Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Spiritual

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-19-2003, 05:12 PM   #26
otto
Dojo: Independent
Location: Maracaibo/Zulia
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 149
Venezuela
Offline
Best of luck for you and your wife Terje

and Ian Pal...Free your mind

and jump from that rooftop

JK..Plus KI!

"Perfection is a Process"
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2003, 07:34 PM   #27
W^2
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 53
United_States
Offline
Interesting turn of events in this thread...

Jeff,

If you think about your terms & definitions thoroughly beforehand, you may avoid a pointless debate over semantics in favor of a conceptually productive exchange of ideas.

I just thought I'd point out that if something comes from nature - such as Homo Sapiens - then it is natural. So if our technology is 'unnatural', then it would by definition, have to come from an unnatural source. So, are we natural or unnatural beings, because in this instance they're mutually exclusive terms?

It would be better to say that every species on this planet is interdependent, and this symbiosis is also present between the species and the planet itself, so when that continuum is perturbed sufficiently an 'imbalance' may occur. These relationships aren't linear, but rather, they form a Complex System that is in a constant state of flux. Some perturbations may cause a 'hiccup', and some may push the whole System into a different cycle. Within this context Homo Sapiens may use it's dominant ability of abstraction to perturb the current ‘world-cycle' into a different and perhaps self-destructive one. In addition, due to the non-linear complexity of nature, any species current influence on the world-cycle is impossible to predict accurately over long periods of time.

In this regard technology is a natural byproduct of our growth as a species. If you want to argue that without 'us' technology wouldn't exist, and therefore it is unnatural, then you would have to apply that reasoning to the behavior of all species - in which case the results of all our behaviorisms would be unnatural.

If the arguments presented are valid, then we must accept that whatever the future holds for us is natural.

I apologize for the off-topic post.

~Ward

PS Of course, if Homo Sapiens technology is unnatural then Aikido is unnatural as well.

Last edited by W^2 : 05-19-2003 at 07:37 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2003, 07:35 PM   #28
Thalib
 
Thalib's Avatar
Dojo: 合気研究会
Location: Jakarta Selatan
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 504
Indonesia
Offline
Is this reality a dream?

Or, is the dream the reality?

We live in a relative truth. Our physical body, our logical mind, our scientific world, they all have limitations.

Limitations that make us comfortable with the present life. Ignorant of what may be, what could be, what will be.

We deny ourselves of the absolute truth just because of its inconvenience. So long has it been forgotten, we don't even know what it is anymore.

Why is it when I dream it feels more real?

When I have to die by the sword, I will do so with honor.
--------
http://funkybuddha.multiply.com/
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2003, 08:39 PM   #29
Jeff R.
Dojo: River Valley
Location: New Hampshire
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 93
Offline
Re: Interesting turn of events in this thread...

Quote:
Ward Ward (W^2) wrote:
Jeff,

If you think about your terms & definitions thoroughly beforehand, you may avoid a pointless debate over semantics in favor of a conceptually productive exchange of ideas.
It's true; thank you.
Quote:
I just thought I'd point out that if something comes from nature - such as Homo Sapiens - then it is natural. So if our technology is 'unnatural', then it would by definition, have to come from an unnatural source. So, are we natural or unnatural beings, because in this instance they're mutually exclusive terms?
So it seems that you're saying that unnatural things cannot come from a natural source. But by the definition of natural, it is not possible for man to create natural things. Man can ONLY create unnatural things (yes, save for offspring and waste products). Further, by your line of reasoning:

Man can create.

Nature was created by a "God."

Man is a God.

Basically, if Nature didn't put it here, and if in its creation a "thing" does any damage to Nature at all, then it does not fit into Nature, and it shouldn't exist.
Quote:
It would be better to say that every species on this planet is interdependent, and this symbiosis is also present between the species and the planet itself, so when that continuum is perturbed sufficiently an 'imbalance' may occur. These relationships aren't linear, but rather, they form a Complex System that is in a constant state of flux. Some perturbations may cause a 'hiccup', and some may push the whole System into a different cycle. Within this context Homo Sapiens may use it's dominant ability of abstraction to perturb the current ‘world-cycle' into a different and perhaps self-destructive one.
Precisely, thank you. And it's amazing that we've been blessed with the ability to think, to love and care for things, yet we still choose to push the system into a different, self-destructive cycle.

If we were absolutely unable to make the distinction, and if we were unable to change our selfish "perturbations" into the more productive cycle of Total Prosperity for all of Creation, then I would totally be with you. But we could change. We choose not to.

And it sounds as though many people are trying to make excuses for it instead of trying to fix it.

Quote:
In addition, due to the non-linear complexity of nature, any species current influence on the world-cycle is impossible to predict accurately over long periods of time.
And even after we've surpassed prediction and have plummeted straight into the manifestation of imminent turmoil, destruction, pollution, and death, we still don't change. Besides, no other species damages the Earth as we do, so it's pretty irrelevant to make any long-term predictions of relative damage to Nature.
Quote:
In this regard technology is a natural byproduct of our growth as a species. If you want to argue that without 'us' technology wouldn't exist, and therefore it is unnatural, then you would have to apply that reasoning to the behavior of all species - in which case the results of all our behaviorisms would be unnatural.
Nah. Just us. We are the only species that poisons our own water. We are the only ones who synthesize things into non-biodegradable substances. We made the technology, why try and pass it off as excusable based upon the biology of other species? However, if all of the premises and conditions (biological and otherwise) were similar between us and other species, then, yes, I would have to conclude that they would be doing unnatural, destructive things as well, if it were so.
Quote:
If the arguments presented are valid, then we must accept that whatever the future holds for us is natural.
You got that right, bud. Nature rules; we have no chance if we fight. But why fight? Why not live in harmony with Nature? Why not preserve the future by protecting the present? Why not apply Total Prosperity to all living things? Isn't that what being the 'dominant' species is all about? The ones in charge, the caretakers. Especially true for Aikidoka, right? Preserve all life?
Quote:
PS Of course, if Homo Sapiens technology is unnatural then Aikido is unnatural as well.
That's like saying that apples are unnatural because man thought of eating them.

Dude, most martial arts are movements from nature. In fact, most of them teach us to emulate the animals and the cycles, and to get closer to the natural world. (Check out Mitsugi Saotome's: Aikido and the Harmony of Nature.) They aren't synthesized and destructive to Nature in their purest form, and they are about the closest connection, along with other forms of dancing, that we still have to our primitive roots.

I appreciate your calm and collected communication. Thank you for that.

Exercise and extend your Ki with conviction; feel its awesome power--just smile.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2003, 08:41 PM   #30
Jeff R.
Dojo: River Valley
Location: New Hampshire
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 93
Offline
Quote:
Terje Theiss (Bussho) wrote:
Hi

Just wanted to say that I'll be off line the next week or so. My wife just went into labor. We have to wait until mornign before we'll go to the hospitle.
Congratulations and I'll be looking forward to your return!


Exercise and extend your Ki with conviction; feel its awesome power--just smile.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2003, 04:06 AM   #31
happysod
Dojo: Kiburn, London, UK
Location: London
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 899
United Kingdom
Offline
Otto, I'll leave the roof jumping to you, but I'll gladly hold your coat when you do.

Jeff, very interested in your arguments, particularly in the way you manage to attribute attitudes that have not been stated and respond to them. I admit I was attempting to be brief in my rejection of your particular take on a solution to world problems and may have misled. However, perhaps I can clarify myself.

As I understand your argument, we should reject all technology above subsistence level, reduce our population drastically (preferably through a third party you term nature to avoid any of the non-pc areas) and generally make room for other species. Please feel free to correct any misapprehension on my part.

1. I agree with your take on other species, man should live more harmoniously with other life on this planet. However, this can be taken to extremes through well-intentioned, but misguided zeal. The example I'm thinking of is some of the national parks in Africa, where the only humanity allowed are the rangers (and of course poachers). This type of "setting aside" was based on the descriptions by early western explorers in Africa who described a land without man -- this was actually often caused by the wiping out of the indigenous tribes by the diseases carried by earlier explorers.

2. Population reduction. Again, I agree with you, but I think your solution is naive. The only areas of the world which have shown population decrease are, ironically, the most technologically dependant. This decrease has been linked with two main areas.

a) Widespread, broad-based secular education. This is itself dependant on a firm economic, technologically advanced base -- education in more subsistence level society has to be specific, often ritualised and rarely addresses such issues as how not to increase your population

b) Longevity: again, the result of increased technology

3. Reducing technology: Technology, traditionally, has been driven by competition and war, with the less technological society being driven under (with the obvious exceptions where numerical superiority outweighed the technological advantages). While technology has successfully been halted in its "advance", I can't think of a single time where technological progress has voluntarily been regressed. The only examples of a technological regression I can think of are:

a) The "dark ages" which current research indicates was a result of a volcanic eruption engendering the equivalent of a nuclear winter

b) The plagues which wiped out most of the Moorish civilisation

So, all you could actually hope for is a natural disaster of biblical proportions. Even then, the time scale between the darks ages and modern day is the merest blip in the world history.

In effect, my disagreement with you is twofold. Firstly, you seem to place the world's ills purely at technology's door. Technology is a tool, which can be misused or used properly, it's the application and motivations of use that are important. Secondly, you seem to have a different take on human nature to myself. You believe people should and would voluntarily suffer hardship, high child mortality and low life expectancy, happily sacrificing themselves on the altar of world balance. I don't, I believe most people are not evil or that many would sanction the extinction of other species. However, I do think many are often short-sighted and addicted to comforts, even if it's just a new type of spear chucker that means they can hunt later in life. I would prefer to work with humanity as it is which means technology and its uses.

Apologies to other readers for the length of this missive, but brevity seemed to be a route far too open to misinterpretation and condescension.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2003, 06:36 AM   #32
Jeff R.
Dojo: River Valley
Location: New Hampshire
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 93
Offline
Quote:
Ian Hurst (happysod) wrote:
Jeff, very interested in your arguments, particularly in the way you manage to attribute attitudes that have not been stated and respond to them.
Please be more specific.
Quote:

As I understand your argument, we should reject all technology above subsistence level, reduce our population drastically (preferably through a third party you term nature to avoid any of the non-pc areas) and generally make room for other species. Please feel free to correct any misapprehension on my part.
Okay. Once again, I'm not suggesting that everyone relinquish their televisions and set up tipis. That's unrealistic. I'm suggesting that since living in harmony with Nature cannot possibly be wrong, whereas the creation of technology is proven to be damaging, that we take the responsibility to offer our grandchildren the option.

Just because we act stupidly doesn't mean we need to pass it along.
Quote:
1. I agree with your take on other species, man should live more harmoniously with other life on this planet. However, this can be taken to extremes through well-intentioned, but misguided zeal. The example I'm thinking of is some of the national parks in Africa, where the only humanity allowed are the rangers (and of course poachers). This type of "setting aside" was based on the descriptions by early western explorers in Africa who described a land without man -- this was actually often caused by the wiping out of the indigenous tribes by the diseases carried by earlier explorers.
Native Indians live for thousands of years in harmony. Explorers come along for selfish reasons, through technology. Natives contract deadly diseases, then are raped, enslaved, and murdered in masses.

Yeah. We ROCK.
Quote:
2. Population reduction. Again, I agree with you, but I think your solution is naive. The only areas of the world which have shown population decrease are, ironically, the most technologically dependant. This decrease has been linked with two main areas.

a) Widespread, broad-based secular education. This is itself dependant on a firm economic, technologically advanced base -- education in more subsistence level society has to be specific, often ritualised and rarely addresses such issues as how not to increase your population
It shouldn't have to. Only in a society that separates itself from Nature do we need to even address issues as overpopulation. In the real world, in Nature, the issue takes care of itself.
Quote:
3. Reducing technology: Technology, traditionally, has been driven by competition and war
Yeah. There's a good reason to keep technology. It also stems from "necessity" but the extension to that necessity is that it's a need to overcome weaknesses, such as genetic deficiency, or to cater to greed and spiritual deficiency, in the form of all of our "toys," i.e., televisions, cars, etc.

Quote:
While technology has successfully been halted in its "advance", I can't think of a single time where technological progress has voluntarily been regressed.
Ya' think?
Quote:
The only examples of a technological regression I can think of are:

a) The "dark ages" which current research indicates was a result of a volcanic eruption engendering the equivalent of a nuclear winter

b) The plagues which wiped out most of the Moorish civilisation

So, all you could actually hope for is a natural disaster of biblical proportions.
Hope for?

It is interesting though, how Nature in its course of being natural, has these devastating effects on our technological advances, but we still keep fighting it.
Quote:
In effect, my disagreement with you is twofold. Firstly, you seem to place the world's ills purely at technology's door. Technology is a tool, which can be misused or used properly, it's the application and motivations of use that are important.
Not at all. The world's ill come from our stubborness and our dependency upon technology. It's not a real need.

I can't believe that people refuse to see that all of our needs are met in the natural world. Technology is excessive. It totally separates us from Nature. How much spirit do you get from a video game? How sharp are your senses from living in a house, driving to work in a car, then spending the day behind a desk? How free are we by tethering ourselves to the routine of:

After birth, go to school;

Graduate;

Go to college;

Graduate;

Get a job;

Get a house;

Get married;

Have children;

Retire;

Die.

That's the norm in our society. In fact, in the tribal societies, the word "vacation" didn't exist. We have pumped it up to be a powerful concept, because we can't deal with the stresses of the constant pursuit of "technological advancement" and chasing the almighty dollar.

And you're defending this?
Quote:
Secondly, you seem to have a different take on human nature to myself. You believe people should and would voluntarily suffer hardship, high child mortality and low life expectancy, happily sacrificing themselves on the altar of world balance. I don't, I believe most people are not evil or that many would sanction the extinction of other species.
Indigenous people lived with Nature for THOUSANDS OF YEARS! In fact, figureheads of major religions even lived WITH Nature.

Plus, you're talking about a species that commits genicide, has sanctioned the extinction of other species, kills for sport, pollutes air, land, and water . . . etc., etc.

Quote:
However, I do think many are often short-sighted and addicted to comforts, even if it's just a new type of spear chucker that means they can hunt later in life. I would prefer to work with humanity as it is which means technology and its uses.
Well, when you get old and are on your deathbed, I'm sure you'll be happy with yourself, and that your grandchildren will thank you for what you've left behind.
Quote:
Apologies to other readers for the length of this missive, but brevity seemed to be a route far too open to misinterpretation and condescension.
Which is ironic because it seems that several people skim the posts rather than really read them. I am totally aghast. I can't believe that it's so blatant that humans damage nature with technology, yet many only want to defend it.

I'm not talking about human nature, or societal economics, or sociology. I'm stating simple, undisputable facts:

Technology is excessive. Indigenous people lived for thousands of years without it in perfect balance with Nature. There was no pollution, no mass destruction, no wiping out of species.

Technology caters to our weaknesses and separates us physically and therefore spiritually from Nature.

Our dependency on technology is doing more harm than good if you look at the larger scale beyond the selfish "what's good for society."

How is it that people are not grasping these things?

Exercise and extend your Ki with conviction; feel its awesome power--just smile.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2003, 07:42 AM   #33
happysod
Dojo: Kiburn, London, UK
Location: London
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 899
United Kingdom
Offline
Jeff, I'm now becoming confused on what you're actually arguing for. You are very enamoured of both nature and "native cultures" and despise technology in all its forms. But, I'm still unclear on how you actually wish things to change or, more importantly, how you believe this should be accomplished.

However, just to keep the ball rolling, if I can come back to parts of your last reply

"Only in a society that separates itself from Nature do we need to even address issues as overpopulation. In the real world, in Nature, the issue takes care of itself." By this do I take your meaning to be almost "Spartan-esque" -- expose the child at birth, the strong survive and (by extension) the most minimal child-care and medicines for common ailments. In short a society that has no place for the healer?

"Native Indians live for thousands of years in harmony.": by harmony I presume you meant remained within what you're expounding as our rightful niche in nature, or do you mean spiritual harmony? Also are you including South American Indians in this (Mayans spring to mind for what can be accomplished with just a stick in terms of ecological damage)?

"Technology caters to our weaknesses and separates us physically and therefore spiritually from Nature". From your own posts, you feel you have a good spiritual bond with nature. Despite this, you're obviously a well educated child of a technological society. Is it this dual nature that you wish everyone to experience? Also, all technology caters for a weakness, your bone or stick is a crutch for our lack of claws etc.

Final point for us to disagree on, "Technology is excessive. Indigenous people lived for thousands of years without it in perfect balance with Nature. There was no pollution, no mass destruction, no wiping out of species." I have two problems with this statement. Firstly, how do we know this, what records are you basing this on? Core samples taken from the pole indicate heavy concentrations of carbon and other pollutants way in the past, perhaps this was one campfire too many? Secondly, we do have fossil records of species that are no-longer with us -- are you positive we weren't to blame. Certainly, it looks as though we did "do" for Neanderthal man and how would you explain the demise of the Moa?

Yes, I support technological progress, mainly because, in my own way, I am probably as much an idealist as yourself. To me, our technology just hasn't gone far enough in the right direction as evinced by the damage our current practices are doing. However, I think the damage can only be properly addressed by (yes you guessed it) more progress...
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2003, 08:20 AM   #34
Jeff R.
Dojo: River Valley
Location: New Hampshire
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 93
Offline
Quote:
Ian Hurst (happysod) wrote:
Jeff, I'm now becoming confused on what you're actually arguing for. You are very enamoured of both nature and "native cultures" and despise technology in all its forms. But, I'm still unclear on how you actually wish things to change or, more importantly, how you believe this should be accomplished.

However, just to keep the ball rolling, if I can come back to parts of your last reply
Of course.
Quote:
"Only in a society that separates itself from Nature do we need to even address issues as overpopulation. In the real world, in Nature, the issue takes care of itself." By this do I take your meaning to be almost "Spartan-esque" -- expose the child at birth, the strong survive and (by extension) the most minimal child-care and medicines for common ailments. In short a society that has no place for the healer?
Not quite. It's harder these days in the matter of ailments, because many of our modern ailments didn't exist in the tribal society. Back then, they had natural medicines and methods that could deal with the ailments they had. But the people also had a closer relationship with death than we do. They embraced it as part of living, and didn't strive for immortality in the obsessive way that we do. They obviously tried to survive, but they understood that death was natural and not to be fought.

Tribal society was family oriented. Children were raised by all of the tribe; all of the mothers were mother to every child.

Natural Selection is the way of Nature, and humans have taken too much of the reign in the decision of mortality, therefore, we do have massive overpopulation, overcrowding, and a huge impact of devastation on the environment in the forms of pollution and eliminating ecosystems.

The solution? Education.
Quote:
"Native Indians live for thousands of years in harmony.": by harmony I presume you meant remained within what you're expounding as our rightful niche in nature, or do you mean spiritual harmony?
The natives of any continent who lived close to Nature had to be very aware of their surroundings, food sources, dangers, etc. Their senses were highly in tune, and that honing opens the "veils" to the spiritual senses. We all have this ability, and many often feel it in spurts. It can be in the form of deja vu, "coincedence," the gut feeling, intuition, etc.

Without this spiritual connection to Nature, we begin to separate ourselves and lose track of the cycles. This is when we begin to develop crutches (technology) to make up for the spiritual gaps.
Quote:
Also are you including South American Indians in this (Mayans spring to mind for what can be accomplished with just a stick in terms of ecological damage)?
Either way. Anything created that does damage to Nature in its creation or separates us from our connection to the Natural world, is not healthy.
Quote:
"Technology caters to our weaknesses and separates us physically and therefore spiritually from Nature". From your own posts, you feel you have a good spiritual bond with nature. Despite this, you're obviously a well educated child of a technological society. Is it this dual nature that you wish everyone to experience?
I wish I still had a solid spiritual bond with Nature. That I don't anymore is the very reason that I try and teach the Aikido principles of giving options and protection all life. I can't live in Nature right now, but I can still pass on the old lessons to the next generations and give them the chance.

As for duality, that's an interesting point. The duality that the Shaman lived was a perfect balance between the logical world and the spirit world. In our society, I believe science classifies it as the Delta state of brain activity. It is being open to all messages and stimuli in both worlds. That, I believe, it the Satori we Aikidoka are striving for. But, the thing is, the only way to achieve it is by being connected to Nature.
Quote:
Also, all technology caters for a weakness, your bone or stick is a crutch for our lack of claws etc.
Exactly. We started early, didn't we? However the bone and stick do no damage to the cycles of nature in their conception. The tools we create now literally wipe out ecosystems, and in some cases, societies.
Quote:
Final point for us to disagree on, "Technology is excessive. Indigenous people lived for thousands of years without it in perfect balance with Nature. There was no pollution, no mass destruction, no wiping out of species." I have two problems with this statement. Firstly, how do we know this, what records are you basing this on? Core samples taken from the pole indicate heavy concentrations of carbon and other pollutants way in the past, perhaps this was one campfire too many?
Or volcanoes, forest fires . . . In fact, the forest fire is an important part of the natural cycles. Believe it or not, the forest fire is important in carrying on the proper function of some ecosystems. Without the forest fires in some places, the ecosystems would collapse. But once again, we come along and try to extinguish them all.

It's interesting. We tend to either do too much interaction with nature, wiping it out, or none whatsoever.

It has been proven, in fact, that the Natives who depended upon Nature actually IMPROVED their environment by removing the sick and the weak, and they helped the ecosystems thrive because of their intimate connection.
Quote:
Secondly, we do have fossil records of species that are no-longer with us -- are you positive we weren't to blame.
Nope. But it would figure if we were. But I am positive that it wasn't because of the technological advances of some other species.
Quote:
Certainly, it looks as though we did "do" for Neanderthal man and how would you explain the demise of the Moa?
Moa? Enlighten me.
Quote:
Yes, I support technological progress, mainly because, in my own way, I am probably as much an idealist as yourself. To me, our technology just hasn't gone far enough in the right direction as evinced by the damage our current practices are doing. However, I think the damage can only be properly addressed by (yes you guessed it) more progress...
But, my friend, by the time it is properly addressed, it may be beyond proper repair. And as long as we keep "making" things, and living for the dollar, I don't see how the issues will ever be properly addressed. Hidden and subverted perhaps.

I foresee a lot of regret in our society.

Anyway, what I am 'fighting' for are some of the most important principles of Aikido:

1.Preserve all life. Not all human life, but ALL life.

2.Always provide options.

3.Educate.

Exercise and extend your Ki with conviction; feel its awesome power--just smile.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2003, 05:30 PM   #35
Col.Clink
Dojo: Waiuku Ki Society
Location: New Zealand
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 68
Offline
Quote:
Jeff Rychwa (Jeff R.) wrote:
Moa? Enlighten me.
Quoted from Encarta:

"Moa, common name, originally used by the Maoris, for about 20 species of ostrichlike birds that inhabited New Zealand. All are extinct, although one species may have persisted until early in the 19th century. Most moa bones have been found in swamps, others in sands, riverbeds, and in dry caves, where bits of skin and feathers have been preserved. Many pieces of their thick-shelled eggs and a few whole eggs have been found, one containing a large embryo. Moas varied greatly in size, from about 1 m (about 39 in) to 4 m (13 ft) in height. Unlike ostriches, moas lacked even the rudiments of wings. Their legs were massive and relatively short. Moas were widespread in New Zealand when it was colonized by the Maori people about 800 years ago, but were extinct or extremely rare by the time Captain James Cook first visited there in 1769.

Scientific classification: Moas belong to the order Dinornithiformes."

Enjoying this discussion, thanks guys!

"Excess leads to the path of Wisdom"
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2003, 07:18 PM   #36
Jeff R.
Dojo: River Valley
Location: New Hampshire
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 93
Offline
Quote:
Robert H.G Burrell (Col.Clink) wrote:
Quoted from Encarta:

"Moa, common name . . .
Thank you very kindly, sir.

Now that I have some info, I'm not sure exactly how my counterpart's question pertains.

Exercise and extend your Ki with conviction; feel its awesome power--just smile.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2003, 05:45 AM   #37
happysod
Dojo: Kiburn, London, UK
Location: London
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 899
United Kingdom
Offline
Robert, please tell me you looked that up or are a zoologist, or I'm going to feel really inadequate...thanks for the definition.

Jeff, the moa comment was with reference to your claims that indigenous peoples worked in harmony with nature. The Maori culture has a very rich, very spiritual background with a high regard for nature. However, even such enlightened cultures can make mistakes without technology. I think that this is the root of our disagreement; you regard technology as the overweening factor is our detrimental effects on the world.

To me, technology is just a tool, problems we manufacture through being whom and what we are. Furthermore, technology is also an integral part of us, we are hardwired into being tool users as we're so woefully lacking in other natural benefits. Now I can agree the balance may have tipped too far, but I still have problems with your sorting society into the weak and the hale as a solution, as I certainly don't feel I have the right to make that decision about another human being (who is also a unique, precious animal in their own right), even if you're "just" talking about removing certain technical advances in medicine. Next we'd have to go down the route of defining humanity and what makes for a functioning human being in order to compromise (if possible) on what technologies are permissible. So although I can respect your viewpoint (if not your over-use of declarative statements - sorry, couldn't resist) and agree with points 1-3 I am unlikely to join your crusade.

I'm afraid I'm now going to make the almost unpardonable sin of saying that's all I will type on this thread (but at least leaving you the option of the final word). Sheer cowardice on my part as I have the sneaking suspicion that Jun may be considering a bar on further discussion so divorced from aikido.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2003, 07:36 AM   #38
Jeff R.
Dojo: River Valley
Location: New Hampshire
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 93
Offline
Here it is, plain, straight, simple:

Aikido is about preserving all life and developing spiritual energy (Ki) so that we may all have a common, unconditional bond.

Technology kills nature and inhibits our spiritual connection with each other and Nature.

All indigenous cultures that depended upon Nature for survival, only survived if they lived in harmony with Nature.

Indigenous cultures that lived in harmony with Nature also had an intimate spiritual connection, i.e., Shamanism.

Therefore, since all of the above statements have been proven to be true, not by me, but by hundreds of years of research, and thousands of years of life, that makes them indisputable fact.

I make no claims, no grandstanding, am basing nothing on heresay, conjecture, or half-truth. Everything I've stated about the philosophy of preservation and energy has been stated at one time, in some similar way by all major spiritual/religious figureheads.

If we continue to harm nature and separate ourselves with technology, we can depend upon demise by our own doing, which seems unfair to our grandchildren, and we can expect a very difficult--if not impossible--time trying to achieve the ultimate goal of Aikido, which is Satori or enlightenment.

It's all about Aikido, all the way around.

Now instead of telling me I'm biased, opinionated, stubborn, restricted in view, or whatnot, anyone reading could offer something new to add to the information.

I honestly don't understand how so many people can be following the Ways of all these spiritual leaders, yet still turn around and say that everything they represented, taught, strived for, is crap.

I'm only passing down information, not making it up. It's common sense, obvious, proven. Why is this so difficult?

It works like this: Anyone can argue these points into the ground, but nobody has shown any inclination of proving the concepts invalid, misgiven, or incorrect. In fact, what I mostly see is fear of the truth, guilt, redirection into unrelated issues, and just plain denial.

It's not MY philosophy. I didn't manufacture it. If you have a problem with it, talk to your God, whomever it may be. The only way to find out if it's crap or not will be to see what happens to the earth and all the species (that we're wiping out BTW) and see what your great grandchildren say.

Exercise and extend your Ki with conviction; feel its awesome power--just smile.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2003, 09:57 AM   #39
Col.Clink
Dojo: Waiuku Ki Society
Location: New Zealand
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 68
Offline
Quote:
Ian Hurst (happysod) wrote:
Robert, please tell me you looked that up or are a zoologist, or I'm going to feel really inadequate...thanks for the definition.
Don't feel inadequate, I'm a New Zealander!

Thought it best to quote from Encarta than come into this convo with my own views etc. It was a good example you gave actually.

oh...and your both welcome.

Cheers

Rob


"Excess leads to the path of Wisdom"
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2003, 10:54 AM   #40
W^2
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 53
United_States
Offline
Wink Hmm...

Hello again Jeff,

It is obvious that you are very passionate about your beliefs, just don't let that blind you - keep an open mind. If we aren't flexible in mind, we will be easily unbalanced in life...

I did indeed add a new perspective with my last post; purely logical actually - I don't have any personal investments in your philosophical/spiritual statements. My last post pointed out the flaws in your use of terms that lead to a fallacy. I then restated it without your use of terms leading to a similar yet slightly different result. Your rebuttal consisted of arguments which you later contradict with statements of belief having no logical foundation.

What I was trying to do was encourage you to present your ideas better; I was under the impression that you were open to discussing concepts, etc., just as I am.

Ciao,

Ward

Last edited by W^2 : 05-22-2003 at 10:56 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2003, 12:37 PM   #41
kironin
 
kironin's Avatar
Dojo: Houston Ki Aikido
Location: Houston,TX
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,033
United_States
Offline
Ki Symbol

Quote:
Lynn Seiser (SeiserL) wrote:
IMHO, Ki is no-thing in particular. Ki just is.

If you say Ki exist, you will be hit. If you say Ki does not exist, you will be hit. Who is the "I" that experiences the Ki as existing or non-existing?

Sometimes, the only way to find the answer is to drop the question and accept what is.

Train. When you expereinece it you know. When you don't, no words can explain or verify it.

Until again,

Lynn
So beautifully put! Worth repeating.

More words than this just becomes nonsense.

Train.

Craig
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2003, 07:27 PM   #42
Jeff R.
Dojo: River Valley
Location: New Hampshire
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 93
Offline
Re: Hmm...

Quote:
Ward Ward (W^2) wrote:
Hello again Jeff,

It is obvious that you are very passionate about your beliefs, just don't let that blind you - keep an open mind. If we aren't flexible in mind, we will be easily unbalanced in life...

I did indeed add a new perspective with my last post; purely logical actually - I don't have any personal investments in your philosophical/spiritual statements. My last post pointed out the flaws in your use of terms that lead to a fallacy. I then restated it without your use of terms leading to a similar yet slightly different result. Your rebuttal consisted of arguments which you later contradict with statements of belief having no logical foundation.

What I was trying to do was encourage you to present your ideas better; I was under the impression that you were open to discussing concepts, etc., just as I am.

Ciao,

Ward
And I'm pretty sure that I returned logic with logic and sufficiently left the ball in your court. My points are, once again, ignored, and still another person claims that my method of argument is faulty.

I address everyone's points, effectively offer logical rebuttal, or at least facts (which everyone seems vehement to dispute), and though I'm actually discussing concepts and making points, I'm being told that I'm not open to discussing concepts.

If your logic and concepts don't hold up, don't make it my fault.

PROVE ME WRONG OR PROVE ME RIGHT. Stop griping and beating around the bush with, "well then what about this culture or that species? Doesn't Nature destroy?"

Why is everyone so afraid of the Aikido philosophy?

Try READING THE OTHER POSTS. Either you live the Aikido philosophy, or you don't.

Are you an Aikidoka or a hypocrite?

And of course I'm passionate about this philosophy. Once again, every major spiritual leader spoke of or utilized these principles in a very serious way. And where all of our grandchildren are concerned, maybe EVERYONE should be passionate about preserving all life.

My last post to Ward pointed out the flaws in the "logic" that was used to subvert my reasoning.

Where at all did I ever contradict my statements?

And why is everyone evading the point of the issue with semantics and stonewalling?

My logic is unsound . . . Tell that to O'Sensei.

Exercise and extend your Ki with conviction; feel its awesome power--just smile.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2003, 09:21 PM   #43
PeterR
 
PeterR's Avatar
Dojo: Shodokan Honbu (Osaka)
Location: Himeji, Japan
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,054
Japan
Online
Re: Re: Hmm...

Quote:
Jeff Rychwa (Jeff R.) wrote:
Why is everyone so afraid of the Aikido philosophy?

Try READING THE OTHER POSTS. Either you live the Aikido philosophy, or you don't.

Are you an Aikidoka or a hypocrite?
The thing is Jeff that you are stating absolutes about what Aikido philosophy is and frankly speaking you seem to have latched onto a few quotes here and there and made them your own.

I have read your posts and can't help be feel you are missing the point of the Do. I sure don't have any fear of Aikido philosophy as taught to me by an Aikido master, that philosophy is permeating my life and I surely am not a hypocrite because my view of what I do does not mesh with yours.

I'm curious. How long have you studied Aikido and with whom?

One of the shocking things to many who come to Japan to train is how many of their preconceptions of what Aikido is get tossed out the window. We all learn something new every day but we do want to know the source of the information.

Peter Rehse Shodokan Aikido
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2003, 09:55 PM   #44
Jeff R.
Dojo: River Valley
Location: New Hampshire
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 93
Offline
Re: Re: Re: Hmm...

Quote:
Peter Rehse (PeterR) wrote:
The thing is Jeff that you are stating absolutes about what Aikido philosophy is and frankly speaking you seem to have latched onto a few quotes here and there and made them your own.

I have read your posts and can't help be feel you are missing the point of the Do. I sure don't have any fear of Aikido philosophy as taught to me by an Aikido master, that philosophy is permeating my life and I surely am not a hypocrite because my view of what I do does not mesh with yours.

I'm curious. How long have you studied Aikido and with whom?

One of the shocking things to many who come to Japan to train is how many of their preconceptions of what Aikido is get tossed out the window. We all learn something new every day but we do want to know the source of the information.
Once again, ignoring the points, telling me how to do things.

How about giving a little bit of insight as to what these preconceptions are, and what your view is. Maybe they mesh maybe they don't. I'm sure you aren't misinterpreting anything at all. So, since my information, based on twenty years of martial arts and philosophy study, particularly focused on the universal truths, is so hard to swallow, maybe all you masters should finally speak up, enlighten those of us who are desperately seeking useful information instead of postulating and claiming that passiveness is a viable allowance for either ignorance or simply not caring.

Is your Aikido Master Enlightened? Why is his way the right way? Is his way different from O'Sensei's? If not, then we must agree. If so, then what is the difference, and how do you know it's still Aikido?

How long have you lived in the wilderness, starting with no tools and only the clothes on your back?

How much study of the human impact on the environment have you done?

Do you have a car? A house? Do you buy your food? Do you work? Do you depend on society for your survival? Do you watch t.v.?

Explain why we don't need Ki to make Aikido work.

Explain why O'Sensei said that preservation of all life is crucial, but we say, "no, it isn't."

Explain why most of the responses on this topic defend pollution, species extinction, moving away from our connection with Nature and Spirit.

Everyone makes these grandiose, mock-logical arguments and tosses around million-dollar words, but nobody is willing to discuss any of the points. It's almost like everyone would rather egg me on instead of diving into these unfathomable issues. If you can't prove these issues wrong or prove them right, what are you doing?

Last edited by Jeff R. : 05-22-2003 at 10:00 PM.

Exercise and extend your Ki with conviction; feel its awesome power--just smile.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2003, 10:17 PM   #45
Pretoriano
 
Pretoriano's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido Santa Fe
Location: Aragua Venezuela
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 130
Venezuela
Offline
Good Jeff Rychwa, show some, naecrapsayers wont get it anyway, thats plenty for 30 years you know.

I second your thoughts

Praetorian
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2003, 02:22 AM   #46
aubrey bannah
Dojo: Yoshinkan Brisbane
Location: aust
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 34
Offline
In Aikido or otherwise is not nature in the realm of the gods.

Plastic was found in the tail of Hallies comet

by scientist's last time it pasted earth.

All things are in nature, what we are trying to do is know the way to the truth of nature etc.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2003, 06:59 AM   #47
Jeff R.
Dojo: River Valley
Location: New Hampshire
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 93
Offline
Quote:
aubrey bannah wrote:
In Aikido or otherwise is not nature in the realm of the gods.

Plastic was found in the tail of Hallies comet

by scientist's last time it pasted earth.

All things are in nature, what we are trying to do is know the way to the truth of nature etc.
Plastic in Halley's Comet? Ya' know, that's fascinating. It may or may not be true. As the polymer is created by massive heat and pressure upon substances like coal-tar, who knows what could exist out there? But how much plastic existed on Earth before we got here?

How much good does plastic do for the Earth?

Is it showing up in Natural form, or is it being introduced into the wrong ecosystem?

Would it be wise to bring radioactive waste into your home just because it makes a nice light?

Are we trying to find the "scientific" truth of Nature, or the Spiritual?

If the former, then it seems we are going to destroy it before we understand it.

If the latter, then, to quote Mr. Rhese:
Quote:
I have read your posts and can't help be feel you are missing the point of the DO.
The problem is, most seem to believe that the DO doesn't even exist, or don't care.

If you know what the DO is, enlighten. O'Sensei knew. It's a way of living, not just training. You either live it, or you don't.

If you aren't living it, don't dare tell me I'm missing the point. I'm reiterating what O'Sensei was teaching about spirit.

Thank you for the posts, folks!

Exercise and extend your Ki with conviction; feel its awesome power--just smile.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2003, 08:18 AM   #48
Jeff R.
Dojo: River Valley
Location: New Hampshire
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 93
Offline
Another interesting thing to think about:

If there was plastic in the tail of the comet, and the basis of plastic is carbon--i.e., fossil-fuels--then it begs the question, "Mustn't there be other life out there?"

Or it could be from the garbage that we jettison into space.

What a wonderful, far-ranging impact of destruction our species has, eh?

Exercise and extend your Ki with conviction; feel its awesome power--just smile.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2003, 10:50 AM   #49
Bussho
Dojo: Aarhus Shobukan
Location: Denmark
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 21
Offline
I'm back

Quote:
Jeff Rychwa (Jeff R.) wrote:
The cool thing is that most everybody is correct . . . but not necessarily for the correct reasons. Go figure.
I'm back. It's a girl, and her name will proabaly be Marie. She weighed 3880 grams, and was 52 cm.

I promised I'd answer and here we go. I can see the thread really moved, but I havn't read it all. I just answer were I think we left off.

You stated in a later "mail" that you didn't know who I am. I presented my self. Just to add, I've Doen MA for nearly 25 years, and Aikido for nearly 15. Do you need more to feel that I'm valid? How about your self? Who are you and your credentials?

You also stated that the playing feild wasn't set. I'll set it as the words we use should be understood by everbody,a nd by that meaning that the encycopidia should be OK. I'm using Websters.

Now lets start.

You first statement:
Quote:
The only truth is Universal, and simple.
The word Universal means everwere. What your saying is that the only truth would exsist everwere. That is an assumption, since nobody has been everwere. Beside that I belive there are many truths, and that initself is two belifes and truths, thus your assumption cannot exsist.
Quote:
It is the indisputable manifestation of whatever "Higher Power" created us.
Indisputable? You said it, prove it. You can't, and I can't disprove it. There for it becaomes an assumption. You can belive it, and that is OK. But to be indisputable you have to prove it, or everbody has to belive it, and I don't belive it, so it's not everbody.
Quote:
Things that come from the human mind are dreamworks, existing, but having no necessary place in Nature. They provide no benefit, but more often offer some destructive impact to Nature.
From Webters: unnatural is something either not from the wild, or manufactured. Is has nothing to do with being destructive. I belive that everthing in life is natural. But from the Webters definition I'm wrong. But that's because I define natural as things are.

If we keep to Webters definition, everthing that is made would be unnatural:

A toothbrush

Soap

beds

houses

roads

maps

cars

heating

alot of foods (they are manufactured, as even farming is)

and so on.

The trickey part is are ideas manufactured? Are the from the wild? If yes then one thought is no more natural than the other. If no, then there is nothing wrong in the though it self.

SAo when you state that thoughts of humans are dream works your stating that human thought is unnatural. Then anythought even that they are dream works is wrong. That kinda bits itself in the tail, right? So from this you can't say that human thoughts are dreamworks(unnatural).

No if all thoughts are natural, then the ideas an concepts we make should be natural. They have consequences, as you point out, and some of them sever, but they are still natural.

In a later part of the thread you stated that there is only logic and chaos. I challenge that, since they are the same, and at the same time have nothing to do with each other.Logic is a way of thinking. Chaos is a situation. But you might be meaning system contra chaos?? But to that I would have to say that there is a third , and that is in between system and chaos.

Thanks for waiting, and I'm looking forward to hearing you answer.

/Terje
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2003, 11:06 AM   #50
George S. Ledyard
 
George S. Ledyard's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido Eastside
Location: Bellevue, WA
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,637
Offline
Spirituality

One of the things I have noticed over the years is that many of the people who are most inclined to champion the spiritual side of Aikido, who seem most entranced with what they see as O-Sensei's vision of Peace and Love etc. are often the most contentious, have little respect for other people's views and manage to be in a state on coflict with their fellows much of the time. I think this is fairly ironic. There are folks posting here who do very martial versions of this art, don't have a tremendous interest in the spiritual side and yet seem to better embody the values that these other folks say are so important to them.

Last edited by George S. Ledyard : 06-05-2003 at 11:09 AM.

George S. Ledyard
Aikido Eastside
Bellevue, WA
Aikido Eastside
AikidoDvds.Com
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

Aikido DVDs and Video Downloads - by George Ledyard Sensei & other great teachers from AikidoDVDS.Com



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Poll: If you could be uke for yourself, would you be able to throw yourself? AikiWeb System AikiWeb System 72 08-07-2013 05:16 PM
Aikido and being Christian Nick Spiritual 178 07-31-2010 06:47 PM
Stanislavsky and Ki DaveO General 11 01-20-2006 10:11 AM
Ki is Extended. tedehara Spiritual 5 11-15-2004 10:12 PM
Train In Ki And Why chadsieger Training 54 06-15-2002 10:26 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:28 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2014 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate