During Aikido practice the other night, Sensei spoke of separating the opponent’s mind
and body. As I reflected upon this concept, my mind returned to the gung fu
principle of wu wei. I realized that separating the opponent’s mind and body can be a practical realization of wu wei as applied to combat. This is how I understand this idea:
Fundamentally, one must act naturally or spontaneously. With respect to combat, this means
that one’s actions are simply a natural response to the opponent’s actions.
When an opponent chooses to act, he skews the distribution of his attention,
strength and balance in the direction of his intent. Thus, unilateral action
compromises the opponent’s grasp over the situation – this is not to be
misunderstood to mean that the control has by default passed to the other
party, i.e. oneself. Rather the opponent has simply allowed one an opportunity
to alter the situation. It is this capacity that one acts – simply doing what
the situation necessitates rather than trying to force the situation to fit the
mold created by one’s sense of self. In practical terms, one can achieve this
by taking advantage of the skew in the opponent’s attention, strength and
balance.
Movement
relative to the opponent can realign one away from the opponent’s strength and
balance. Thinking about how such movement can be achieved leads me to the
concept of fluidity and back to the notion of wu wei. The goal of one’s movement must be to complement and
complete the opponent’s structure and force. One’s actions must be a
spontaneous response to the situation created by the opponent’s intent, or in
other words one must be like a fluid and take the shape that is dictated by the
vessel that is the opponent’s rigid intent.
Once
in appropriate position, one can neutralize the opponent’s intent by applying a
force to complementary that generated by the opponent thereby separating his
strength from his balance rather than by simply trying to overwhelm it.
Aikido
aims to achieve this goal in its most philosophically and practically pure
form, disrupting the opponent’s balance and thereby breaking his control over
his own strength. This is achieved by connecting with the opponent either
physically (joint locking etc) or mentally (for instance, by inducing a sense
of impending physical contact). Disruption of balance leads to loss of positional
and kinesthetic awareness, allowing one an opportunity to apply a small force
to complement the opponent’s force and direct the opponent’s center of mass in
a safe direction.
Hung Gar offers the possibility of achieving a similar outcome through striking with
the intent of disrupting balance, disrupting the mind through pain or by
directly disrupting strength by causing damage to the body.
While
some of these approaches may lack somewhat in elegance and refinement compared
to others, they also offer viable alternatives which may be necessitated given
the limitations of one’s skill. Also, with the same limitations of skill in
mind, I do think that a fundamental intent is still necessary to the extent of
deciding the level of violence necessary – in other words, the response must be
proportional to the threat.
Regardless
of the specific approach one takes, it is important to extend one’s thinking beyond
unilateral action, beyond victory and defeat and to endeavor simply to respond
to a situation and prevail through it.