respectfully,
Scott Sonnon
www.facebook.com/scottsonnon
http://youtu.be/EjwkTzgf8zc
One Response to “The Absence of Desire for Violence”
Scott, I’m in 100% agreement with your approach. I find it interesting too that you reference an Aikido philosophy. I remember you told me you studied Aikido (maybe it was your first martial art?). The heart of Aikido philosophy is inspired by the Omoto Kyo religion. What aspect of the resulting philosophy have you found most influential?
One interesting aspect of O’Sensei’s Aikido that many people miss is the concept of initiating the attack. Sensei Morihiro Saito (who studied exclusively with O’Sensei) referenced this often in his teaching. O’Sensei realized that its easier to redirect the energy of an object in motion than an object that was static or stiff. He would feign some motion or attack in order to inspire movement in his training partner/opponent, and then take decisive action through technique. This runs counter to what I’ve seen many instructors teach (and even counter to the basic level of learning) whereby one waits for an attack.
In light of that, and your post, I find it to be an interesting observation that in order to defend, must initiate the attack. In saying that, I’m reminded of Karasuma Kantaro’s argument for a corrected definition of Aikido to “empathic engagement”, which quite lengthily, but effectively, bases off of the duality of the Chinese characters for budo: defending against attack, attacking to defend.
By Sonny on Sep 30, 2012