warriorship

Archived Posts from this Category

February 26, 2012

more opinions on the definition of “warrior”

Image via Wikipedia

Low Tech Combat has an interesting post up about the use of the term “Warrior”.

http://www.lowtechcombat.com/2012/02/warrior-is-dead-long-live-warrior.html

When you type in the query “What is a Warrior” to Google, you get over 25,000,000 results. Yes, that’s twenty-five million.

And yet it is still such a disputed topic.

Many argue about what a warrior is and is not.

Some argue that only a man that has fought in a war and returned is a warrior. Others say a brave child who has fought off cancer is a warrior.

There are many other classifications and strong opinions on what may be allowed to be defined as a warrior and what must not be.

Others profusely despise the term in its entirety. The term has lost all meaning in the 21st century pop culture where young men learn their morales from day time soap operas and shiny movies whilst drinking soft drink and eating fairy floss.

Such people believe the term has been both over romanticized and distilled down into a feel good term that can be attached to anyone who shows basic goodness.

Let’s get to the bottom of this…

Take the time to read LTC’s definition of the term.

About these ads

February 7, 2012

of the office that appertaineth to a knight

Posted by tgace under code of conduct, quotes, warriorship | Tags: code of conduct, philosophy, quotation, warriorship |
Leave a Comment

English: A Knight in a re-enactment of the Bat...

Image via Wikipedia

Office of a knight is the end and the beginning wherefore began the order of chivalry. Then if a knight use not his office, he is contrary to his order and to the beginning of chivalry. *** The office of a knight is to maintain and defend the holy catholic faith by which God the Father sent his Son into the world to take human flesh in the glorious Virgin, our Lady Saint Mary; and for to honor and multiply the faith, suffered in this world many travails, despites, and anguishous death. Then in like wise as our Lord God hath chosen the clerks for to maintain the holy catholic faith with scripture and reasons against the miscreaunts and unbelievers, in like wise God of glory hath chosen knights because that by force of arms they vanquish the miscreaunts, which daily labor for to destroy holy church, and such knights God holdeth them for his friends honored in the world and in that other when they keep and maintain the faith by the which we intend to be saved.

* * *

The office of a knight is to maintain and defend his worldly or terrestrial lord, for a king ne no high baron hath no power to maintain righteousness in his men without aid and help. Then if any man do against the commandment of his king or prince, it behooves the knights aid their lord, which is but a man only as another is. * * * The office of a knight is to maintain the land, for because that the fear of the common people have of the knights, they labor and cultivate the earth for fear lest they should be destroyed.

* * *

The office of a knight is to maintain and defend women, widows, and orphans, and men diseased and not powerful ne strong. For like as custom and reason is that the greatest and most might help the feeble and less, and that they have recourse to the great; right so is the order of chivalry, because she is great, honorable, and mighty, be in succor and in aid of them that been under him and less mighty and less honored than he is.

* * *

The office of a knight is to have a castle and horse for to keep the ways and for to defend them that labor the lands and the earth. And they ought to have towns and cities for to hold right to the people, and for to assemble in a place men of many diverse crafts which been much necessary to the ordinance of this world to keep and maintain the life of man and of woman.

* * *

The office of a knight is also to search for thieves, robbers, and other wicked folk, for to make them to be punished. For in like wise as the ax is made for to hew and destroy the evil trees, in like wise is the office of a knight established for to punish the trespassers and delinquents.

* * *

- Raymon Lull, Libre del Orde de Cauayleria (The Book of the Order of Chivalry).

January 30, 2012

reading ancient warrior codes

Posted by tgace under philosophy, Samurai, Tom, warriorship | Tags: bushido, philosophy, Samurai, warriorship |
[8] Comments

Image via Wikipedia

Written by Taira Shigesuke around 1700 AD. The Bushido Shoshinshu was intended to instruct the novice Samurai of the peaceful Edo Era, who had not known the rigors of battle, with the practical philosophies of previous eras.

Bushido Shoshinshu is roughly translated as “Bushido for Beginners.”

A fellow blogger over at The H Line has a post on this text:

My favorite part is from a section called “Officials,” which centers on one bit of imagery: a white jacket.

A white jacket, it says, can come clean with detergent and a good wash. Likewise:

“…there are various practices that are like detergents for cleaning the heart of warriors. What are these practices? These are loyalty, duty, and courage. There is dirt that is removed by the detergent of loyalty and fidelity, and there is dirt that is removed by the detergent of faithfulness to duty. When the stain remains stubborn even after washing with loyalty and rinsing with duty, then use the detergent of courage, and make a determined effort to scrub it clean. This is the warrior’s ultimate secret of cleaning the heart.”

It’s a beautiful message, full of hope.

Which brings up an interesting point about the reading of ancient Warrior codes. That passage IS an inspiring concept, however if one reads the final passage of this book…

Now were he to grab the aforementioned evil man and finish the matter by carving out his entrails and cutting off his head just as he pleased, and then quickly committing seppuku, the affair would be ended with him seeming to have lost his wits. Thus, there would be no problems or public hearings at the time, the lord’s position would not be threatened, the retainers would all feel at ease, and the domain would be at peace. This would be an act one hundred times greater than junshi, would combine the three virtues of loyalty, righteousness and courage, and would be a model of great loyalty to the warriors of this corrupt age.

…we see that you cant take everything you read in these warrior codes “at face value”.

This passage, on it’s face, is saying that a loyal Samurai would kill one his lords political enemies then kill himself and make it look like he did it while appearing out of his mind. This would be done as a selfless action done out of loyalty to, and for the good of, his lord and his clan; eliminating his lord’s enemy and giving his lord “plausible deniability”.

Thus, from the Bushido Shoshinshu you CAN distill the concept of “loyalty and selfless service” as an inspirational one but you cannot go around cutting the guts out of your bosses enemies. The Samurai lived in a different age, in a different culture and under a vastly different set of rules than our own. I think this illustrates the differences between the wise person who looks for the message behind the words as compared to the “wanna be” Ghost Dog Samurai who believes that these codes can be lived verbatim in our modern times.

January 13, 2012

warriordom

Posted by tgace under warriorship | Tags: warriorship |
[2] Comments

Rory Miller put up the following post on his blog a few years ago:

http://chirontraining.blogspot.com/2009/04/warriordom.html

A warrior is someone who makes war for a living. Period. It’s not some autonomous, independent, noble killing machine, some reborn knight or paragon. It is someone who is paid money to make big problems go away, often in a messy fashion.

Never been in a war? Not a warrior. Get over it.

I know that there is a myth and an industry building up around the ‘warrior identity’ but there are parts of it that I really don’t get. ”Warriors” I am told, follow their own hearts. Whatever. Real warriors follow orders. Know what you call a bunch of individuals on a battlefield? Meat. They have the humility and the basic intelligence to know that other people have more information and trust the people with that information to make those decisions.

…

Read the rest, but that quote sums up his opinion, I posted the following comment in reply.

Depends on the society and culture we are discussing.

In ancient Japan (and in other societies) a “Warrior” was what you were were born as (vs a Farmer, Artisan or merchant).

I have no issues with some professions using the word as a motivational term to inspire their members to a higher level of training and/or performance.

If a cop considers himself a “warrior” who protects society from criminals and the mindset drives him to workout, shoot, take martial arts classes, study law, etc…GREAT!

On the other hand if a person is only using the term as an ego gratifier and thinks that he/she is somehow a better person than someone else that’s an issue with the individual, not the term.

I think that the word is vastly overused by people who never have to put their ass on the line for it (in service to others). A soldier, LEO, Firefighter, etc using the term? Fine. A hobby martial artist, sport fighter or gun class Rambo? That’s another story.

As a number of my posts have dealt with this same issue I thought it appropriate to mention Rory’s post here. Back in November of 2009 I wrote this:

http://tgace.com/2009/11/15/defining-terms/

Alright, I have a moment to type.

It would be a fairly accurate statement to say that when I created this blog it was with the intention of coalescing my thoughts about, and refining my definition of, “Warriorship”.

While “Warriorship” is closely associated with the word “Warrior”, I am starting to come to the conclusion that they may have become two separate but closely related issues; perhaps too closely related. While one can be quantifiable, the other has become so nebulous that people training in what I define as “Wariorship” have come to believe that doing so makes them “Warriors” which I don’t believe is the case.

I am currently of the opinion that the term “Warrior”, as in “I am a Warrior”, is currently overused and misapplied. In my worldview, a “warrior” is a person who fights for their country, lord or master, or is at least a dedicated professional in a field of arms. Professional military personnel fit my definition, with the special operators on one end of the continuum and more mundane MOS personnel at the other. I would also include Law Enforcement Officers as existing on the outside fringe of possible inclusion. Currently the term is being applied to a wide range of people; athletes, new ager’s, martial artists, gun enthusiasts and the terminally Ill to name a few. Not to disparage any of these people, but while they may behave with the virtues of a warrior, or be training in the skills of a “Warrior”, defining yourself as a Warrior impresses me aWalter Mitty-ish fantasy. Harmless in most cases, admittedly, but with some disturbing exceptions as in the case discussed elsewhere in this blog.

“Warriorship” is a concept that doesn’t even have one accepted definition. While the O.E.D. defines it as “1The craft or skill of military arts and science, see ‘warrior , most attempts to find a definition lead you to Carlos Castenada; Cogyam Trungpa and his Shambala philosophy, Joseph Campbell, Ninjutsu practitioners, New Age Druids,Native American culture and Bushido. While sharing some characteristics, there is no common definition between them.

So I guess Im going to add my definition to the mix. I define Warriorship as:

Warriorship
( War-ri-or-ship ) n. [OE. werreour, OF. werreour, guerreor, from guerre, werre, war. See War]

1. A state in which a person is training in the skills and traits possessed by those of the Warrior profession.

2. A philosophy based on the positive character and social traits of persons in the warrior profession.

At least thats my first hack at it. Any opinions or assistance in refining it will be appreciated.

I suppose that by my definition a person can be participating in “warriorship” if they are approaching training and life as more than a mere “hobbyist”. Someone going to amartial arts class two times a week isn’t participating. Someone who buys a handgun and wears 5.11 “operator clothes” and tactical boots isn’t participating. Just reading books and playing paintball isn’t enough.

Someone who looks at the entirety of life as “training in warriorship”, learning, mastering and incorporating into their personal lifestyle skills as varied as combat techniques; navigation, medicine, climbing/rappelling, driving, swimming, SCUBA, physical conditioning and countless others MAY be meeting my definition. However, my personal twist would include some sort of service to society, putting those skills to use.

The hazard lies in the ease by which a person practicing Warriorship as a lifestyle can fall into believing that they are the equivalent of a Warrior. I believe that many people who begin the pursuit in the first place are doing one hoping to become the other.

more to come later…..

The comments section on that post blossomed into an interesting discussion on this topic and if this interests you it would be worth your while to read it. In a nutshell, while I do not entirely disagree with Rory’s opinion here (and I have posted things similar), I also believe that the term is not as simple to pigeonhole as he thinks.

January 5, 2012

how much is good enough?

Posted by tgace under martial arts, military, self defense, skills, tactics, warriorship | Tags: warriorship |
1 Comment

In light of my recent post “what exactly do you think you are doing”, I thought that moving up this post from last year would add yet another professionals opinion on the issue of training priorities.

Former SEAL and “Tactical Impact” star Kyle Defoor has a blog going. Go check it out.

I especially like the post Training Balance and How Good is Good Enough?

The first thing you need to do clearly identify your needs of training FOR THE REAL WORLD, such as; carbine, pistol, blade, combatives, physical fitness, tactics. Once you’ve made a list of the what, honestly ask yourself what you really NEED the most and which one you just LIKE to do. Here lies the problem. We (humans) like to practice what we’re good at, and what makes us feel good. Over time this is a recipe for disaster.

Kyle has a lot of good stuff; rifle painting, controlling fear, repairing EoTechs…take a look.

December 18, 2011

be aware of yourself

Posted by tgace under philosophy, quotes, Samurai, warriorship | Tags: mindset, opinion, philosophy, quotations, warriorship, zen |
[3] Comments

“Be aware of yourself and know yourself. No matter how much you have learned and how much you know, if you don’t know yourself you don’t know anything. Indeed, if you don’t know yourself you cannot know anything else. People who don’t know themselves criticize others from the point of view of their own ignorant selves. They consider whatever agrees with them to be good, and hate whatever doesn’t go their way. They become irritated about everything, causing themselves to suffer by themselves, bothering themselves solely because of their own prejudices. If you know that not everyone will be agreeable to you, know that you won’t be agreeable to everyone either. Those who have no prejudices in themselves do not reject people, and therefore people do not reject them.”

– Suzuki Shosan (1579-1655)

December 8, 2011

when to meditate

Posted by tgace under code of conduct, philosophy, Samurai, warriorship | Tags: code of conduct, mindset, Samurai, self-development, warriorship |
1 Comment

Image via Wikipedia

From the beginning it’s best to do zazen in the midst of strife and confusion. A samurai, in particular, must be able to do zazen while uttering his battle cry. Guns are firing, lances are flying, and amidst the confusion , you send up a battle cry. It’s here that you can clearly make good use of your practice. What use can there be for a zazen requiring a quiet place? However appealing Buddhist teachings may be, the samurai should throw away anything he can’t use when the moment for his battle cry arrives.

-Suzuki Shosan

October 26, 2011

how dedicated are you?

Posted by tgace under skills, warriorship | Tags: skills, training, warriorship |
Leave a Comment

Image via Wikipedia

Hayashizaki temple is dedicated to the master of the same name who lived in the sixteenth century and created the art of iai (the art of drawing the sword). During the Edo period, a great number of adepts spent time at this temple in order to fulfill a kind of vow: to go beyond the bounds of their art by devoting one or several days exclusively to the practice of iai in order to honor the gods and make progress by surpassing their own limits. Nakayama Hakudo, one of the greatest masters of iai of the twentieth century, spent a day at this temple fulfilling such a vow. In a period of twenty-four hours, he succeeded in drawing his sword ten thousand times. To achieve this, he practiced constantly, without sleeping, only drinking rice congee from a bowl placed within reach of his hand. In the temple’s registry, a considerable number of persons are listed who drew their swords between thirty and forty thousand times. The three adepts who went the furthest stayed for seven days and drew more than ninety thousand times, which is to say more than an average of thirteen thousand times a day. If we may go by the experience of Nakayama Hakudo, we can say that these adept, could pretty well not have slept in the course of seven days of continuous effort. Nakayama explains that when he trains in his dojo, he succeeds on the best days in drawing two thousand times, but then the next day he has to put in twice the effort to arrive at the same result. Are we capable of imagining what sort of effort it look for the person who kept up at least this sort of effort for seven days? These facts help us to gauge the gap that exists between our way of thinking and living and that of the warriors. All the traditional techniques that we have inherited in the budo tradition were created through this kind of exceptional exertion of energy, which adepts persevered in over several centuries. Following the tradition, they sought fusion of mind and body by going to the limits of physical effort, until they reached the point of having the feeling that it is through the mind that the body is able to continue with its movements.

-Kenji Tokitsu, Miyamoto Musashi His Live and Writings, pg 290-291

I read this passage today and it made me think…how many of us show that kind of dedication to our craft? Can you imagine spending seven days to accomplish 90,000 pistol draws? Or devoting an entire day to doing 10,000 practice reloads?

September 11, 2011

for those i love…..

Posted by tgace under code of conduct, military, warriorship | Tags: code of conduct, military, mindset, philosophy, warriorship |
[2] Comments

September 10, 2011

American Hero

Posted by tgace under philosophy, Tom, warriorship | Tags: America, hero, patriotism |
[5] Comments

Image via Wikipedia

Rick Rescorla was an interesting man. Rick was a retired United States Army officer of British birth. He served with distinction in Rhodesia as a British soldier and in the Vietnam War as an American officer. For those who read the book or saw the movie, “We were soldiers once, and young”…he was there (as a matter of fact the cover of the book is a photo of him). The author called him “the best platoon leader I ever saw”. There are mentions of him and his bravery in numerous books about that battle and the war in general. He became a US citizen AFTER Vietnam.

Rick was employed as the security chief of Morgan Stanley in the World Trade Center. Being the warrior that he was, Rick anticipated attacks on the towers and had implemented evacuation procedures and drilled employees on them. This served him well on 9/11

As he was evacuating people from the towers he reminded them “…be proud to be an American …everyone will be talking about you tomorrow”, and sang God Bless Americaand other military and Cornish songs over his bullhorn to help evacuees stay calm as they left the building, including an adaptation of the song Men of Harlech:

“Men of Cornwall stop your dreaming;
Can’t you see their spearpoints gleaming?
See their warriors’ pennants streaming
To this battlefield.
Men of Cornwall stand ye steady;
It cannot be ever said ye
for the battle were not ready;
Stand and never yield!”

After he evacuated most of Morgan Stanley’s 2700 employees he went back in to save others. When somebody told him to get out and save himself he said:

“As soon as I make sure everyone else is out”

Rick was killed when tower 2 collapsed. Reports state he was observed as high as the 72nd floor assisting in the evacuation of other people. As a result of Rescorla’s actions, all but 6 of Morgan Stanley’s 2700 WTC employees survived. Four of the six included Rick and three of his deputies who followed him back into the building – Wesley Mercer, Jorge Velazquez, and Godwin Forde. Who are heroes in their own right.

Im not ashamed to say that I get misty eyed when I think about that man on that day. It makes me sad, angry and proud all at the same time. The man was a Warrior, an American and a Hero. There are many not worthy to carry his boots. We should be reminded everyday about 9/11 lest we forget…and frankly its why I get so pissed off at the apologists, the “understand them’s” and the conspiracists. Rick Rescorla is probably one of the best Americans whom you have never heard of..as shameful as that is. Where was the media coverage on him?

An article in The New Yorkerwas published about Rick and his life. It concludes with a statement from his second wife, whom he met late in life, and a reply to that statement from a long time friend of Rick’s who fought and survived in the Ia Drang with him.

“What’s really difficult for me is that I know he had a choice,” Susan says. “He chose to go back in there. I know he would never have left until everyone was safe, until his mission was accomplished. That was his nature. That was the man I loved. So I can understand why he went back. What I can’t understand is why I was left behind.”

Dan Hill says that Susan will understand someday, as he does. “What she doesn’t understand is that she knew him for four or five years. She knew a sixty-two-year-old man with cancer. I knew him as a hundred-and-eighty-pound, six-foot-one piece of human machinery that would not quit, that did not know defeat, that would not back off one inch. In the middle of the greatest battle of Vietnam, he was singing to the troops, saying we’re going to rip them a new asshole, when everyone else was worrying about dying. If he had come out of that building and someone died who he hadn’t tried to save, he would have had to commit suicide.

“I’ve tried to tell Susan this, in a way, but she’s not ready yet for the truth. In the next weeks or months, I’ll get her down here, and we’ll take a walk along the ocean, and I’ll explain these things. You see, for Rick Rescorla, this was a natural death. People like Rick, they don’t die old men. They aren’t destined for that and it isn’t right for them to do so. It just isn’t right, by God, for them to become feeble, old, and helpless sons of bitches. There are certain men born in this world, and they’re supposed to die setting an example for the rest of the weak bastards we’re surrounded with.”

God speed Rick. May the mead never run dry in Valhalla.

« Previous Page — Next Page »