View Single Post
Old 12-12-2006, 04:47 PM   #31
Erick Mead
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,616
Re: For Ted Ehara - Boundary of your aikido?

Fred Little wrote:
... Neo-Confucian authoritarian paternalism in the sphere of human relations, on shamanistic practices both native and continental in the realm of personal spiritual adventurism, and simple consonance with the smooth rap and flow of the charismatic Onisaburo, all wrapped up in a furoshiki woven of such disparate strands of rhetoric as Norinaga's 18th Century nativist Kokugaku, Wang Yang Min's 19th Century intuitive Buddhist revolutionism, the Esperanto Society's 20th Century internationalism, and the high sheen of triumphalist gnostic exceptionalism. ... many of his other expressions of his genius just about as esoteric, syncretic, non-systemic, and -- dare I say it -- out to lunch as Ueshiba's works off the mat.
Geez! Not a poet among the bunch of ya ...! BTW -- Wang Yang Ming -- 16th century. The Old Man was trying to communicate complex things that do not denote well in the ebst of circumstances -- if at all. That does not make the attempt to get inside that stream ofthought meaningless or worthless to consider seriously in its own right, and without prejudging assumptions about what it does or does not have to say. I am constantly amazed at those who, not having the time, inclination or background to delve carefully into these things treat them as not worthy of being delved into at all. The lamp may be worthless to a blind man -- that does not mean it has no uses.
Mike Sigman wrote:
My point was that at core is the Yin-Yang cosmology and the attention on following the laws of nature in "harmony".
As opposed, say, to the "laws of nature" "red in tooth and claw" ?? Exemplified in the Warring States? There is a world of Chinese thought beyond Taoism, you know. Taoist concepts of Yin and Yang have nothing to say about peace in preference by prinicple, other than it is a pole opposite war. Taoism my fit your ideas of dispassion and moral remove "Heaven is very high, and the emperor is far away." It does not refelct O Sensei's thoughts on anythign other than a rudimentary level

Worse yet as counter example to the "common Asian cosmology" you falsely posit, was the recurrent resumption of the totalitarian legalism (fajia 法家 ) that sanctioned a minefield of laws, selective enforcement, harsh punishment and bound it all up in a nice little bow of the cult of rulership. The foremost modern practitioner of this ancient school of Chinese philosophy is named Kim Jong-Il.

If you really want a closer call on any "root" doctrione of Chinese philosophical as influence on both Omoto and particularly O Sensei's EXPRESSED sensibilities -- look more carefully at the passionate engagement that WAS expressed and the emphasis on Love and Peace in O Sensei's writing -- in other words, ya left out Moism.

Mozi proclaimed the doctrine of universal love (兼愛 jian ai). O Sensei, in several Doka, would write "Aikido" with the variant "love" ("ai" 愛 ) substituted. His conception of the "Art of Peace" and his principles of technique are spot on with Mozi's stance against all aggression and war. Also in common was MOzi's reliance on Heaven not a s a dispassiont amoral force of nature, but as a benevolent and personal, moral force in human nature and society. This is much closer to the humane principles expressed by O Sensei in his work, and his own sense of affinity to root Christian teachings, to which Moism has often been compared.
Mike Sigman wrote:
My approach is more in line with dispassion being a correct approach as opposed to passionate defense of strongly-held beliefs somehow being a proof of the "spiritual".
When dealing with objects -- objective terms are usually best. As a general rule, however, people should be treated as subjects, not objects, and it is better to try to understand a person on his own terms. That way we can see what commonalities or distcintion actually exist betwen different people and their circumstances, rather making poorly drawn assumptions, yet again, based merely on one's own unsubstantiated terms.


Erick Mead
  Reply With Quote