View Single Post
Old 09-20-2005, 06:35 PM   #66
Misogi-no-Gyo
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 498
Offline
Omoto-kyo Theology... Relevant?

Quote:
David Valadez wrote:
Hi Shaun,

Is that a "yes"? :-) I'll take that as a one then.
Hi David,

Actually, it is not a yes by any stretch of the word. I did answer the question, but I did so in a way that might encourage one where to look as opposed to telling them where not to look.

Quote:
David Valadez wrote:
It is a very interesting view of things. As a historian however, I do not think it would cancel out the significance of Omoto-kyo theology as far as gaining some insight into the more universal and well-known statements made by the Founder.
Nor should you discard them. I never said that. As a matter of fact, I would suggest everyone to conduct their own investigations of the subject matter. I went to Ayabe and spoke with the Omoto priests there. I had the proper introductions and was there as a student of Seagal Sensei, who was quite well known by the priests there, as he had been there a decade, or so earlier to get his own answers. While I have this, I have also asked repeatedly for anyone to show me any first or second hand source material that indicates that Omoto theology is in any way source material for the art of the Founder. Of course, one could say that anything and everything one encounters is source material for everything that person says and does that comes afterward. On one level this is correct. However I mean that Aikido is directly founded upon the principles of Omoto. I have not presented my own opinion on the matter, either in favor or against the theory. But regardless of whether I am trying to eliminate it as source material for further study, or am merely trying to confirm my own conclusions so as to embrace further study, I have yet to encounter anyone giving any conclusive evidence (or anything even palatable for that matter) that would support it. That is all I have been trying to say...
Quote:
David Valadez wrote:
Such a history would simply add to the overall history of Osensei - not force currently accepted parts of it out and/or render them as meaningless. This is not an endorsement suggesting that if you want to do "real" Aikido or if you want to do the Aikido of the Founder you have to do Omoto-kyo theology. I hardly believe that - as I have said many times.
However that does not mean that if standing on one's head for two hours before every meal was the answer we have all been looking for that there wouldn't be whole groups invalidating the concept as (take your pick)
  • bad science
  • spiritually void
  • physically impractical for self defense...
As we all know magic is not the thing it seems to be, but rather the slight of hand that we are not supposed to see. If one spends their day, or their life training themselves to levitate (I can say with 99.999% confidence) they will not get any better at whatever David Blaine, or your favorite magician of choice is actually doing when he wants it to appear that he is levitating. Meaning Maybe O-Sensei's waza was misdirection in terms of his own training and goals. In other words the car and the road are not the focus of the journey.
Quote:
David Valadez wrote:
This is to say that one is going to have to look at all of these things, and more, if one wants to understand Osensei historically.
Perhaps we should start with clarifying the importance, if any of understanding O-Sensei historically versus Seeking O-Sensei's art. I have a pretty good idea of the (current thought on the) historical significance of Jesus Christ, Buddha and Mohammed. However, that doesn't help me even 1/10th of 1% to be a better Christian, Buddhist or Muslim...

Quote:
David Valadez wrote:
On a different note:

As a person that considers himself to be practicing Aikido, as a person that considers himself an aikidoka, I must depart from your concern with pedigree here.
While I may have done or said something to which you are referring, I am not sure what you specifically pointing to or at. Would you please clarify as to what statement I may have made that implies such a thing?
Quote:
David Valadez wrote:
In other words, I cannot share in such a concern. Personally, I feel there are two areas where Aikido must survive in order to define itself properly.
Again, the term, "define itself" is strange for me. O-Sensei defined Aikido, and it is there for us to discover. I once did a seminar where 3000 people spent an entire weekend discussing how to "define" something. the process directly relates to Kotodama and is immutable. Define, discern discover, etc are fixed variables strung out in a particular order (fixed) along a particular process. In that regard, we don't define Aikido, and Aikido certainly does not define itself. Of course, from your historical perspective, you make a valid point in speaking in such terms. However, as you will notice from the title I have ascribed to my posts, one has to wonder if such a perspective is even relevant.
Quote:
David Valadez wrote:
These are the areas of martial validity (i.e. its capacity to gain victory over defeat in hand to hand combat scenarios) and of spiritual maturity (i.e. social/moral harmony and gaining a proximity to God).
Well, as for the first, according to the Founder, winning and losing are not part of the Aikido praxis, either on the physical or spiritual plain. So once again, I would have to wonder as to the relevance of that path. Having said that, I certainly would agree that the techniques (the waza itself) must be martially viable - just not in terms of victory or defeat. As for the second point you expressed as paramount, I would again have to question the direction of such thinking. When one stands at the center and breathes in an out with the rhythm of the universe, there is no sense of morality, social harmony or proximity to God as these things are merely the musings of man's small mind and are of no matter or consequence whatsoever.
Quote:
David Valadez wrote:
As far as these things go, there are many ways for one to achieve them. I cannot look at the obvious multiplicity of paths and denounce one path over another because it does not look like that of the Founder's.
I would agree, especially when one has yet to understand the path of the Founder, to do so would be ludicris. One must first seek the Founder, for that is the center of centers.
Quote:
David Valadez wrote:
I cannot judge or rather condemn one path to futility because it varies either in part or in total from what Osensei did.
If it is in terms of victory versus defeat and morality, spirituality and harmony versus immorality, a-spiritual and discord, I would tend to agree with you. Knowing as you now do how I do not ascribe to the relevance of those terms when it comes to seeking O-Sensei, I would not be able to agree. I would therefore ask, Why not judge (use one's power of judgment) or condemn (using one's power to discriminate right from wrong, better from worse...etc.) in order to better reach your goal?
Quote:
David Valadez wrote:
I can only determine the value, or the viability, of a given path by looking at it in and of itself.
Without inferring hipocrisy, isn't the difference between your last two points just semantics and in essence the same thing?



.

I no longer participate in or read the discussion forums here on AikiWeb due to the unfair and uneven treatment of people by the owner/administrator.
  Reply With Quote