My thoughts on Competition vs Non-competition

I don't believe competition in itself is bad. Competition improves quality.

Think about companies. Without competition between companies, product quality would be lower and prices would be higher.

Think about science. Without competition between scientitsts, less progress would be made in how to cure diseases or how to build earthquake resistant buildings, to name just two examples.

I've been a go player for almost 24 years now (a japanese board game, a bit like chess). Without competition, improving ones skill would be much slower (and hard to measure).

But extreme competition could lead to bad things. Competition means taking risks, but taking too much risk could lead to serious injuries, death, bankruptcy, stock market failure, crisis, war.

Ok deep breath, here goes nothing,
What I am alluding to and some people have almost smacked the nail on the head and almost drived it home is this. If the human race is to servive another centuary we have to see the collective madness of the competative mind seeking sense of self in ideologise and out dated dogma as mind made madness.

He`s wrong im right so I feel better and stronger for doing so. It is competition on a global human scale. I believe we are the custodians of our own and collective destiny, this generation above all others because we are HERE NOW in this moment, in our time of life, the threat of total human destruction through the competative self seeking sense of self in whatever we do will ultimate lead the world into destruction. Mother nature will have to finally have bring about her hand and bring the world into harmony to save the earth from us. if this leads to our destruction so be it, life in some form or another will continue. I believe (yes this is also just a thought) this is what O`sensei ment when he eliminated competition indeed forbid it.

If only we could realise the truth, that each one of us IS THE TRUTH, IS LIFE, LIVING LIFE NOW. Not in the competing mind of past events and what that country did to me/us and the other. Or indeed the mass fear of future competition/war if you like, being portrayed on our tv screens every night.

It is indeed the same process as the individual self competing only on a lrger collective scale, and it is completely mad. To live in this moment, and to become awere of awareness itself, or awareness becoming concious of itself, and then seeing the madness of the collective competing mind, is having one ffot in freedom. Ask yourselves this question. What problems do you have in your life right at this moment, not life situations, actuall real problems, the only problems that truly are are mind made, and it is totally insane.

So next time you step onto the mat as a teacher or a student, or indeed both, ask yourselves what it is truly you are learning to do, and what are teaching the next generation.

In Budo

Andy B

Hugh Beyer wrote: Marc -- Having just finished "The Better Angels of Our Nature" by Stephen Pinker, highly recommended, I am over-supplied with examples... but let's just choose one close to the topic. The honor/shame retributive mindset is apparently built in--it's just about universal in traditional societies and still exists in modern societies. But overcoming this mindset--which was one important result of the Enlightenment--is critical to reducing violence and creating the kind of stable societies we have these days. (And if you don't think we do, read the book.) That answers your question,but doesn't really address your argument. If you're going to promote competition on the grounds that people are competitive, you need to show that either (1) it's harmless so why not; or (2) it's not harmless but it's worth it because the world is a dangerous place or (3) it's an active good for some reason. You can't just say it's human nature, so that settles it.

Hugh, thanks for the reference to the book. I will definitely check it out.

I agree that transcendence needs to occur in order to reduce violence and create a stable society.

I personally believe budo can serve as a "bridge" solution that could lead to transcendence, but budo in and of itself is not a transcendental process.

I think a best, budo teaches us skills to deal with the very real problems and conflicts we can incur as we attempt to transcend violence.

The Koan "Do no Harm, Stop Harm" comes to mind.

Again, I go back to my statement from the other day. What is meant by Competition? I think there is a difference in say competition as a Team Sport such as Football, and competition over scarce resources.

Again, using the example of using the competitive model of sports in an inner city to bring together disenfranchised youth to cooperate and interact in a positive manner yields positive results, and can certainly help guide them further towards the path of transcending greed, violence etc.

However, competition between two rival gangs trying to gain influence over a turf to sell drugs would be heading in the wrong direction.

There is a spectrum of transcendence. You simply cannot remove a gang member from the street and place him in a Utopic Ideal environment like a Win/Win striving, non-competitive Aikido Dojo and capture his heart and mind....you have to bring him through the spectrum.

Competition in a constructive manner such as boxing, which has had great success in getting kids off the street and guiding there energy to fight in a postive way can work.

Again, you have to address the spectrum of violence with the right solution set.

Hugh Beyer wrote: Marc -- Having just finished "The Better Angels of Our Nature" by Stephen Pinker, highly recommended, I am over-supplied with examples... but let's just choose one close to the topic. The honor/shame retributive mindset is apparently built in--it's just about universal in traditional societies and still exists in modern societies. But overcoming this mindset--which was one important result of the Enlightenment--is critical to reducing violence and creating the kind of stable societies we have these days. (And if you don't think we do, read the book.) That answers your question,but doesn't really address your argument. If you're going to promote competition on the grounds that people are competitive, you need to show that either (1) it's harmless so why not; or (2) it's not harmless but it's worth it because the world is a dangerous place or (3) it's an active good for some reason. You can't just say it's human nature, so that settles it.

Hugh:

1) Honor/Shame mindset: Human institutions reflect humans, complete with all of our imperfections. The mindset that you are speaking about reflects a feedback mechanism for people within a society to function effectively within the parameters of that society. Having honor and having shame can be functionally effective thought/feeling experiences that help a person to modulate behavior within a society (family unit, classroom, etc...). Honor and shame are factors that help to create a sense of integrity in an individual within a particular societal unit. I know my parents used them to help raise me to be a caring, concerned citizen. I would argue that when the cognitive and behavioral manifestations of honor and/or shame are expressed in a manner that is destructive to both members and a society, then the focus on the identifiable factors/conditions that lead to a destructive process could yield valuable information to help stop destructive manifestations of application of the honor/shame paradigm (such as "honor killing"- talk about an oxymoron!).

2) Life is a fatal disease and inherently dangerous (regardless of the life form). Competition, as an expression of our very nature can be both constructive and destructive, depending upon how "competition" is manifest. Actually, it is quite easy to say that competition is a fundamental part of our nature. If we use competition as a form of self-motivation, it can be constructive to us or even destructive to us. If I use this form of self-motivation to see how deadly I can be to other people, then the manifestation of competitive, self-motivation is destructive to me and to others who deal with me. If I use this form of self-motivation to see how helpful I can be to people in need, then the manifestation of competitive, self-motivation is not destructive to me and those around me. We then have to look at the critical differences. What were the conditions and circumstances with which competitive self-motivation became expressed in two very different forms. If I have an understanding of those factors, I would be better able to create societal paradigms that promoted the positive expression, while reciprocally inhibiting the destructive expression.

In summary, what I am driving at is that the initial poster was the one who was being way to generalized and intellectually detached from a larger reality. When we really get into it, we are talking about very, very complex factors that result in human thoughts, feelings and behaviors. I was simply trying to push the poster into looking at some more reality-based, complex factors that can lead to a very in-depth discussion about topics that are too easily generalized (and thereby neutered). Sorry if I seemed to vague in my approach.

Marc Abrams

Andrew Bedford wrote:

Ask yourselves this question. What problems do you have in your life right at this moment, not life situations, actuall real problems, the only problems that truly are are mind made, and it is totally insane.

What REAL problems do I have in my life or world right now?

It depends on what you want to focus on and what level. At the high level you seem to be discussing...in the big picture, with some of the horrors and things I have witnessed and dealt with over the years...NONE. I have no problems.

What I DO have is the ability to help people that are less fortunate than I am. To educate them, protect them, and to give them the means and hope to stand up, support themselves and to STOP those than mean to cause them real and authentic harm.

For me, it is about leveling the playing field for the less fortunate and creating an environment of accountability and fairness....reducing corruption...again accountability. It is about liberating the oppressed.

As much as we may want to transcend injustice. Lets call it that. Who cares really about competition the real issue is injustice. We need to hold those accountable that wish to impose there will on others.

Can't do that...then this whole conversation is simply a pipe dream of western people with internet service and Starbucks making themselves feel good by talking about a Utopic society that we will get by twirling around in a skirt in the dojo. It ain't gonna happen that way. Sorry.

Kevin Leavitt wrote: Can't do that...then this whole conversation is simply a pipe dream of western people with internet service and Starbucks making themselves feel good by talking about a Utopic society that we will get by twirling around in a skirt in the dojo. It ain't gonna happen that way. Sorry.

+1

Kevin Leavitt wrote: Andrew Bedford wrote: What REAL problems do I have in my life or world right now? It depends on what you want to focus on and what level. At the high level you seem to be discussing...in the big picture, with some of the horrors and things I have witnessed and dealt with over the years...NONE. I have no problems. What I DO have is the ability to help people that are less fortunate than I am. To educate them, protect them, and to give them the means and hope to stand up, support themselves and to STOP those than mean to cause them real and authentic harm. For me, it is about leveling the playing field for the less fortunate and creating an environment of accountability and fairness....reducing corruption...again accountability. It is about liberating the oppressed. As much as we may want to transcend injustice. Lets call it that. Who cares really about competition the real issue is injustice. We need to hold those accountable that wish to impose there will on others. Can't do that...then this whole conversation is simply a pipe dream of western people with internet service and Starbucks making themselves feel good by talking about a Utopic society that we will get by twirling around in a skirt in the dojo. It ain't gonna happen that way. Sorry.

Agreed totally, but you have to make a stand somewhere, and I have chosen to do this through the medium of martial arts. of which I have been a part of since I was about 5 years old. Indeed it is about the only thing that makes sense to me in this world. And If only one person hear`s what I have to say albeit here in this setting or when I teach the childrens class or weapons class at the dojo, or indeed my own children, then it would have been worth it all the while.

Oh by the way I dont go to starbucks, never have ;-)

As Always In Budo

Andy B

Andrew Bedford wrote: Agreed totally, but you have to make a stand somewhere, and I have chosen to do this through the medium of martial arts. of which I have been a part of since I was about 5 years old. Indeed it is about the only thing that makes sense to me in this world. And If only one person hear`s what I have to say albeit here in this setting or when I teach the childrens class or weapons class at the dojo, or indeed my own children, then it would have been worth it all the while. Oh by the way I dont go to starbucks, never have ;-) As Always In Budo Andy B

Thanks for the reply Andrew.

So do you address the issues of Win/Win, Win/Lose, Lose/Win, and Lose/Lose? I am interested in your perspective on these areas. Especially with sword and weapons work. In kata someone will be the loser and someone will be the winner right? How do you teach the concept of Win/WIn in weapons work?

I'd see, at the base level, that even in kata there is an element of competition being communicated as typically there will be a conflict, and it must be resolved and ended some how.

Gregory Gargiso wrote: "that your mindset, is in accord with the collective mindset of your nation" Andy, STRONGLY DISAGREE. This nation and its collective mindset, I do not remember, did we force Britain after WWII or Iraq after the current war to fly our flag. Or assert or cast them off that they (the British and Iraqis) somehow are lesser ...airy fairies because they could not or would not compete against aggression, dominance, dictatorship, etc. What was that guy's name ? Neville Chamberlain, now there was an airy fairy with his head in the sand and he probably cost a lot of people their lives by delaying the inevitable. But history lesson and shots across this nation's bow aside. Letting go of ego is one thing, living with your head in the sand completely different. In other words, you can train with out any competition or thoughts there of your whole life. Finding out that that you have not been doing it right (again personal or with in oneself/ ) is quite a shock and is either appeasement , rationalization and gets you most likely hurt or dead.

Exactly my point gregory, this is self seeking in the past, creating problems from the past. In reality none of those things have any existance in the present!
Only people dragging up the past re-living it then reacting to it as if it was real and happening now when it was gone gone gone along time ago. forever gone never to return except in the madness of the human mind. It is completely and utter madness cant you see that? what I am alluding to here is buddah`s teaching. All the true teachings are there as pointers, you just have to see through all the rest of the mad stuff people have added, added and find out for yourself ultimately.

lol that actually made me laugh typing that. Because I know people are going to find it difficult to give up competition for the greater good, because, well at least in the west, we have built an entire so-called civilization on it. but when you take a step back and look at our society, you could hardly call it civilized the way we treat each other and indeed the planet. Always the search more of this more of that and it has it routes in the competative contentious mind of me, or the collective mind of us.

Andy B

Kevin Leavitt wrote: Thanks for the reply Andrew. So do you address the issues of Win/Win, Win/Lose, Lose/Win, and Lose/Lose? I am interested in your perspective on these areas. Especially with sword and weapons work. In kata someone will be the loser and someone will be the winner right? How do you teach the concept of Win/WIn in weapons work? I'd see, at the base level, that even in kata there is an element of competition being communicated as typically there will be a conflict, and it must be resolved and ended some how.

Now we are getting there, thank you Kevin. The thread of what i am teaching at the moment in dojo closely relates to what I am discuassing here.

For example in the childrens class, which incidently is straight after there Judo class, I teach say Ikkyo, and explain that you did not want to arrive at this situation in the first place so the situations has to be controlled, not the attacker, in such a way that the attacker feels minimum of disconfort for the strength of attack. i.e. if he attacks with 20% we defend with the same power guiding him off the line of attack, through body movement not force, and showing him the error of his ways thatdue to the nature of the technique we controll the situation not the person. (typing very fast going home form work in ten minute ;-)
this is why I believe Saito sensei used the term Taijitsu, body technique to control the situation, and then its done. I do not teach to go in and finish tham off, because once you have controll of the situation, finishing them off so to speak again is competative.

Sword is the same no different, Uketachi (attacker) attacks ok in a very pre-determined way I accept that, but the underlying princple of controlling the opponents sword not him, through body movement is the same as in Taijitsu. I teach to stop before you kill with the sword when you have controlled the opponents sword. This does not meen I am not prepared for or not capable of cutting the opponent, its just at the moment of impending doom on Uketachi`s part, I can choose peace

I teach to have complete control of the situation, but not to have a feeling of controlling the opponent, in this way I believe that the attacker at this point loses the will to fight, because tori does not have a mindset of fighting just to control the situation so nobody gets hurt, i.e. nobody loses. So this is as you put it a win/win situation, and do you know what, the kids understand it. How brilliant it is a childs mind, truly open, and not bogged down yet with the mind of the competing self.

In Budo

Andy B

I dont know.
Obviously you are on a higher plain or plane of thinking.
A lot of the principles of this country tend to mimic Buddha's teaching , which as I see it ,
is to be free or freeing. So I dont think the insanity references are necessary whatsoever.
Having allegiance,loyalty, fealty to ideals does not get in the way of what you seek and could complement it. All depends on the indvidual. What you purport is akin to living like a monk in a cave.
The monks in Tibet are all but powerless to stop the Red Chinese and their quest for enlightenment has been seriously interupted I would venture to say....
Agree to disagree about this country of mine, I see some of the insanity, and a lot of it is operating without a clear set of principles, but I can not do anything about it from the cave

Gregory Gargiso wrote: I dont know. Obviously you are on a higher plain or plane of thinking. A lot of the principles of this country tend to mimic Buddha's teaching , which as I see it , is to be free or freeing. So I dont think the insanity references are necessary whatsoever. Having allegiance,loyalty, fealty to ideals does not get in the way of what you seek and could complement it. All depends on the indvidual. What you purport is akin to living like a monk in a cave. The monks in Tibet are all but powerless to stop the Red Chinese and their quest for enlightenment has been seriously interupted I would venture to say.... Agree to disagree about this country of mine, I see some of the insanity, and a lot of it is operating without a clear set of principles, but I can not do anything about it from the cave

To all, I am no attacking the us here just the mind set.
Qutoe"A lot of the principles of this country tend to mimic Buddha's teaching , which as I see it ," end quote.

Do you not belong to a race of people that almost completely wiped out the indigenous population of that country? I would hardly call that Buddha teaching`s. However again that may seem a little unfair as this too happened a long time ago, but the relevance here is obvious.
please read a history book that was not written in the states on the history of the united states and you may understand what it is I am talking about. My country too is to blame for a lot of atrocious acts towards people from other parts of the world. But it is too late, to apportion blame here, because everybody that were to blame are dead.
So we cannot be held responsible for past actions of our fore fathers, yet it seems, that is still the case. When will the world wake up and realize its a new day. And we are NOT responsible for what happened centuries ago, We are still living in the past and seeking ourselves through future, and the competitiveness to "get there" is way out of control and is again mad.
We need to move forward in the present, not the past, we are still reliving acting out past actions still today in war, or the competing collective self. I.e. i`m American, I`m a Muslim, I`m English, I`m a christian.
The individual self, I`m a banker, I`m a policeman, I`m a President of a country.
You may as well be a child running round the floor shouting I`m a fire engine.

What happened to just being human, and part of a remarkable form of life. We just are, here and now, alive, and that is the miracle of life, we are life.

Andy B

Nice Andy,
great taking it out of context.
No I am not. my family is only in the country for a hundred years or so. What of it?
I am sure the history books written over in BBC land are much much better.
Are you saying that white people as race collectively said let's wipe out the Indians?
Or a conquered people refusing to acknowledge that they were indeed conquered , pushed themselves to the brink of extinction. Treaties were made , treaties were broken by both sides and politics , competition , pride and prejudice, extremism and narrow mindedness played a part, of that much I am sure. Your history books are especially not worth a damn as they have been skewed with the rose colored glasses of whatever is pop culture du jour over there in Europe.
It is exactly that kind of slander and BS that puts your views in competition with my own.
May the best man ..win.
Oh and by the way, I much rather be American than Buddha, and good on you for sucking me into a conversation without a forseeable end with your broadsides against America.
While we are supposed to just be happy being human, who is going to put out the fires, arrest the bad guys, teach whatever to whomever? Curious thing you say.

I guess you have not been to an Indian Casino over here lately , either. Excuse me , Native American casino.

In fact
The Spanish conquistadors were much more into wiping out collectively .
Once this country was established during the Indian wars, atrocities still occurred, war sucks, but once we had fought last battle and won , did we wipe out all of them? Had we been the Mongols imcsure it would have gone another way . We had these ideals and documents that to this day get in the way of that sloppy collectivism u speak of
I would love to be above the fray of this thread , like so many here have wisely chosen to do by now.
Are u still asking whether competition is necessary and how to implement it( I think u knw where I stand on the issue)
Or has this become bash nations and races hour?

Not so. You believe it is "your country" as you said so in your previous post. Now can you see how the egoic/competative mind set belies, even the basic principle upon which your country was founded, land of the free.
This is not I repeat not having ago at you or your country, but bringing to light that you have identified yourself as being an American, not a human being, Your country, not a place you just happen to in habit, why do think it is, that people believe that this is or that is theirs. It is the egoic sense of self wanting more and more and will compete with anything no matter what it is to get it.
I happen to quite like America I have sen parts of it and it is truly an amazing country. And I have some wonderful American friends. I am talking about the collective insanity of the planet due to competitiveness, and in my view it just so happens with the worlds largest economy that America does indeed have a massive egoic sense of competitiveness that is out of control. However this is not exclusive only to America, but the entire planet.
when I talk about past deeds, and how people identify a sense of self from that, it is like a kind of collective guilt. So the human mind tries and makes up for what it has done, and then what happens it goes round in circles repeating the same mindset just in a different time and setting, and the competative mind sabotages true efforts for that peace....... From both sides.
I repeat, this is a call to us as martial artists, who really want to make a difference in this world please, think about what we are truly teaching the next generation.

Competative arts teach win - non competative art teaches, to not lose, so know one loses.

The book and the sword as one, we are all of one family. I just hope one day the people of the nations of this world will see it being as one.

Always in Budo

Andy B

P.s I meant your post before your last one, postings out of sink. And yes the Spanish were worse but that is not really the point I was making, I guess the question aught to be then who do we think we are as a species. Now that would bring some weird answers. FWIW

Andy

Again a lot of Buddhists speak letting go of these images imposed upon us by the mindset u speak of .
I see it as a cop out on life and cowardice. "I'm unattached " so it doesn't matter and I don't have to answer for it. Lots more name tags for those kinds of people..
Singing kumbaya and handing out cokes.
I'm glad you are trying to show kids a better way of thinking . Globally so to speak.
I often wonder why I was born here and not some God forsaken place. It certainly was not to place myself above it all.
And when you teach the kids what you do , you are competing in the arena of ideas whether u think so or not . I believe that was also said by an American.
Do countries and political ideas /agendas have anything to with martial arts/ .
I think that they do

I'm not responding to the anti-US stuff, it's too juvenile to bother.

Though I might mention that the whole concept of "human rights" was invented by theologians in the Spanish Catholic church who were appalled at the treatment of native Americans and who sought to develop a theology to explain why even non-believers had to be treated as the image of God.

"Sword is the same no different, Uketachi (attacker) attacks ok in a very pre-determined way I accept that, but the underlying princple of controlling the opponents sword not him" -- NO, no, no! You control your opponent through his sword, not the other way around.

Kevin, the relationship back to economic competition strikes close to home, and is my touchstone for a lot of this. I'm a consultant. I confront reality every day. Reality is, if I don't offer a service my client values, I don't eat. It doesn't matter how pure I am or how theoretically perfect my work is. If it isn't valuable, and they don't see it as valuable, I don't eat.

In fact, I'm prepared to argue that capitalism is the most moral economic system available, for this very reason. If anyone in the economy wants to eat, they need to offer society a service that is perceived as valuable--not by their own self-centered values, but by the values of others. If Lady Gaga's services are more highly valued by more people than my local (very good) public high school's science teacher, so be it.

Marc- You know I was referring to honor/shame societies in the technical sense in which public honor and the public maintenance of honor through retribution matters. And yes, no blame to those in societies--if that's how your society works, you can't opt out of the game.

In everyday language, yeah, shame has its uses. I still remember one family conference where I laid out a situation in front of everyone and told them that in my opinion, we should be ashamed of ourselves as a family--and invited them to disagree with me. (They didn't.)

And that relates back to the topic here. "Shame" in this sense is a recognition that you have failed your own standards. To fail to feel shame in those circumstances is to fail to recognize where you need to grow. In my family story, the purpose of the discussion was to recognize our failings and work on them, not just to make everyone feel bad.

Same, as I see it, with budo. Budo provides a framework in which we find it hard not to recognize our failings and limitations, in a context that encourages working on overcoming those limitations. It teaches a pattern in which our failings are faced unflinchingly, addressed sincerely, and on a regular basis overcome and surpassed.

Taking those lessons into everyday life is, surely, valuable.

Gregory Gargiso wrote: Again a lot of Buddhists speak letting go of these images imposed upon us by the mindset u speak of . I see it as a cop out on life and cowardice. "I'm unattached " so it doesn't matter and I don't have to answer for it. Lots more name tags for those kinds of people..

Shucks, gotta address this.

This is a real misinterpretation of Buddhism. You don't let go of anything by denying it. You let go of it by accepting it--"Yes, I am possessed by rage now. This is my rage. It is my response to the moment. It is real just as the butt-cushion I am sitting on is real--and it is illusion just as the butt-cushion is illusion. Accepting the rage, I can move beyond it to understand the reality of the situation" is more how I understand Buddhism. Same with non-attachment--non-attachment doesn't mean indifference. It means understanding the appalling nature of the situation without getting caught up in it.

Hugh Beyer wrote: I'm not responding to the anti-US stuff, it's too juvenile to bother. Though I might mention that the whole concept of "human rights" was invented by theologians in the Spanish Catholic church who were appalled at the treatment of native Americans and who sought to develop a theology to explain why even non-believers had to be treated as the image of God. "Sword is the same no different, Uketachi (attacker) attacks ok in a very pre-determined way I accept that, but the underlying princple of controlling the opponents sword not him" -- NO, no, no! You control your opponent through his sword, not the other way around. Kevin, the relationship back to economic competition strikes close to home, and is my touchstone for a lot of this. I'm a consultant. I confront reality every day. Reality is, if I don't offer a service my client values, I don't eat. It doesn't matter how pure I am or how theoretically perfect my work is. If it isn't valuable, and they don't see it as valuable, I don't eat. In fact, I'm prepared to argue that capitalism is the most moral economic system available, for this very reason. If anyone in the economy wants to eat, they need to offer society a service that is perceived as valuable--not by their own self-centered values, but by the values of others. If Lady Gaga's services are more highly valued by more people than my local (very good) public high school's science teacher, so be it. Marc- You know I was referring to honor/shame societies in the technical sense in which public honor and the public maintenance of honor through retribution matters. And yes, no blame to those in societies--if that's how your society works, you can't opt out of the game. In everyday language, yeah, shame has its uses. I still remember one family conference where I laid out a situation in front of everyone and told them that in my opinion, we should be ashamed of ourselves as a family--and invited them to disagree with me. (They didn't.) And that relates back to the topic here. "Shame" in this sense is a recognition that you have failed your own standards. To fail to feel shame in those circumstances is to fail to recognize where you need to grow. In my family story, the purpose of the discussion was to recognize our failings and work on them, not just to make everyone feel bad. Same, as I see it, with budo. Budo provides a framework in which we find it hard not to recognize our failings and limitations, in a context that encourages working on overcoming those limitations. It teaches a pattern in which our failings are faced unflinchingly, addressed sincerely, and on a regular basis overcome and surpassed. Taking those lessons into everyday life is, surely, valuable.

I agree with pretty much all that Hugh said except that capitalist society is the only way to go. Oh please it's almost dead in the water. We need to find a new way, so that we can live in a sharing caring way. Not because we have to or feel obligated to, but because it is the right thing to do. I teach my kids to share!

About sword I think that is kind of samantics there Hugh, I control the opponents sword through body movement, so I do not have to worry about controlling him. We move in such a way that when the kumi tachi ends if the attack continues he indeed cuts himself, if that makes sense. Not that i cannot take the initiative if it escalates and I am in mortal danger, yes I can still act, and then deliver the decisive blow out of compassion for life, not out of a sense of wanting to control and kill the opponent.

Andy B

Hugh Beyer wrote: Shucks, gotta address this. This is a real misinterpretation of Buddhism. You don't let go of anything by denying it. You let go of it by accepting it--"Yes, I am possessed by rage now. This is my rage. It is my response to the moment. It is real just as the butt-cushion I am sitting on is real--and it is illusion just as the butt-cushion is illusion. Accepting the rage, I can move beyond it to understand the reality of the situation" is more how I understand Buddhism. Same with non-attachment--non-attachment doesn't mean indifference. It means understanding the appalling nature of the situation without getting caught up in it.

I am not ignoring reality here Hugh, I am confronting it head on and with passion, so to speak.
Are you of the mind all is well in the world. I would hardly say all has been well in this world for at least wellover a couple a hundred years, all that you said about capitalism is a conditioned response to keep it the way it is, because the fear of change is also rife, within society.
I am not talking about non-attachment here either, although that certainly has its place in the egoic mind, I believe non-attachment is pointing to the fact we seek ourselves in almost every spect of our lives, look at me I've trained to be a doctor, look at me and my wealth, health life style isn't it all great. Non of those things even if we are one of those types of people are who we truly are. That is the illusion, we are much much deeper than all that, but that is only a pointer to the truth, indeed who among us can really speak of the truth of who we really are?
I will use a quote from the bible I don't know if it is an accurate one but it goes something like this, Jesus said, "I am the truth and the light" I believe there is a piece missing here. It should have been, jesus said " I am the truth and the light, And so are you too, it's just I know it to be true and you simply are not aware of it.....yet".

Now could you read my original post and tell me now what you think of it.

Andy B

Hugh Beyer wrote: Shucks, gotta address this. This is a real misinterpretation of Buddhism. You don't let go of anything by denying it. You let go of it by accepting it--"Yes, I am possessed by rage now. This is my rage. It is my response to the moment. It is real just as the butt-cushion I am sitting on is real--and it is illusion just as the butt-cushion is illusion. Accepting the rage, I can move beyond it to understand the reality of the situation" is more how I understand Buddhism. Same with non-attachment--non-attachment doesn't mean indifference. It means understanding the appalling nature of the situation without getting caught up in it.

Accepting it and moving on before dealing with it. I meant the vehicle and how it is used by most or understood. Same as " it is real and a n illusion". What is that. R we living a dream? So did the Spanish missionaries "get caught up in it" or not ? Only took them 300 years for their idea to be taken seriously. I am fully invested in living and understanding within myself so I guess u can say I am caught up.
I am not up to argueings any of Buddhism's tenets nor equipped. So maybe I misunderstand .
By comparison ( sorry) how effective have they been in getting their point across and without being esoteric?

Also, i am very accepting of the fact that I am a juvenile .
This anti capitalist ,anti US , Occupy Whatever mindset crap on the other hand is not. They are totally mature and unaccepting of other views.

How 'bout that aikido, eh?

Gregory Gargiso wrote: Also, i am very accepting of the fact that I am a juvenile . This anti capitalist ,anti US , Occupy Whatever mindset crap on the other hand is not. They are totally mature and unaccepting of other views.

Yes that is why when we went into afganistan and Iraq, it was widely reported that, I can't for the life of me remember which general who said this but it was said. We will be setting up new schools to re-educate them.
Funny that greg, it is exactly the same way as the government of the day did on the Indian reservations, built new schools to re- educate them. And do it goes on and on. Now that again hardly seems a mature and respective attitude towards others way of thinking/life. However yet again you have identified yourself with a certain culture time and place. Not who you really are beyond all that mental stuff.

The only and I repeat only thing I am trying to show, is how mad all this competition is, you even have had the thought I am personally attacking you and not the mind set, and have believed that thought. now can you see the deep routes of the contentious egoic competitive mind. There is nothing personal or anti this nation or that nation, to put it another way then it is a sickness, a human sickness that has not been identifîed as such by the mass majority of the whole human race. And most can't even see it when it is right under there noses because usually they too identified with me and the story of my life and all the problems I have in it, to see or even seek truth.

Andy B