In what way does imbalance come into play in judo?

Imbalance does not come into play in the way it is usually conceived.

Then how?

I can give an example. Take this pen and place it vertically on the table.

There.

That is a stable balance. Now push it. What happens?

It falls.

That is imbalance. The object cannot remain in imbalance, it falls. Imbalance exists only as a passage from one state to another.

From one fixed point to another fixed point?

That’s it. Whereas what must be sought is something else. What must be sought is to be mobile. In judo, before throwing a partner, one must mobilise oneself. As soon as one is mobilised, one can do whatever one wants. One is neither in balance nor in imbalance. One is in unstable balance.

So imbalance does not exist at all in judo?

Yes, it does exist. My partner will be unbalanced in the action, but imbalance is not the aim of that action.

When you say that we should place our weight forward of the body, one might think this is an encouragement towards imbalance?

That is a mistake. It is a misinterpretation. One must be well balanced in one’s instability. There are people who feel very stable by being perfectly upright. In reality, they are in a precarious balance, the slightest action makes them vibrate because they have based their whole balance on a single point.

What is sought, then, is above all a state of mobility?

One cannot really say a state of mobility either, because a “state” is static. One can say that one is in mobility. One cannot be in a state if one is mobile. The practical form of judo that I am trying to help you understand and acquire gives the impression of being in a state, but in reality it is being mobile in space. Mobile does not mean going from one place to another, it means being suspended and always in vibration. It is not the fact of moving, it is the fact of being suspended. One is stopped on a step, but the body remains mobile and keeps the possibility of going one way or the other. That is why making imbalance a means or a goal in judo is not correct.

Rather than unbalancing the partner, is it better to mobilise oneself?

That’s it, the partner is carried along by your mobility.

How did you come to understand this notion?

It appeared to me one day when I had been invited to a kendo gala. That day I made an essential discovery. I did not like that kind of event and I had no desire to go. Yet that time I did not regret going. It was an ordinary kendo demonstration, where one could see the best French kendoka sparring with each other. They raised their swords, they shouted, “Aaaaaah!”, and it was ridiculous. It was nothing at all. Then two Japanese came on. They did the same thing, but it was completely different. There was mobility, there was life. I saw mobility, I discovered it by watching them. Since then, I know what it is. At first I did not think about it much, but later I saw other Japanese in other disciplines. They had it. Most Japanese who practise martial arts have mobility.

And did you immediately find a way to apply it?

I must already have had this mobility, I was practising it, but I had not understood it. I realised that my effectiveness was not due to my speed or my liveliness. It was something else. That day I understood what it was. I saw the difference between people who were brandishing a sword in the air and the others.

And you made this discovery through something other than judo?

Yes, at least the conscious discovery. But in other circumstances, it is possible that I would not have seen it.

Did it suddenly change your way of practising?

Not my way of practising, but my way of teaching. From that day on, I undertook to make mobility known and understood by everyone.

What changes did you introduce into your teaching?

I did not introduce specific changes, I simply tried to give value to this notion. And I found a way to explain it. Not sufficiently, because it is difficult to transmit.

In what ways do you explain it?

For example, by helping people understand the importance of being mobile before carrying out an action. It is a different way of being that is not visible to the eye. Here, for example, I am immobile. Whereas here, I am mobile, even if I am not moving. I can do anything, I am vigilant, decisive, alive. Here I am not available, I am asleep, I am resting.

Is mobility a form of awakening?

That’s it, but awakening is not a sufficient word.

Is it an availability to oneself, but also to the other, to the situation?

Above all to oneself. One must be available to do something immediately. And when I say immediately, it means beforehand. Being mobile before acting. Starting from a standstill takes too much time. When one is immobile, one does immobile things, one fixes an objective and that is it.

Facing the partner, how should one act then?

If you want to throw them and you fix yourself on that idea, you cannot. Even if you put all your strength against them, all they have to do is make a simple movement and it is no longer of any use. Because you have attacked a fixed objective. You never have an objective. You take the partner in passing. Mobility does not concern only attack or movement, it concerns everything we do in judo, all the time. Even the behaviour one should have. From time to time you achieve it, but it is fleeting, you find it hard to acquire. These are not gestures, they are actions, it is life. It is extremely difficult to make this understood and to explain it in a positive way.

One can understand that it exists, but one does not know how to reach it.

That is the case even in everyday life. If one starts thinking about how one climbs a staircase, one imagines lifting the foot, placing it on the step, pulling the body with the leg, lifting the other foot, pulling the body again, and so on. Whereas in reality it is the body that moves first, before the feet climb. That is mobility. It is the anticipation of the life of your body before your gestures. In mobility, gestures have no value, they are useful only insofar as they assist the work of the body.

Do you think that this notion can be explained entirely?

It is certainly possible, since it can be transmitted. I know how to do it, I know how to show it, I know how to make it felt and sometimes realised, but I do not have the means to make it understood in a lasting way. That is what is missing in my teaching, the words to make this understood.

Does it perhaps belong to the student to find it by themselves?

Yes, but one must give them the path. From time to time I find a word that allows you to discover something. But you discover it, and then afterwards it is gone. The other day, on a movement, I knew how to say to leave the step suspended, to delay the moment when the supporting foot is placed, to place it only at the moment when the other foot attacks. At that moment it was understood, the movements were successful. And afterwards it was lost. That is what is infernal, it is lost afterwards. Everyone is in mobility at a given moment, but only at a given moment, not all the time.

Perhaps mobility is not something that can be maintained permanently?

Yes, it can be. I have acquired it, I have it. I do not lose it. But I do not keep it either. I give it. It has entered into my way of being. In all the explanations I give, in all the demonstrations I do, there is this mobility. You do not necessarily see it, but it is there.

When you say that the Japanese have mobility, what do you mean?

Apart from the Japanese, I have never seen other martial arts practitioners have this permanent mobility. Never.

Why, then, should we seek what we do not have naturally?

Because what we do not have naturally, what is it? It is value. I am not talking about a particular, isolated value, I am talking about a universal value. That value is mobility.