PDA

View Full Version : "Resist not evil"


Please visit our sponsor:
 

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!


Dan Richards
06-06-2012, 12:11 PM
Matthew 6:33 "But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well."

Jesus said: The kingdom is inside you. (find/seek one point) Resist not evil. (relax) Forgive. Cast your burdens. Put down your baggage. (weight underside) Love God with all your might. (extend ki)

It's all the same stuff.

hughrbeyer
06-06-2012, 06:05 PM
Jesus said: Forgive. Resist not evil.

No he didn't. And the difference between what he did say and your paraphrase is significant.

Dan Richards
06-06-2012, 08:18 PM
hugh, if you're gonna jump in here and hold up your stop sign. OK. Or, you could put a little more on the table. Expound a bit, please.

Some more on the table...

http://www.biblecenter.de/bibel/cbc/resist.php
http://bible.cc/matthew/5-39.htm

lbb
06-06-2012, 08:41 PM
Now you've derailed the thread, all right.

Chris Parkerson
06-06-2012, 08:58 PM
Matthew 6:33 "But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well."

Jesus said: The kingdom is inside you. (find/seek one point) Resist not evil. (relax) Forgive. Cast your burdens. Put down your baggage. (weight underside) Love God with all your might. (extend ki)

It's all the same stuff.

The hard sayings of Jesus in Matthew 5 are plain enough.

Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. . . .

Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy.

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

That you may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

~ Matthew 5: 38-39; 43-45.

They are not easy to ingest for those who are not idealistic and apocalyptic (Like Jesus).
Certainly not within the palate of "Just War" theorists or "supply side Jesus" theologies.

New Age Jesus theology may better be derived from the Gospel of Thomas as it's gnostic character lends to inner self awareness. Thomas is an early source...as early as the Gospel of Mark. But even then, Japan's Budo culture and Aesthetic Hebrew culture are very different animals. Original language rehashed into English by way of Greek and Latin can really muddy the waters in the biblical texts alone. Cross culture analogies require serious exegesis.

Namaste,

Chris

hughrbeyer
06-06-2012, 09:18 PM
Actually, I'm going to cede this one to Dan. I'd forgotten that Matthew 5:38 starts "Resist not evil" because in context it's clear Jesus is talking about evil done to oneself. He talks a lot about actively resisting evil in the world.

I'm still waiting to hear how overturning the tables in the Temple translates to "keep one point" though.

Chris Parkerson
06-06-2012, 11:25 PM
Actually, I'm going to cede this one to Dan. I'd forgotten that Matthew 5:38 starts "Resist not evil" because in context it's clear Jesus is talking about evil done to oneself. He talks a lot about actively resisting evil in the world.

I'm still waiting to hear how overturning the tables in the Temple translates to "keep one point" though.

The cleansing of the temple was done for "one point" and was not violence against people. No lethal weapon was used. He was making a statement about how the Kingdom of God would sort out.
His point was To protect the temple (symbol of the Kingdom of God) from the emporion (becoming a market - Gospel of John), and from Corruption by a "den of thieves" or unscrupulous and greedy business practices (Gospels of Luke and Matthew).

Matthew and Luke place it directly after Palm Sunday. Jesus knows his time is short

1. Jesus looks for fruit on a fig tree and finding none curses it (11:12-14)

2. Jesus enters Jerusalem and attacks the temple (11:15-19)

3. The disciples see the fig tree withered from the root and ask about it.
 . 
So this story is primarily used by the writers to point to the eschatological changes Jesus's death and resurrection established.

No lethal weapon was used. No one injured.
And no Aiki "One Point" (I know you were jesting).

Namaste

Chris

graham christian
06-07-2012, 07:43 AM
Matthew 6:33 "But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well."

Jesus said: The kingdom is inside you. (find/seek one point) Resist not evil. (relax) Forgive. Cast your burdens. Put down your baggage. (weight underside) Love God with all your might. (extend ki)

It's all the same stuff.

Dan.
Like your approach. I agree basically. Not just Jesus or Christianity but nearly all religions and spiritual practices (yoga etc) and healing arts are based on the same universal principles. They are all to do with self development too.

Thus they all relate to Aikido.

The only difference is Bu, or Budo.

But if you look at those too in their essence then you will find for the true practitioner of those other things Bu and Budo are there too.

Peace.G.

lbb
06-07-2012, 07:53 AM
Not just Jesus or Christianity but nearly all religions and spiritual practices (yoga etc) and healing arts are based on the same universal principles.

One of those truisms that just isn't true. A lot of people like to believe this, but I don't know how you can say this without pretty extensive study of "nearly all religions and spiritual practices" -- knowing one tradition in some depth, another two or three at a superficial pop-culture level, and then extrapolating to say, "Aaah, they're all the same" is just not adequate. More accurate, and a lot scarier, is to accept that different traditions can have radically different beliefs -- scarier because it implies that, gulp, other people in the world may see things very differently than you do.

graham christian
06-07-2012, 08:06 AM
One of those truisms that just isn't true. A lot of people like to believe this, but I don't know how you can say this without pretty extensive study of "nearly all religions and spiritual practices" -- knowing one tradition in some depth, another two or three at a superficial pop-culture level, and then extrapolating to say, "Aaah, they're all the same" is just not adequate. More accurate, and a lot scarier, is to accept that different traditions can have radically different beliefs -- scarier because it implies that, gulp, other people in the world may see things very differently than you do.

Is it scary?
A lot of people who like to believe this may be right. Now that for some may be scary.

Compassion for example is a prime tenet that runs through all major religions. It has to for it is a spiritual truth. Funny thing is it is also a tenet of healing arts.

Then we come to the healing sword, shimejutsu and such things. As I keep saying, it's all good.

Peace.G.

lbb
06-07-2012, 09:02 AM
Is it scary?
A lot of people who like to believe this may be right. Now that for some may be scary.

Just to clarify: the "it" I'm referring to is the fact that different traditions have radically different beliefs. Those who like to believe differently are not right. They may be comfortable and happy, but they are not right.

Compassion for example is a prime tenet that runs through all major religions. It has to for it is a spiritual truth.

Fettuccine Alfredo for example is a dish that is served at every major Italian restaurant. It has to be for it is a pasta truth.

Here we have two examples of assertions made without any supporting evidence. Easy to do, and easy to weasel out of when challenged, by humpty-dumptying the definition of "major" and selective copy and paste.

Graham, doesn't it strike you as profoundly disrespectful of these "major" spiritual traditions, of which you are neither student nor practitioner, that you speak for them in such a manner? Do you feel, for example, that you can speak for what Islam is all about? And Hinduism, and Buddhism? Do you feel that you can clearly articulate all the principles on which these religions are based?

I understand that you like to say "It's all good". Maybe on some level it is. But maybe you should leave it alone a bit, and not try to shove other people's traditions, practices and experiences under your big umbrella. It's fine to be inclusive; it's disrespectful to co-opt.

graham christian
06-07-2012, 10:20 AM
Just to clarify: the "it" I'm referring to is the fact that different traditions have radically different beliefs. Those who like to believe differently are not right. They may be comfortable and happy, but they are not right.

Fettuccine Alfredo for example is a dish that is served at every major Italian restaurant. It has to be for it is a pasta truth.

Here we have two examples of assertions made without any supporting evidence. Easy to do, and easy to weasel out of when challenged, by humpty-dumptying the definition of "major" and selective copy and paste.

Graham, doesn't it strike you as profoundly disrespectful of these "major" spiritual traditions, of which you are neither student nor practitioner, that you speak for them in such a manner? Do you feel, for example, that you can speak for what Islam is all about? And Hinduism, and Buddhism? Do you feel that you can clearly articulate all the principles on which these religions are based?

I understand that you like to say "It's all good". Maybe on some level it is. But maybe you should leave it alone a bit, and not try to shove other people's traditions, practices and experiences under your big umbrella. It's fine to be inclusive; it's disrespectful to co-opt.

Easy for you to say.

Strikes me as profoundly disrespectful to assume you know what I do or don't do.

I speak to and discuss with many religious folk from many religions as is my way thank you very much.

Let's see now, my basic orientation is Buddhist, my family are christian, my godson is muslim, my neighbours with whom I have great religious discourse with are hindu, my teacher was zen, my friends all various from catholic to brahmin, my life is a journey. In my experience they all agree on the tenets held in common and all agree that only the zealot or egotistical add on the negatives.

Thus I speak for my view, my experiences and as depicted in this thread aligning with what the o/p said.

You don't have to agree. It's all good.

Peace.G.

lbb
06-07-2012, 10:38 AM
Easy for you to say.

Strikes me as profoundly disrespectful to assume you know what I do or don't do.

I didn't make any assumptions. I asked you to show evidence to support your assertions.

I speak to and discuss with many religious folk from many religions as is my way thank you very much.

Let's see now, my basic orientation is Buddhist, my family are christian, my godson is muslim, my neighbours with whom I have great religious discourse with are hindu, my teacher was zen, my friends all various from catholic to brahmin, my life is a journey. In my experience they all agree on the tenets held in common and all agree that only the zealot or egotistical add on the negatives.

That's nice that you have such a diversity of experience, but it doesn't mean you have a good understanding of all these traditions. Perhaps you do, but you're not showing it here. I'm just asking you to support your claims of unversality and so on. I'm asking because I don't see this universality. I see that you (and many others) would like to believe it exists, but I'm not a big fan of wishful thinking. Mind you, I'm not a scholar of any of these traditions either, but I'm familiar enough with some of the concepts that I see examples of important concepts on which different religions have very different takes (the Christian belief in the desirability/achievability of transcendence vs. the Buddhist focus on immanence, to use one example). So, I question whether this universality exists.

I also question whether it's even desirable. Do we, as thinking adults, really need the emotional comfort in believing that there's some kind of universal set of values or eternal verities? Is the truth of diversity really such an ugly and frightening thing? Is diversity only acceptable and non-scary when it means that we really have to agree on everything except superficialities?

Thus I speak for my view, my experiences and as depicted in this thread aligning with what the o/p said.

I dunno. Is asserting universal truths really the same thing as "speak[ing] for my view, my experiences"? Seems like it's a good bit more than that. It's good to speak from our experiences, it's good to speak from our actual knowledge, but we're better off stopping there. Having a Muslim friend doesn't mean you're automatically knowledgeable about Islam any more than eating in an Italian restaurant means you know about Giuseppe Mazzini.

You don't have to agree. It's all good.

What "it" is all good?

graham christian
06-07-2012, 11:14 AM
Mary. You are into argument and supporting evidence and quotes and who said.

Not my game. To the academic mind maybe that's the pinnacle of debate. To me not.

I don't hide behind what others say for they are not me.

I may debate with many in life every week but I find the best debates are to do with 'what do you think' not who said or give reference.

I encourage others to say what they think unclouded. It takes trust in that each person has a right to look and speak from their own view without these academic games.

I am a student of life, of the principles thereof and convey what I find. Kannagara almost in view.

I have had many in depth discussions with religious folk, I repeat.

When you understand 'it's all good' then you will understand 'zen' I would say.

Apart from that, I'll sign off from our tete a tete.

Peace.G.

Chris Parkerson
06-07-2012, 11:32 AM
Various religious beliefs are bound by both historical context and culture. Ideas like "compassion" and how to act upon it are different because of these two issues.

People, even today, have a variety of contexts in which they understand "compassion". If you have been introduced to"Spiral Dynamics" you might see that a red meme (tribal) is different than a blue meme. The street Gang member's idea of compassion is about his tribe. He cares little about who he
steals from or who is injured from his drug distribution business. But he displays compassion to his fellow gang members.

See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSvKByYOPdo&feature=youtube_gdata_player

This is the simplest YouTube on Spiral Dynamics. Though set in a context of discussing Bipolar disorder, it talks briefly and thoroughly about the different consciousnesses present today. Find out which one you are and you may see why different folks tend to agree with you and others don't.

Namaste,

Chris

lbb
06-07-2012, 01:01 PM
Mary. You are into argument and supporting evidence and quotes and who said.

Not my game. To the academic mind maybe that's the pinnacle of debate. To me not.

Graham: you are into telling people what they're thinking, calling their beliefs or way they view the world as "games", and representing your own beliefs and worldviews as objective truth. You use words like "academic" as a pejorative and disparage intellectual rigor, supporting of one's claims with facts, refraining from making sweeping generalizations that aren't backed up by facts, and other tools that aid in seeking the truth.


I don't hide behind what others say for they are not me.

That's an interesting take on things. If you say that O-Sensei said something, and then quote him, are you "hiding behind what others say"? I'll remember that...

I may debate with many in life every week but I find the best debates are to do with 'what do you think' not who said or give reference.

I encourage others to say what they think unclouded. It takes trust in that each person has a right to look and speak from their own view without these academic games.

These "academic games", as you disparagingly refer to them, are about honesty, Graham. You've claimed that the central tenets of all the "major" religions are the same, but in your manifest disdain for "what others say", you seem indifferent to what these religions actually have to say for themselves. Do you consider yourself more of an authority on all these religions than their various scriptures, dharma, teachers, etc.?

I don't think there's any problem with having your own take on things, no matter how much experience you may have with them. I do think there's a problem with stating what a belief system is all about without some pretty solid knowledge. At the least, it seems disrespectful.

I am a student of life, of the principles thereof and convey what I find. Kannagara almost in view.

I have had many in depth discussions with religious folk, I repeat.

That's fine. Maybe some of them taught you about the central tenets of their religions, or some of them. But you made a statement about all of them. All I said was that this is too broad a statement. I provided one counterexample, but there are numerous others.

When you understand 'it's all good' then you will understand 'zen' I would say.

I'd understand your take on zen, I'm sure. What I don't understand is why you can't give a more direct answer. Are you perhaps referring to the teachings on equanimity? If so, I wouldn't consider that the same thing as "it's all good", but that's the closest I can come.

Apart from that, I'll sign off from our tete a tete.

Tete a tete? Hardly that.

C. David Henderson
06-07-2012, 01:28 PM
"I don't hide behind what others say for they are not me."

With these last words, the Dodger suffered himself to be led off by the collar, threatening, till he got into the yard, to make a parliamentary business of it, and then grinning in the officer's face, with great glee and self-approval.

Benjamin Green
06-07-2012, 05:16 PM
Matthew 6:33 "But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well."

Jesus said: The kingdom is inside you. (find/seek one point) Resist not evil. (relax) Forgive. Cast your burdens. Put down your baggage. (weight underside) Love God with all your might. (extend ki)

It's all the same stuff.

One might say that actions are neither good nor evil of themselves. That evil exists only in the mind, as malign intent. A rock falling on someone's head commits no sin, a lion that eats you was only hungry.

Under that interpretation: you take an action, the goal of which is to thwart my intention (my intention not being to throw force out - which is simply a means to an end - but to hurt you.) However you accomplish that, whether by punching me in the face or dodging or throwing me or whatever, you have resisted the imposition of my will; and if my will is for evil you have resisted evil.

It's not necessarily all the same stuff.

graham christian
06-07-2012, 06:11 PM
"I don't hide behind what others say for they are not me."

With these last words, the Dodger suffered himself to be led off by the collar, threatening, till he got into the yard, to make a parliamentary business of it, and then grinning in the officer's face, with great glee and self-approval.

Well at least that's your view.

A bit off topic, a bit insulting, but yours nonetheless.:)

Peace.G.

Carsten Möllering
06-08-2012, 05:56 AM
.. the fact that different traditions have radically different beliefs. Those who like to believe differently are not right. They may be comfortable and happy, but they are not right.
For me personally it is sad, that staying "comfortable and happy" is more important for many, many people, than to recognize the tremendous diversity and richness of life - and of the conceptions to understand it. So they allways see only the surface of, let's say, a religion or philosophy. Instead of being able to "really see" and learn something they don't know yet. Because it is different, radically, deeply different.

C. David Henderson
06-08-2012, 10:35 AM
On topic, then,

, Japan's Budo culture and Aesthetic Hebrew culture are very different animals. Original language rehashed into English by way of Greek and Latin can really muddy the waters in the biblical texts alone. Cross culture analogies require serious exegesis.


+1

Graham Christian wrote:
Not just Jesus or Christianity but nearly all religions and spiritual practices (yoga etc) and healing arts are based on the same universal principles.
One of those truisms that just isn't true. A lot of people like to believe this, but I don't know how you can say this without pretty extensive study of "nearly all religions and spiritual practices" -- knowing one tradition in some depth, another two or three at a superficial pop-culture level, and then extrapolating to say, "Aaah, they're all the same" is just not adequate.

+1

For me personally it is sad, that staying "comfortable and happy" is more important for many, many people, than to recognize the tremendous diversity and richness of life - and of the conceptions to understand it. So they allways see only the surface of, let's say, a religion or philosophy. Instead of being able to "really see" and learn something they don't know yet. Because it is different, radically, deeply different.

+1

Man: Is this the right room for an argument?

Other Man:(John Cleese) I've told you once.

Man: No you haven't!

Other Man: Yes I have.

M: When?

O: Just now.

M: No you didn't!

O: Yes I did!

M: You didn't!

O: I did!

M: You didn't!

O: I'm telling you, I did!

M: You did not!

O: Oh I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour?

M: Ah! (taking out his wallet and paying) Just the five minutes.

O: Just the five minutes. Thank you.

O: Anyway, I did.

M: You most certainly did not!

O: Now let's get one thing quite clear: I most definitely told you!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: No you DIDN'T!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: No you DIDN'T!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: No you DIDN'T!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh look, this isn't an argument!

(pause)

O: Yes it is!

M: No it isn't!

(pause)

M: It's just contradiction!

O: No it isn't!

M: It IS!

O: It is NOT!

M: You just contradicted me!

O: No I didn't!

M: You DID!

O: No no no!

M: You did just then!

O: Nonsense!

M: (exasperated) Oh, this is futile!!

(pause)

O: No it isn't!

M: Yes it is!

(pause)

M: I came here for a good argument!

O: AH, no you didn't, you came here for an argument!

M: An argument isn't just contradiction.

O: Well! it CAN be!

M: No it can't!

M: An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.

O: No it isn't!

M: Yes it is! 'tisn't just contradiction.

O: Look, if I *argue* with you, I must take up a contrary position!

M: Yes but it isn't just saying 'no it isn't'.

O: Yes it is!

M: No it isn't!

O: Yes it is!

M: No it isn't!

O: Yes it is!

M: No it ISN'T! Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.

O: It is NOT!

M: It is!

O: Not at all!

M: It is!

(The Arguer hits a bell on his desk and stops.)

O: Thank you, that's it.

M: (stunned) What?

O: That's it. Good morning.

M: But I was just getting interested!

O: I'm sorry, the five minutes is up.

M: That was never five minutes just now!!

O: I'm afraid it was.

M: (leading on) No it wasn't.....

O: I'm sorry, I'm not allowed to argue any more.

M: WHAT??

O: If you want me to go on arguing, you'll have to pay for another five minutes.

M: But that was never five minutes just now!
Oh Come on!
Oh this is...
This is ridiculous!

O: I told you... I told you, I'm not allowed to argue unless you PAY!

M: Oh all right. (takes out his wallet and pays again.) There you are.

O: Thank you.

M: (clears throat) Well...

O: Well WHAT?

M: That was never five minutes just now.

O: I told you, I'm not allowed to argue unless you've paid!

M: Well I just paid!

O: No you didn't!

M: I DID!!!

O: YOU didn't!

M: I DID!!!

O: YOU didn't!

M: I DID!!!

O: YOU didn't!

M: I DID!!!

O: YOU didn't!

M: I don't want to argue about it!

O: Well I'm very sorry but you didn't pay!

M: Ah hah! Well if I didn't pay, why are you arguing??? Ah HAAAAAAHHH! Gotcha!

O: No you haven't!

M: Yes I have! If you're arguing, I must have paid.

O: Not necessarily. I *could* be arguing in my spare time.

M: I've had enough of this!

O: No you haven't.

M: Oh shut up!

(Man leaves the office)



(http://www.montypython.net/scripts/argument.php)

+1

Rob Watson
06-08-2012, 11:56 AM
On topic, then,

+1

+1

+1

+1

Adds up to 4. Count thee up to three, not 4, nor 2 before pulling the pin on the holy hand grenade.

Counting by one then seeing the total is an excellent way to measure success. Of course, one must count the right things. Be sure to deduct for errors and taxes. A daily net greater than zero means progress is being made - that is success.

hughrbeyer
06-08-2012, 01:55 PM
Been reflecting on the original point. I think what has my most puzzled is what "resist not evil" is doing in a budo forum. If we're not about resisting something or other, what in tarnation are we doing here?

C. David Henderson
06-08-2012, 02:43 PM
Some might "argue," if I may use that ironically, reconciling conflict through non-resistance and restoring harmony. Non-resistance as a strategy for not getting caught up in evil while transforming it. Which brings us back to another perennial disagreement -- what do these terms mean in the context of budo? That probably deserves some serious exigesis as well.

Chris Parkerson
06-08-2012, 04:11 PM
Some might "argue," if I may use that ironically, reconciling conflict through non-resistance and restoring harmony. Non-resistance as a strategy for not getting caught up in evil while transforming it. Which brings us back to another perennial disagreement -- what do these terms mean in the context of budo? That probably deserves some serious exigesis as well.

Budo (redirecting the spear)????
Some resistance is necessary, in my experience.

From my perspective, the idea you mentioned re: "restoring balance" is an honorable ideal.
Now that is a wonderful shamanic quest and a fine goal in practicing Aiki.

In reconciling conflict, non-reactivity might be a more precise goal rather than non resistance. If we remain clear during the chaos of conflict, it is easier to locate the path that reconciles and restores balance. But the actions we take may include both passive and even aggressive resistance. Having clarity about why we do something is the major guide toward collaborating on a successful resolution.

I must admit, in several of the recent threads I have experienced more reactivity and unnecessary conflict coming from Aiki teachers than I have witnessed reconciliation or resolution.

Namaste,

Chris

C. David Henderson
06-08-2012, 04:34 PM
Chris,

That is nicely stated. FWIW, I don't disagree with any of it (I was in fact trying to summarize a viewpoint to which I don't ascribe).

Your point reminds me of hearing a Yoga teacher tell her students to go out into the world with their hearts fully "open." "Terrible idea" I says to myself, at least for us mere mortals.

As for Clarity, it is sometimes as elusive as it is valuable, as you no doubt are aware. In real life, mat time and sitting certainly help me.

Regards,

David H.

P.S. I have enjoyed reading your posts over the last several weeks, and in particular your interesting comments on shamanism. Take care.

Chris Parkerson
06-08-2012, 05:00 PM
Chris,

That is nicely stated. FWIW, I don't disagree with any of it (I was in fact trying to summarize a viewpoint to which I don't ascribe).

Your point reminds me of hearing a Yoga teacher tell her students to go out into the world with their hearts fully "open." "Terrible idea" I says to myself, at least for us mere mortals.

As for Clarity, it is sometimes as elusive as it is valuable, as you no doubt are aware. In real life, mat time and sitting certainly help me.

Regards,

David H.

P.S. I have enjoyed reading your posts over the last several weeks, and in particular your interesting
comments on shamanism. Take care.

I am honored by your comments. I guess I do come from that place of ecstatic surrender (opened heart). It stems from feeling connected to all things - even the presence of evil.

Oddly, I do remain grounded. I run a bodyguard company. I often tell my more aesthetic friends that I am a great maintenance man and janitor. I clean up messes for a living. And a good day is when conflict is resolved via collaboration ( we private security folks have little authority and no "color of law" behind our badge.

A few thing I am convinced of Are these. If something has substance, it needs no defense. Suffering comes from being "attached". Ideas of right and wrong promote the greatest attachments and thus suffering. Live like the Lilly of the field - without worry and you can see the Kingdom of God in it fullness each moment. They key to living like a Lilly is to be ready at any time for the first storm to take you out.

Gratitude,

Chris

Chris Parkerson
06-08-2012, 05:28 PM
David,

I guess I have an opinion on clarity as well. Everything we think, do and say is what we are practicing. Our practice is either leading us toward clarity or chaos. Clarity is experienced in bits and pieces. It is foggy when it is clear and it is clear in a fog. But our inner self can learn to take one step at a time if we listen well....One step at a time. That way we can navigate without becoming overwhelmed by seeing our many layers of "pain-body" ( emotional history that causes reactivity) all at once.

Still, as Rumi well said, the cure is in the pain.

Be well,

Chris

Chris Parkerson
06-08-2012, 07:48 PM
Actually, I'm going to cede this one to Dan. I'd forgotten that Matthew 5:38 starts "Resist not evil" because in context it's clear Jesus is talking about evil done to oneself. He talks a lot about actively resisting evil in the world.

I'm still waiting to hear how overturning the tables in the Temple translates to "keep one point" though.

Say Hugh,

I pulled out my old Greek lexicon and a couple of commentaries on Matthew.
The Greek word for "resist" τω πονηρω has the connotation of standing forcefully in full armor and battle array, striving for victory.

Another more sublime translation would be, "Do not repel one outrage by another." He that does so makes himself precisely what the other is, a wicked person." the Hebrews believed that all insults and attacks should be repaid "in kind".

Jesus was trying to level that "barrier" to peaceful living within the Kingdom of God.
Thus says Matthew Henry's commentary-

Matthew 5:38-42 The plain instruction is, Suffer any injury that can be borne, for the sake of peace, committing your concerns to the Lord's keeping. And the sum of all is, that Christians must avoid disputing and striving. If any say, Flesh and blood cannot pass by such an affront, let them remember, that flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God; and those who act upon right principles will have most peace and comfort.

Shalom,

Chris

Patrick Hutchinson
06-08-2012, 08:05 PM
Shalom, namaste, hoka hey, puha
Frankly I'm finding your endless list of buzzword sign-offs a little pretentious and dilettantish.
I hope your martial arts aren't similar.

Chris Parkerson
06-08-2012, 09:12 PM
Shalom, namaste, hoka hey, puha
Frankly I'm finding your endless list of buzzword sign-offs a little pretentious and dilettantish.
I hope your martial arts aren't similar.

I am sorry you feel that way. I can't help but wonder if something deeper is lying behind your statement. If so, would you care to share it?

Be well,

Chris

hughrbeyer
06-08-2012, 10:50 PM
Jesus said: The kingdom is inside you. (find/seek one point) Resist not evil. (relax) Forgive. Cast your burdens. Put down your baggage. (weight underside) Love God with all your might. (extend ki)

There are valid corollaries across the different spiritual viewpoints, but I don't think you can get at them by putting them all in a blender and hitting "puree."

Let me try to be as careful about the different threads I see as the Laphroaig will allow:

- You have Jesus in full-on pacifist mode--resist not evil, turn the other cheek, etc.

- And yet Jesus clearly did not expect pacifism to bring peace: I come not with peace but a sword; I will set a man against his father, etc.

- And Jesus in pacifist mode was talking about violence towards yourself--he clearly expected compassionate action in the world.

Now myself, I can't reconcile the pacifist Jesus with budo. The point of budo is to develop the strength--spiritual and martial--to impose your will on those who would do evil. If we take Jesus' pacifist sayings literally, you don't need budo or physical competence to turn the other cheek or to give your coat away. You do need spiritual strength, but there was no context in Jesus' time linking spiritual strength with martial practice (the Nazarenes come the closest, but that's a huge stretch.)

If I understand you, you want to allegorize the pacifist statements into "keep center" even while being attacked so that you control the situation. However interesting an interpretation that is, I think it's clear it's not what Jesus actually meant. His point isn't that by keeping center you can control the situation--his point is to give up and give over control. His point isn't even that the attacker will be ashamed of themselves, but that in choosing to be generous to them you will be acting more like God, who makes it rain on the just and the unjust.

(Which, by the way, provides the rebuttal to whichever senior Aikido shihan it was that said you could only choose mercy if you had the ability to take life. Jesus says when you are in the powerless position you choose mercy by going beyond the demands made on you.)

More justifiable, I think, would be to run the allegory in the other direction--avoiding and blending with the attack, allowing it to go where its momentum takes it, is like Jesus' command to turn the other cheek. Problem here is that that's not what Jesus said. He said turn the other cheek--so your assailant could hit you again. You're not getting out of the way so as to control the situation.

Budo comes at these moral issues from a very different place. Are there any stories from Japan of budoka turning the other cheek? I can't think of any. Budo sees no value in weakness, compliance, or giving in.

Instead, in budo if you are spiritually correct in your attitude--and martially competent, which you have to be to be spiritually correct--you are alined with the Infinite and you align the world around you with the Infinite, creating a tiny movable pocket of enlightenment around you.

That's why when you get thrown by a master, you get up with a grin on your face, laughing. You can feel how you've been wrenched into alignment with something beyond yourself by the throw.

I think this is where O-Sensei was going when he talked about Aikido being an art of peace and the spread of Aikido bringing about a spiritual awakening in the world. All these individuals, lining themselves up like little magnets towards True North, each small and imperfect but all reinforcing each other and creating an irresistible spiritual force larger than themselves.

Chris Parkerson
06-08-2012, 11:03 PM
Hugh,

What a beautiful contrast.

Peace,

Chris

Anthony Loeppert
06-09-2012, 12:04 AM
The point of budo is to develop the strength--spiritual and martial--to impose your will on those who would do evil.
...
Instead, in budo if you are spiritually correct in your attitude--and martially competent, which you have to be to be spiritually correct--you are alined with the Infinite and you align the world around you with the Infinite, creating a tiny movable pocket of enlightenment around you.
...
I think this is where O-Sensei was going when he talked about Aikido being an art of peace and the spread of Aikido bringing about a spiritual awakening in the world. All these individuals, lining themselves up like little magnets towards True North, each small and imperfect but all reinforcing each other and creating an irresistible spiritual force larger than themselves.

Strange that I think I feel/hear/understand your point and almost agree with it (whatever that is worth) but:
a) I've found more success setting the baggage down about imposing my will on others, instead not letting others impose their will on me.

b) It seems easier to align yourself with the world and infinite rather than the other way around.

It may seem like I am nit-picking or grammar nazi'ing (see I just made a verb out of a noun proof positive I'm not :) ), but that is not my intent. I feel this is crucial somehow.

c) As far as my opinion on the art of peace's ultimate purpose:
I see "evil" for lack of a better word as the side effect of cowardice or plain selfishness. I can't make someone else less greedy but I can make myself less afraid. Every day, people are faced with choices and some of those choices will be skewed by "what if standing up for what is 'right' gets my ass handed to me, or fired, or ostracized, etc." Adding up the difference between what people will do when afraid vs. not would be the dividend globally and lead to a just world given some unknown critical mass.

Regards,
Anthony

Belt_Up
06-09-2012, 07:27 AM
c) As far as my opinion on the art of peace's ultimate purpose:
I see "evil" for lack of a better word as the side effect of cowardice or plain selfishness. I can't make someone else less greedy but I can make myself less afraid. Every day, people are faced with choices and some of those choices will be skewed by "what if standing up for what is 'right' gets my ass handed to me, or fired, or ostracized, etc." Adding up the difference between what people will do when afraid vs. not would be the dividend globally and lead to a just world given some unknown critical mass.

Regards,
Anthony

Seconded. Couldn't have summed it up better myself.

Chris Parkerson
06-09-2012, 08:54 AM
Seconded. Couldn't have summed it up better myself.

Most interesting.
It makes me wonder how the term Budo has been interpreted by Japanese over the centuries.
I am not a historian of Japanese Budo and certainly interested in the thoughts of those who are.

How would Saigo Takamori and his clan's ( Satsuma Rebellion) view the position stated above. How would they view Morehei Ueshiba's ideal of Budo?
How would Ueshiba view the statement posited above?

Thanks in advance

Chris