senshincenter

Hi Shaun,

- Yes, I agree, that a secondhand source saying so does not make it so. For me, it remains a hypothesis. Yet, it is one that gains more weight by demonstrating a consistency of thought and practices than by noting statements. Cultural influence is a strange thing, and often elements that demonstrate it even come to take precedence over those statements that might seek to prove it or to disprove it. For example, for many, it has become important that Osensei has said he has disapproved of Zen. So for many it has become plausible to think of Budo and even Aikido as something totally separate from Zen. However, from the view of cultural influence, this is not an accurate understanding of history. This is remains so even in spite of Osensei's statement. Another example: Take the American constitution, it is heavily influenced by Judeo/Christian culture, and this remains true even if the founding fathers of the United States said they were out to establish a clear break between Church and State. Etc. In almost a counter-intuitive way, statements, whether they go one way or another, have little weight in terms of cultural influence. Rather, when noting cultural influence, we are looking for systems of thought that go on to make certain actions (which includes the writing of discourses) possible (and vice versa).

- Yes, then, right now I am not capable of answering this question of how Osensei felt we should bring the concept of Ichirei-Shikon into our lives. The only work I have done on this is related to the article I used to shed some light on the larger topic of Omoto-kyo theology. In that article, he briefly mentions some of his practices (e.g. Aikido, a simple existence, a departure from material culture, various religious rites, a discipline lifestyle, etc.) He also provides some commentary on some key moments in his life where he is attempting to summarize how certain drives/capacities have played themselves out. I think we can gain some insight in these summaries as well (e.g. his vision of turning into a gold body). However, in my opinion, this is only one article and much more would have to be researched before we could determine what Osensei's applications actually looked like -- or if he even had one in terms of a system of practice.

- I am always open for discussion -- personal or otherwise. Please always feel free to contact me. My email is found our dojo web site. However, I think many people would benefit from such a discussion, and if possible I would like to keep things open for all to share in and to partake of.


Some comments on your comments -- in the spirit of sharing…


- An interesting thing is that Omoto-kyo has said a very similar thing about their tradition -- that it was kind of a meta-tradition or para-tradition -- not really a tradition at all. This is very connected to presenting oneself as a "world" tradition -- as something that is beyond all "creeds and races" -- something that all of humanity can find him or herself within, etc. How close Omoto-kyo is to actually being this, or even how borrowed Osensei's statement may have been, I too personally understand Aikido in this same way that you imply here. Aikido is not a religion but a way of deepening all things because of the space it has for personal investment and thus for spiritual cultivation -- which all aspects of life benefit from (which includes religious practice).

- I agree, I would say that it is not necessary to follow Omoto-kyo. I would also say that Omoto-kyo would also say this same thing. Please note how Omoto-kyo has found a way within their discourse to suggest that all of the other major world traditions are part of the same religious worldview (i.e. how the high-god is the hypostasis for all of the other major religious figures of history). In its quest to be a world religion, Omoto-kyo is not saying it is the source of all other traditions -- they are not trying to co-opt everything else. They are merely trying to identify what is common to all of them -- which it sees itself as a part of as well. For my own person, I think it is very important to not follow Omoto-kyo practice -- to not adopt them as one's own. As one can guess, I would consider many of its elements to be bordering on a fetishization of the mundane -- so you know which side I would personally be coming from. No, what is important, and what Omoto-kyo would allow for, is that you come to this ever-present truth through your own means. However, that means must be real -- meaning, for example, it must include the cultivation of those key virtues and their corresponding functions and drives. I would also apply this to Osensei's own practice. The point is not to fetishize it -- so one is taking a big risk by seeking to copy it element for element. In my opinion, the point is the same -- to find one's own (real) path.

- I agree -- simple is always better than overly complex.

- There is a lot in there. I am not sure I can agree with everything you state in this comment. It may be your path, and if through it you can cultivate the virtues and drives relevant to a spiritual life -- more power to you. Still, I am not sure about what you are saying here -- to be honest. I sense that you have thought about this for some time and that you are speaking with silent referents that you are long familiar with. Not partial yet to those referents, I nevertheless sense that my own path is somewhat different. Thus, for example, I am not so motivated to see Osensei as a simplifier of things (though I can see how one might come to this view).

- I do not think that Aikido has to be separated from one tradition that says, "everything is the same and it's all good" in order to say, "everything is the same and its all good." My own perspective is that Aikido's view of itself as something that is beyond all creed and race is something it got from Omoto-kyo. In "getting this" from Omoto-kyo it was only itself practicing the same philosophy. It was not seeking to rise above it and/or to evolve beyond it -- since such concepts could not find their philosophical space. If Osensei did not make folks practice Omote-kyo practices, it was not because he felt he moved beyond them but rather because Omoto-kyo itself probably at that time had no real system of practices like it might today. In addition, it also had a great deal to do with the fact that for Omoto-kyo no set of practices (e.g. Aikido) were thought to be outside of the eternal truth that Onisaburo was attempting to lay out. Finally, there are these reasons: 1) One also has to realize how in Japanese culture, especially around this time, the "spreading" of religion was a kind of social taboo; 2) The view of religion that allows missionary work to actually function in a way we are use to in the West has never really been a part of the larger Japanese cultural conscience; and 3) Mystical systems of thought almost never tend to emphasize their actual practices since the fetishization of rites is a very real danger to be avoided. In my opinion, if Osensei posited Aikido as a kind of ritual, etc., or as its own thing, it was because it fit squarely within the worldview that underlying our material reality rested a singular spiritual reality. The singularity of this spiritual reality is what allows us to do Aikido without having to do Omoto-kyo. In that sense, it is not really an evolution over Omoto-kyo but more an extension or an application of Omoto-kyo's position regarding this singular spiritual reality.

- The phrase is something my Kenpo teacher makes use of. I am sure is not copyrighted - J

Thank you again for your thoughtful comments and for sharing some of your ideas with me.

Honored,
david