Shinku no Ki – The Ki of True Emptiness

On November 24, 2023, Chris Li shared another great Sangenkai post on Facebook. It began with the following quote:

“Above all, you must find the exact place where the void (shinku no ki) and emptiness (ku no ki) reside.”

– Morihei Ueshiba, “Aiki Shinzui”

Of course, this advice is useful only if one is knowledgeable of both “shinku no ki” and “ku no ki.” It is saying, those that would follow the Way of Aiki must “find the exact place where the void (shinku no ki) and emptiness (ku no ki) reside.” The true value of these “places” rests in its power to inform those who previously overlooked Ku no Ki and struggled to grasp the profound nature of Shinku no Ki, providing them with a comprehensive understanding of Aiki in all its facets.

This led me to wonder how many people are familiar with the terms “shinku no ki” and “ku no ki,” much less how many people know where, and/or how to locate them?

Most people who don’t read Japanese are not familiar with these terms, and even native Japanese readers may not be familiar with their usage in this context. In fact, almost everyone gives their attention, understandably and exclusively, to Mono 物, material or manifest things. In the case of martial arts, they pay attention to the techniques and forms they can see. Their training primarily focuses on half of the Yin/Yang pair and ignores the crucial truth of the unified whole from which the pair arises. This whole is called “Shinku”. And, naturally, that of which Shinku is created is “Ki.” Consequently, it is “Shinku no Ki.”

The illustration provided by Bansen Tanaka shows the character Ku 空 inside a circle. The Ku is juxtaposed by the character Mono 物. They embody opposing complements: nothingness versus something-ness. That is to say, they represent: Yin/Yang, In/Yo, Fire/Water, Heaven/Earth, A/O, Izanagi/Izanami, etc.

The term “Shinku no Ki” is found in the upper right-hand corner. Chris introduces it thus:

“Shinku no Ki” (真空の気) is the void, Ku (or “Ku no ki” 空/空の気) is often translated as emptiness, which can be confusing – aren’t the void and emptiness the same?

The simple answer to this question is, “No.”

Understanding can become challenging in this context, as it involves both peculiarities of language and assumptions of prior knowledge. Let’s start by breaking down the significant character combinations. We’ll ignore the character Ki 気 for now, since most readers are probably familiar with that term. Instead, we will begin with the term Shinku. Shin 真 means “true” or “real.” As an example, the term “True Aiki” can also be written as “Shin Aiki 真合気.” Ku 空 means sky (sora), but it also implies emptiness as in an “empty sky.” So, Shinku symbolizes true emptiness as opposed to normal emptiness or physical vacuity.

BUT WAIT, there’s more! Shinku which is commonly defined as “void”, is important to be understood in two significantly different ways. One understanding has Shinku meaning a void, as in a physical vacuum (in contradiction to what I just stated in my previous paragraph.) However, it is evident that this definition bears resemblance to the usage of Ku within Bansen Tanaka’s diagram circle. There, Ku denotes the negation of Mono, the lack of any tangible entity. Therefore, in this context, the term “Ku” is already being used to represent the absence of matter, similar to how “Shinku” is understood as “vacuum”. Consequently, the term “Shinku” is used to denote that its usage implies a different meaning than just a physical void in this case. So what is the other possible understanding of the term Shinku, the one that is intended in our case? It is Sunyata.

Before we look more closely at the meaning of Sunyata, let us look at the various definitions of Shinku, so we know that this is appropriate.

Here are four definitions of Shinku pulled from web:

Noun

真

しん

空

くう

• (shinkū) 

1. [from 1876] (physics) vacuum: a region of space that contains no matter, a void
2. [from 1907] (figurative) a blank, an empty slate quotations ▼
3. [from 751] (Buddhism) sunyata: void, emptiness, non-existence; also, in the early Buddhist schools, enlightenment, nirvana synonyms ▲
4. Synonyms: (sunyata) 空 (kū), (nirvana) 涅槃 (nehan)

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/真空

Here we can see that this is a very important distinction, and is therefore worthy of reemphasis: Shinku can be translated as “void,” meaning devoid of any matter (Mono). However, that usage is already present when the term Ku (emptiness) is held in juxtaposition to Mono (matter). It is clear that Shinku, also known as True Emptiness, is being employed in a distinct way, this way is akin to the concept of Sunyata.

“What being here means is not what we take it to be. The real experience is all of them together. We call that shinku, true vast nothing.” https://www.mountaincloud.org/henry-shukman-shinku-and-shunyata/

This logically leads one to ask, “So what is Sunyata?”

Etymology

“Śūnyatā” (Sanskrit) is usually translated as “devoidness”, “emptiness”, “hollow”, “hollowness”, “voidness”. It is the noun form of the adjective śūnya, plus –tā: 

• śūnya, in the context of buddha dharma, primarily means “empty”, or “void,” but also means “zero,” and “nothing,”^[6] and derives from the root śvi, meaning “hollow”
• –tā is a suffix denoting a quality or state of being, equivalent to English “-ness”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Śūnyatā

As evident from this definition of Sunyata, we find ourselves once again in a compilation of comparable, if not identical, terms! Not very helpful! I suggest following the included link and reading the entire Wikipedia entry. I also encourage readers to understand that many spend their entire lives devoted to the exploration of what Sunyata is. That is to say, one isn’t likely to truly understand Sunyata from a Wikipedia entry or a quote from Ueshiba, Tanaka, Li, or Beebe. However, one will likely have a much better idea about the depth of the term by investing a few minutes of your time reading.

Below are provided some definitions pulled from the Wikipedia article that might help one gain a summary understanding:

Buddhist interpretations:

“What is the Dharma Discourse on Great Emptiness? It is this— ‘When this exists, that exists; when this arises, that arises.”^[19]

[Allen ~ This sounds like the definition of Yin/Yang does it not?]

“Form is emptiness, emptiness is form

Emptiness is not separate from form, form is not separate from emptiness

Whatever is form is emptiness, whatever is emptiness is form.”^[44]

[Allen ~ Please refer to the illustration by Bansen Tanaka. It is a graphic representation of this phrase.]

“The nonexistence of duality is indeed the existence of nonexistence; this is the definition of emptiness. It is neither existence, nor nonexistence, neither different nor identical.” [73]

[Allen ~ This is the definition of Shinku no Ki.]

“According to the theory of emptiness, any belief in an objective reality grounded in the assumption of intrinsic, independent existence is simply untenable.

All things and events, whether ‘material’, mental or even abstract concepts like time, are devoid of objective, independent existence … [T]hings and events are ’empty’ in that they can never possess any immutable essence, intrinsic reality or absolute ‘being’ that affords independence.”^[103]

[Allen ~ Here one begins to unwrap an understanding of how Aiki, which is Shinku no Ki, is beyond timing, winning, losing, and all other relative conceptions.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Śūnyatā

I hope that you, the reader, will come to truly understand the distinction between the notions of Void as Sunyata and Void as a mere vacuum.

“In this case, the reference about emptiness is actually to the “sky”, the heavens, in reference to the Shinto creation, myths (based on Daoist creation myths) in which the void gives birth to the emptiness of the heavens, the High Plain of Heaven, in which the gods are born.”

Chris Li:

Let us not make the mistake of thinking that O-sensei was necessarily a big proponent of Buddhism or Buddhist philosophy. He wasn’t! However, there is a distinct overlap present between Buddhist, Daoist, Shinto and Oomoto terms and understandings present here.

In Chinese cosmology, the void that gives rise to Heaven and Earth is Wu. In Japanese, this character is known as Mu. The concept of Wu/Mu is closely linked to Sunyata. In this model, Wu and Mu correspond to Shinku. The Japanese language helps out at this point. Ku is emptiness, Shinku is True Emptiness. See the difference? Emptiness is a relative term, whereas “TRUE” emptiness implies a term beyond duality.

Chris Li continues: This theme has echoes in other places:

“What is called the spirit of the void is where there is nothing. It is not included in man’s knowledge. Of course the void is nothingness. By knowing things that exist, you can know that which does not exist. That is the void.

People in this world look at things mistakenly, and think that what they do not understand must be the void. This is not the true void. It is bewilderment. “

Miyamoto Musashi, the Book of the Void

This passage, while seemingly straight forward, is actually reflective of Miyamoto Musashi’s deep understanding of Buddhist teaching. He is alluding to different levels of understanding and consequently to different levels of delusion as well.

Chris Li: Morihei Ueshiba also cited this as an example of “takemusu” – defined by him as the training of the connective force joining the unification of opposites.

“上にア下にオ声と対照で気を結び、そこに引力が発生するのである。”

“Above the sound “A” and below the sound “O” – opposites connected with Ki, there Attractive Force (“Inryoku”) is created.”

– Morihei Ueshiba

This is incredibly important. It is no understatement to say that this understanding separates those that understand Aiki and those that don’t. Obviously only those that truly understand Aiki are those that can actually use Aiki. Hence, the importance of this utterance. Takemusu (that is True Aiki) is “the training of the connective force”

Chris Li: “武産とは引力の錬磨であります。”

“Takemusu is the training of Attractive Force.”

Takemusu is often misinterpreted as “endless variation” or “absolute freedom of techniques” – so people often show a range of changing techniques, like jiyu waza, and call that “takemusu“.

However, Morihei Ueshiba clearly defined takemusu as the unification of opposites (coincidentally, similar to the definition of “taiji“).

In other words, it is through the unification of opposites that one ENABLES free movement, the freedom is a result of the method. He’s referring to the method rather than the effect.

Like saying “happiness is a warm puppy” – one is a result of the other, but they are not the same thing.

Here we see, once again, how so many people are inclined to only focus on tangible “things” such as innumerable techniques. Whereas, Aiki or Takemusu Aiki includes, and is more than, the summation of all things and non-things. There is but a difference in the thickness of a sheet of paper between Mono no Ki (The Ki of Things) and Ku no Ki (The Ki of No Things). They are codependent, coarising, complimentary opposites, which together form and simultaneously are produced from Shinku no Ki (The Ki of True Emptiness). That is to say, Mono no Ki and Ku no Ki are Aiki, and Aiki is Shinku no Ki. This is the essence of Aikido as taught by Ueshiba Morihei.

Isn’t the essence of Aikido worthy of the study of those that purport to practice Aikido? Shouldn’t one who claims to practice, or especially teach, Aikido be able to at least explain what Aikido is in the terms of the founder of the Art?

How does one proudly claim to be the student of a founder while simultaneously claiming that neither they nor their peers understood what it was their teacher taught? What was it they studied? What is it that they are teaching?

My questions are meant as an invitation rather than a criticism. More than ever, profound teachings are abundantly available to be studied. One ought not let imperfect knowledge stand in the way of one’s exploration. Again, we can turn to our predecessors as an example of those that dedicated their lives to furthering their study and understanding.

I understand that there was a certain amount of humility and self-deprecating among those that said they couldn’t understand “anything.” As just one example, when one reads the writings of Shirata Rinjiro it becomes clear that he certainly understood quite a lot. On the other hand, I think he also knew that one truly cannot completely understand until one can “do.” And, I know that he felt that his ability to “do” paled in comparison with his teacher. Therefore, he could claim “not understanding.”

Nevertheless, he also knew that present ignorance nor humility excused him from avidly pursuing the furtherance of his understanding of Aikido throughout the entirety of his life. Here too is a valuable lesson to be learned. Shirata sensei, didn’t have time to be proud or arrogant. He was too busy trying to improve his knowledge and ability.

So much the more for me. How about you?