Being Honest with Myself

[zanshin]

Hello Sloppy,

 

You've expressed many times that you think it's perfectly fine to learn martial arts in order to protect yourself and others. I see you choose to carry on the debate here as well and that's fine too. First you obviously don't understand what I am saying when I say, "do not value". Did I not say be compassionate as well? Would it be compassionate to allow another to harm someone? Do you think you it would be possible to connect the dots and say, that I was possibly talking about the ego and material wants and desires? That if one does not value their self, in the sense that they do not care what others think of them, do not value goods, in the sense that they will give them away freely to those who want them, then one has little to fear?

 

Now if you want an example of this then look to the sage, but I really thought it was clear in my first comments.

 

Remember the phrase, those who live by the sword, die by the sword? Well that's paraphrased in nearly every language and culture across the world. People, even the least spiritual, understand on an intuitive level that only by living peacefully with one's neighbor can one be assured peace in their lives.

 

There are those who will feel the need to enforce their will on others and then their are those who will not resist them. Some may look down on these people, call them weak, but these are the same people who live their lives freely, because no matter what they do or are forced to do, no one can master them, because they want nothing and hold onto nothing, so nothing can be taken from them. These people are the ones who have true power. Those who force themselves on others are weak and wanting, hungry and never full, they are not satisfied because they can never have enough. You can choose which you'd rather be. I'd rather be the slave who is content, than a master who can never be happy.

 

Aaron

 

Si vis pacum, para bellum.

 

"If their forces are substantial, prepare for them; if their forces are strong, avoid them."

 

"Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win."

 

"The best victory is when the opponent surrenders of its own accord before there are any actual hostilities...It is best to win without fighting."

 

"In peace prepare for war, in war prepare for peace. The art of war is of vital importance to the state. It is matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence under no circumstances can it be neglected."

-Sun Tzu (all of them except the Latin- If you want peace prepare for war).

 

Aaron, perhaps a sage can be content even when oppressed, but what of children who are abused and hungry? I too see nothing wrong with trying to get power to protect. This too is paraphrased in almost every language and culture throughout the world. Your idea is the epitome if everyone would be peaceful, but in this world we have a long way to go. Wisdom without power is impotent, power without wisdom easily becomes oppression.

Edited October 25, 2011 by zanshin

[Sloppy Zhang]

Hthose who live by the sword, die by the sword

 

Those who don't live by the sword also die by the sword.

 

And plenty who wield swords die happy of old age in their beds surrounded by loved ones.

 

Guess the world is just fucked up like that.

 

There are those who will feel the need to enforce their will on others and then their are those who will not resist them. Some may look down on these people, call them weak, but these are the same people who live their lives freely, because no matter what they do or are forced to do, no one can master them, because they want nothing and hold onto nothing, so nothing can be taken from them. These people are the ones who have true power. Those who force themselves on others are weak and wanting, hungry and never full, they are not satisfied because they can never have enough. You can choose which you'd rather be. I'd rather be the slave who is content, than a master who can never be happy.

 

Yeah, um, this is a perfect example of the mental gymnastics that people have to go through to convince themselves that they are happy and content when they are clearly powerless and destitute. Of course, reality is a cold slap in the face, so most people would much prefer to spin it in such a way that they have all the power. You know, rather than admitting that they are repeatedly violated up the behind by an authority that they hate and despise. But if you flip it around so that YOU are the one in power of the one doing the violating... well, you aren't really being violated, are you?

 

Except you're still a slave fucked up the ass at the whim of others.

 

I said something to this effect in another thread- don't feed me shit and expect me to like it. Don't feed me shit and expect me to think that just because it's the only food I've ever had, that somehow it makes it good. Don't feed me shit and tell me to just "accept it", because there isn't any other option, and then tell me that eating that shit somehow empowers me.

 

And don't say all of that while the shit that I'm eating is coming from someone who doesn't have to eat shit, and who is in fact living a great and wonderful shit free existence, while forcing me to eat their shit.

 

Not my cup of shit. But whatever.

 

You can be spiritual without having to carry on eating shit.

[konchog uma]

[Dainin]

 

You can be spiritual without having to carry on eating shit.

 

This is true. However, back in the early days of this forum, there were a number of individuals here who tried to become more spiritual by drinking their own pee. No shit!

[Aaron]

Those who don't live by the sword also die by the sword.

 

And plenty who wield swords die happy of old age in their beds surrounded by loved ones.

 

Guess the world is just fucked up like that.

 

 

 

Yeah, um, this is a perfect example of the mental gymnastics that people have to go through to convince themselves that they are happy and content when they are clearly powerless and destitute. Of course, reality is a cold slap in the face, so most people would much prefer to spin it in such a way that they have all the power. You know, rather than admitting that they are repeatedly violated up the behind by an authority that they hate and despise. But if you flip it around so that YOU are the one in power of the one doing the violating... well, you aren't really being violated, are you?

 

Except you're still a slave fucked up the ass at the whim of others.

 

I said something to this effect in another thread- don't feed me shit and expect me to like it. Don't feed me shit and expect me to think that just because it's the only food I've ever had, that somehow it makes it good. Don't feed me shit and tell me to just "accept it", because there isn't any other option, and then tell me that eating that shit somehow empowers me.

 

And don't say all of that while the shit that I'm eating is coming from someone who doesn't have to eat shit, and who is in fact living a great and wonderful shit free existence, while forcing me to eat their shit.

 

Not my cup of shit. But whatever.

 

You can be spiritual without having to carry on eating shit.

 

 

You don't get it, I understand that, but let me tell you, there are people living in prisons, who will never see the light of day, that have found contentment in their lives. They eat crappy food, have someone tell them when to go to the bathroom, when to eat, and when they can go outside. Some of them only see the sky through a small box in the ceiling. The difference between you and them is that they are happy with what they have. They focus on what they have, not what they don't have.

 

So the wise man says, eat when you are hungry, drink when you are thirsty, crap when you need to go to the bathroom, Sleep when you are tired, but never let anyone tell you that things bring you happiness, that the greatest things in human life are the relationships you experience, no the truest, greatest virtue, comes from giving up everything and understanding the nature of yourself and all things. When you can give up what you have graciously, gratefully, and gleefully, then you will find true peace, and within that peace lies true power.

 

The sage leads people, but they don't know it. They support him, but no one feels his weight, he has nothing, but is never left wanting. He is happy like a newborn babe, but no one can understand why.

 

Now I also say, do not willfully allow yourself to come to harm or suffer. Do not allow others to come to harm or suffer, rather live peacefully with those around you and in living in peace, you will find harmony in the world.

 

Lay down your weapons, refuse to fight, and you have already won the battle.

 

Aaron

Edited October 26, 2011 by Twinner

[Aaron]

Si vis pacum, para bellum.

 

"If their forces are substantial, prepare for them; if their forces are strong, avoid them."

 

"Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win."

 

"The best victory is when the opponent surrenders of its own accord before there are any actual hostilities...It is best to win without fighting."

 

"In peace prepare for war, in war prepare for peace. The art of war is of vital importance to the state. It is matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence under no circumstances can it be neglected."

-Sun Tzu (all of them except the Latin- If you want peace prepare for war).

 

Aaron, perhaps a sage can be content even when oppressed, but what of children who are abused and hungry? I too see nothing wrong with trying to get power to protect. This too is paraphrased in almost every language and culture throughout the world. Your idea is the epitome if everyone would be peaceful, but in this world we have a long way to go. Wisdom without power is impotent, power without wisdom easily becomes oppression.

 

Sun Tzu was not a sage in my book. He taught how to kill, plain and simple. If you would like to find another example, that's fine, but I'm not interested in debating when you are using a faulty foundation for your argument. Find something that does not advocate violence, for whatever sake, and then we can talk, til then you have already lost the argument.

 

Aaron

[deci belle]

[Encephalon]

Sun Tzu was not a sage in my book. He taught how to kill, plain and simple. If you would like to find another example, that's fine, but I'm not interested in debating when you are using a faulty foundation for your argument. Find something that does not advocate violence, for whatever sake, and then we can talk, til then you have already lost the argument.

 

Aaron

 

Sun Tzu sought to preserve life at all cost. He was emphatic that the superior warrior is one who wins without fighting.

 

I believe you've repeatedly demonstrated balance in this forum, Cat Pillar, and that your quest to achieve higher levels of empowerment for the good of oneself and the world is natural for someone who cultivates their warriorship and scholarship. If you had unconscious motivations to simply dominate others it would have long been revealed in your posts by now.

 

My favorite people are in this thread. There are others who habitually bludgeon others with reckless and persistent misinterpretation of ancient texts and while passing it off as a palliative.

[Aaron]

You don't have to believe in anything you don't know anything about~ since this is an example of one thing you do not. Sun Tzu was a professional military leader, a farmer and a dedicated humanist. You wax romantic over what and what does not constitute sagehood. Do drop the histrionics.

 

The Art of War is a revered text of the taoist canon, oh squeamish one. Furthermore, if you have even a modicum of historical knowledge of Chinese history (not to mention the Yellow Emperor), you would know that a woman wrote the book. It is a book of strategy plain and simple, and how to wage it. The great general only compiled it (there were more than a few documents of this type (not being sold at the corner bazaar).

 

The point of these tomes are to wage war effectively and quickly (China had been embroiled in constant internecine conflict when SunTzu was working his ass off— and eventually dying in the field, far from home).

 

War is. Making faces is war. Your attitude towards this little manual is war. Go bury your head in the sand, dear …we'll let you know when it's over.❤

 

 

Hello Deci Belle,

 

I really don't care who wrote the Art of War, it still has no more value than feces in my opinion. Of course manure is used in farming and other things, so it can have it's uses, but for my purpose it has none, other than being flushed down the toilet. I know enough about Chinese history to know that the Chinese have never seen peace, even though they have had the tools to cultivate it throughout time. The problem is that the answer requires resolve and sacrifice, not war and strategy. The only strategy required for peace is to give up fighting.

 

Sun Tzu was a military genius, but he was never a wise man. If you wish to categorize a sage as someone who knows much about a topic, then perhaps he was a sage, but he was not a spiritual man or a man who understood the true nature of compassion. A general is a butcher, no matter what he butchers. A man kills a bad man, he is still a killer.

 

I say the simplest things, but it confounds you. If you wish to be certain that you win a fight, then do not fight. If you wish to be happy within this lifetime, then be content with what you have. This doesn't mean if someone attacks you that you do not defend yourself, but so long as you prepare to be attacked, then you will be attacked. So long as you mass an army to defend yourself, then you will need to defend yourself, either from within or without. A peaceful people knows that they do not need swords or spears, but rather to possess nothing that anyone will want to take away from them. What they have they share with those in need, so no one needs to take it away from them.

 

If you truly want your children and loved ones to be happy, then do not strive to be strong, but rather to be compassionate. If you are compassionate and kind and act in a way that is right, then whatever happens to you or your children is better than what happens to those who wage war. It is better that every peaceful man be snuffed out from this earth, then for them to live in a world where men continue to slaughter each other with abandon.

 

Aaron

 

Edit- I'm not saying these things to be popular, but rather saying what is true. There has never been peace in the history of mankind, simply because we no longer follow the heartmind, but instead avarice and greed. Give up these things and peace will follow. Continue to fight for equality and you will never find it, simply because those who gain it, must also take from those who have it. It is better to raise our children with a nature of sharing and compassion, then a nature of wants and entitlement. That's why I say it's better for your child to die knowing compassion and kindness, then being taught that they deserve more than anyone else. They may die young, but they will die happy, the latter will live a life of suffering and want for the remainder of their years.

Edited October 26, 2011 by Twinner

[zanshin]

It sounds like the old advice law enforcement used to give women in case they were raped- if it seems inevitable, relax and don't fight back, hopefully he won't hurt you too much. That's changed, we know that women who fight back psychologically do better than those who don't, even if they lose. The mental posture of showing strength and resisting to best of your ability carries over to more follow up in court, being open about the experience to help other victims etc. EmPOWERment. So what if it was your sister, your mother or you? Would you be content and feel compassion after going through this experience? Fight or flight is deeply hard wired into our brains, might as well be good at it, people aren't going to be too peaceful any time soon.

[Ish]

Non violence may not always be compassionate.

Allowing a person to kill you is not being compassionate towards them as you allow them to continue their bad karma.

It is also not compassionate to any potential next victims of that person.

 

There are things worth protecting, I believe it is righteous to attain power if it allows you to protect these things.

If your intentions are rooted in wisdom and morality where can you go wrong?

[Aaron]

It sounds like the old advice law enforcement used to give women in case they were raped- if it seems inevitable, relax and don't fight back, hopefully he won't hurt you too much. That's changed, we know that women who fight back psychologically do better than those who don't, even if they lose. The mental posture of showing strength and resisting to best of your ability carries over to more follow up in court, being open about the experience to help other victims etc. EmPOWERment. So what if it was your sister, your mother or you? Would you be content and feel compassion after going through this experience? Fight or flight is deeply hard wired into our brains, might as well be good at it, people aren't going to be too peaceful any time soon.

 

No offense but this just shocked me for it's blatant ignorance and apparent lack of attention to what I said. I said that if someone attacks you you have a right to defend yourself... do I need to point this out to you. Can't you make a logical deduction? If someone is going to attack you and you know it, avoid them to the best of your ability, but if you can't, you're not required to sit still and die, only do everything you can up until that point to avoid the violence. Yes this means run away and give up your homes if that's what's required. I think your reply showed extreme measures of ignorance in regards to what pacifism means and what compassion entails. If you want to make more absurd examples, then please don't expect me to reply to them.

 

The problem is that you're going along the lines of right and wrong as you've been taught them. You believe you are entitled to freedoms, but you don't understand that many of those "freedoms" are the very reason why you're not free. In a peaceful society there are no laws to moderate others, rather people live along the lines that, so long as they don't harm others, they are free to do what they want. Do you think I'm advocating letting rapists run the street and do as they want? Do you think I'm advocating letting murderers murder indiscriminately? What I am saying is that you take the least violent means to solve an issue and under no circumstance should your answer be "lets kill them before they kill us!" The answer should be, "well if they want it so bad, let them have it." Leave, pack up, go someplace else and live your life as you choose.

 

Now this lifestyle worked for mankind for over 200,000 years before we finally began to settle down and live a "civilized" life. Our problems stem from this idea that we possess this world, its resources, and its people, but we don't possess anything, so we don't have a right to deny anyone anything within it or claim it as our own. This isn't socialism either, it's simply that the notion of property in any form only causes wants. So if someone wants the land you live on, if you want peace within your life, give it to them and find someplace else. This is the rule for dealing with others, I'm assuming that those within a community will be wise enough to see those who choose not to abide by these rules and deal with them as compassionately as possible.

 

Aaron

 

edit- But in saying this, lets say that you cannot find peace, that war follows you and does not give up, do you give up compassion, teach your children how to kill efficiently and quickly? No! You say, "I will not let my children become like these men!" That's why I say it's better for your child to die young knowing happiness and kindness than live a lifetime caught in the cycle of death.

 

Now to clarify, most of us are not in a situation where we need to make this decision, but if it came down to choosing whether or not to send a child off to war, or running and hiding, I'd choose to run and hide them. I'd choose to teach them what's right and good, and not water down those principles because I wanted to be sure I could wake up and buy ice cream at the supermarket or still have internet access tomorrow morning. I would rather have my child die young and happy, without a blemish on their soul, then be taught that there is any such thing as a good war or a right to take another persons life simply because you want something they have, even if what you want is what they want.

Edited October 26, 2011 by Twinner

[deci belle]

[zanshin]

If you do have a right to defend yourself and at sometimes there is a possibility that you may find yourself in a situation to do so in spite of doing your best to avoid trouble, then it would seem a logical deduction that advice from someone who knew how to fight back well should be worth a little more than sewage.

 

Where are you going to go to run away from aggression and violence? Hard to do unless you leave civilization and other human beings completely behind. I'm not talking about war or theory or ancient China. I'm sure in your town there is some domestic violence or crime going right now, mine too.

 

I have a buddy who is a police officer, last week we took our kids to the park (off duty for him), day time, nice neighborhood. Couple guys have a fender bender in the parking lot, screaming and swearing about ready to fist fight. Kevin went over and very kindly helped them calm down. This is the kind of guy I like to have around to show my children what is right and good. So should we have gone away and let them have the park? I have respect for those who are peaceful and don't cause trouble in the first place and I also have a lot of respect for warriors who are protectors in this world too, because without them most of us could do a lot of running for a long time.

[Protector]

Observation: posts about love and compassion start more fights

[Birch]

Observation: posts about love and compassion start more fights

 

Which IMO/IME is why it's better to do than to sit around shooting the crap about it. Need I post a "The Dude" Youtube video to illustrate?

[Sloppy Zhang]

that have found contentment in their lives.

 

Right. And their lives are shit.

 

The difference between you and them is that they are happy with what they have. They focus on what they have, not what they don't have.

 

Right. That doesn't mean they are free. Given the choice, do you think they would continue living their lives, do you think they'd choose to keep watching the sky pass them by in a little window, or see it in the open for themselves?

 

Oh, that's right, they don't get a choice, because they are powerless.

 

They don't get to make the choice between whether they see the sky or not. Someone else makes it for them. So they can either choose to accept it or not choose to accept it. Accepting it will make it easier on them. Fighting it will not. But nothing they do will change their circumstances, because they are without power.

 

"Acceptance" when you don't have a choice in the matter is meaningless.

 

It's the same as saying you're a "moral" person because you have never stolen from someone, despite never being in a situation where you may be forced to steal. Or kill. Or lie. Etc etc etc. Easy to take the high road when you never have to choose it.

 

When you can give up what you have

 

Your "sages" in prison didn't give it up. They had it forcibly taken away. They could either accept it and live happily in prison, or reject it and live miserably in prison. Either way, they'd be in prison at the command of another person. No power. No agency. Nobody cares. It's as good as a self preservation mechanism. Given the choice, how many would choose it?

 

Some people do choose prison. But not because of same sagely wisdom. It's because that is the only life they know. They know how to survive, thrive, even, in prison. But when they are faced with choices? The freedom to choose what you do, where you eat, what job you have, what to pay for, and the consequences of those actions... they'd rather be in prison.

 

That's not sagacious wisdom. That's base animal survival instincts.

 

You need to find some better role models.

 

The sage leads people, but they don't know it. They support him, but no one feels his weight, he has nothing, but is never left wanting. He is happy like a newborn babe, but no one can understand why.

 

Right, because, you know, this is how you describe people in prison, right? Oh, wait, no, you don't. Prisoners don't lead people. They are led. They are supported, and the taxpayers feel their weight. So... huh.

 

Now I also say, do not willfully allow yourself to come to harm or suffer. Do not allow others to come to harm or suffer, rather live peacefully with those around you and in living in peace, you will find harmony in the world.

 

Lay down your weapons, refuse to fight, and you have already won the battle.

 

And what do you do when you stand between an attacker and a loved one? The attacker is determined to physically assault you and your loved one. What do you do? What do you do when laying down your weapons and refusing to fight becomes an act of willfully allowing harm and suffering to occur to another?

 

Learn to apply your philosophy to reality, then we'll talk.

Edited October 27, 2011 by Sloppy Zhang

[konchog uma]

Right. And their lives are shit.

 

contentment is a state of mind, it doesn't have to do with circumstances as much as it has to do with reaction to circumstances.

 

so if a person's life is restricted, they can still have happiness, even bliss. But if they can choose when they see the sky there is still no guarantee of happiness (obviously) and bliss is even more elusive.

 

also, if you ever found yourself in prison sloppy zhang, i think you would find twinner's philosophy "applicable to reality".

Edited October 27, 2011 by anamatva

[Sloppy Zhang]

The answer should be, "well if they want it so bad, let them have it." Leave, pack up, go someplace else and live your life as you choose.

 

This is assuming a couple of things:

 

1) That you can easily give up the thing that they want

2) You have a place you can easily go.

 

So....

 

Do you think I'm advocating letting rapists run the street and do as they want?

 

Well it certainly sounds like it!

 

"Hey, I want your daughter. Give her to me or I'll hurt somebody."

"Oh, well I don't want to be violent. Here you go. And while I'm at it, take my house because I am leaving anyway."

 

What I am saying is that you take the least violent means to solve an issue and under no circumstance should your answer be "lets kill them before they kill us!"

 

So when you are face to face with someone who wants to hurt you or a loved one, what is the "proper" answer, hm?

 

And what happens if there is no place else to leave to? You leave, and have to go somewhere, and are suddenly encroaching on someone else's existence. Well that's just ripe for more problems! Have you really thought this through, the ramifications of just running away and letting people do as they please? Imagine if we raised kids like that!

 

it's simply that the notion of property in any form only causes wants.

 

No, people have always had wants.

 

"I want food. I should follow the herds if I don't want to die. Oh, look, I can get food without packing up and moving every couple of weeks. Yippee."

 

So if someone wants the land you live on, if you want peace within your life, give it to them and find someplace else.

 

That's great assuming you have bounteous amounts of unoccupied land and resources elsewhere. And when that is not the case?

 

This is the rule for dealing with others, I'm assuming that those within a community will be wise enough to see those who choose not to abide by these rules and deal with them as compassionately as possible.

 

People tend to be much more cooperative when they're dead.

 

I'm only really half joking.

 

But in saying this, lets say that you cannot find peace, that war follows you and does not give up, do you give up compassion, teach your children how to kill efficiently and quickly? No! You say, "I will not let my children become like these men!" That's why I say it's better for your child to die young knowing happiness and kindness than live a lifetime caught in the cycle of death.

 

"Only a warrior chooses pacifism. Others are condemned to it."

 

Now to clarify, most of us are not in a situation where we need to make this decision, but if it came down to choosing whether or not to send a child off to war, or running and hiding, I'd choose to run and hide them.

 

And when you have nowhere to run and hide to? Death, is it?

 

I'd choose to teach them what's right and good

 

Except you'd only be teaching them what you think "right" and "good" are, which come from... what, exactly? Getting raped in the ass and saying "thank you can I please have another because I accept whatever life has to offer" is supposed to be "good" and "right", because, you know, you aren't being violent and fighting or, god forbid, killing? Would you really choose a life of slavery as long as you don't make a fuss?

 

That's just fucked up.

 

that there is any such thing as a good war or a right to take another persons life simply because you want something they have, even if what you want is what they want.

 

Right, because the only time we kill people is when we want something they have, and it is always wrong

[Birch]

contentment is a state of mind, it doesn't have to do with circumstances as much as it has to do with reaction to circumstances.

 

so if a person's life is restricted, they can still have happiness, even bliss. But if they can choose when they see the sky there is still no guarantee of happiness (obviously) and bliss is even more elusive.

 

also, if you ever found yourself in prison sloppy zhang, i think you would find twinner's philosophy "applicable to reality".

 

Amnatava. I think I agree with you. I think it's possible to be content while at the same time harbouring (welcoming/receiving) full intent towards resolution. However, IMO this 'state of affairs' is a choice - following full understanding of conditions (note, I only understand the conditions I come into contact with so wouldn't want to claim anything beyond) . IMO/IME 'contentment' is as much born of ignorance as it is of non-ignorance.

 

As far as I can tell, it's possible to be content and raging all/both at the same time. IMO/IME here's where 'acceptance' kicks in full on:-) But like I said in another post. There are pitfalls.

[konchog uma]

Except you'd only be teaching them what you think "right" and "good" are, which come from... what, exactly? Getting raped in the ass and saying "thank you can I please have another because I accept whatever life has to offer" is supposed to be "good" and "right", because, you know, you aren't being violent and fighting or, god forbid, killing? Would you really choose a life of slavery as long as you don't make a fuss?

 

That's just fucked up.

 

i don't think thats what twinner is really saying. Its fucked up, but you said it, not him. ???

 

people have a right to their own morality sloppy zhang. So even tho the values people instill in their children are arbitrary and subjective, it is still everyone's right to raise them in the manner they feel is best.

 

not to get personal, but you sound like a real jerk in this thread. I see from your other threads you are not a big jerk, but you aren't really making a good point, you sound like you are saying we should all run around like its the wild west and if we don't like the way someone acts or looks at us, shoot them in the face!

 

everyone has a right to act in the way they feel is best, for themselves karmically, and for the world. So i understand if you think violence is a natural expression of human emotion. I think that. But i think that you are taking things a little too far with your devil's advocacy of killing and the right to kill. Some people see things differently. Maybe at least you could be glad that we aren't all the same as you or the world would be a lot more dangerous!

 

Just 2 cents, i am not trying to get personal, i just think your arguments aren't addressing what twinner is trying to say in the first place. A lot of what he says is true IMO, and a lot of it is his sovereign right to think just what he thinks.

[Aaron]

Right. And their lives are shit.

 

 

 

Right. That doesn't mean they are free. Given the choice, do you think they would continue living their lives, do you think they'd choose to keep watching the sky pass them by in a little window, or see it in the open for themselves?

 

Oh, that's right, they don't get a choice, because they are powerless.

 

They don't get to make the choice between whether they see the sky or not. Someone else makes it for them. So they can either choose to accept it or not choose to accept it. Accepting it will make it easier on them. Fighting it will not. But nothing they do will change their circumstances, because they are without power.

 

"Acceptance" when you don't have a choice in the matter is meaningless.

 

It's the same as saying you're a "moral" person because you have never stolen from someone, despite never being in a situation where you may be forced to steal. Or kill. Or lie. Etc etc etc. Easy to take the high road when you never have to choose it.

 

 

 

Your "sages" in prison didn't give it up. They had it forcibly taken away. They could either accept it and live happily in prison, or reject it and live miserably in prison. Either way, they'd be in prison at the command of another person. No power. No agency. Nobody cares. It's as good as a self preservation mechanism. Given the choice, how many would choose it?

 

Some people do choose prison. But not because of same sagely wisdom. It's because that is the only life they know. They know how to survive, thrive, even, in prison. But when they are faced with choices? The freedom to choose what you do, where you eat, what job you have, what to pay for, and the consequences of those actions... they'd rather be in prison.

 

That's not sagacious wisdom. That's base animal survival instincts.

 

You need to find some better role models.

 

 

 

Right, because, you know, this is how you describe people in prison, right? Oh, wait, no, you don't. Prisoners don't lead people. They are led. They are supported, and the taxpayers feel their weight. So... huh.

 

 

 

And what do you do when you stand between an attacker and a loved one? The attacker is determined to physically assault you and your loved one. What do you do? What do you do when laying down your weapons and refusing to fight becomes an act of willfully allowing harm and suffering to occur to another?

 

Learn to apply your philosophy to reality, then we'll talk.

 

 

Hello Sloppy,

 

You like martial arts and want to justify learning them as a means of fighting. You seem like the kind of person that wants to fight just to prove you're the best at it, even in your verbal confrontations, so you're the last person in the world I expect to understand what I'm talking about (and obviously you still don't get it.)

 

See I wasn't using the people in prison as an example of what it takes to find contentment, rather I was using them as an example of how someone can have everything taken away from them and find contentment. There are others, including monks around the world, hermits, etc. that live minimal lifestyles and find the same contentment. You see you are bound and chained to your materialistic lifestyle and I understand the notion of being without that is terrifying because you identify yourself with it, but there are some that can step back and see all that crap that you think tastes like heaven, for what it is.

 

Real heaven isn't sitting in your house having a cappuccino watching Friends on TBS after you get home from the fierce workout at the studio, but rather it comes from understanding that all that stuff is actually poison, that it does not bring you contentment at all, that if you were truly aware of what this world is and what matters, then all you would need is a cup of rice and some water and you would be happy, anything else is sheer gravy.

 

So you can defend your need for power, but the sage, of old and new, understand that everything they need is where they are at, that as long as they have a bit food and shelter, then they have no worries. You can worry about your rent/mortgage/bills and claim you're free, but the fact is you're probably going to work today for a company you don't own, spending that money on things you don't really need, then shouting about how you need to defend these things you don't need, and telling your children how they need to go to school and get an education so they can afford these things they don't need.

 

Well the fact of the matter is that if you love your children and you still are doing this, what's wrong with you?

 

Now to get back to the matter of hand in this forum, those who seek power do so, in nearly every case, not to protect their loved ones, but to gain power over others, because they fear others being able to harm them. Before seeking power, you should address why you feel the need to gain power. If you address this and find that isn't the case then consider this, if you live a peaceful life, the chances that someone will decide to harm you is very slim. Might it happen? Maybe, but the chances, even today in our modern Western screwed up life, are so slim that they don't warrant the necessity to learn martial arts. If someone picks a fight with you, the wisest course of action is to back down, don't let your ego get in the way and force you to "man up", if the other person still is bent on fighting, then run.

 

Now if you still want power, or if you're really bent on protecting yourself and others, then learn to communicate with others, the most powerful weapon you have is your voice. Most of all, if you're very worried and you don't agree with what I've said to the least, don't learn martial arts, but rather, do as Witch recommended and buy a gun. I guarantee you put any of the masters up against a guy who knows how to handle a gun and ninety-nine times out of one-hundred the guy with the gun is going to win.

 

Aaron

Edited October 27, 2011 by Twinner

[konchog uma]

you sound like you are saying we should all run around like its the wild west and if we don't like the way someone acts or looks at us, shoot them in the face!

 

you don't really sound like that, i just had to log back in and say that.

 

your tone and whats between the lines of your point of view are troubling, but before anyone goes and takes me literally, i just wanted to say that i realize that you didn't say anything like that.

[Cat Pillar]

[Encephalon]

you don't really sound like that, i just had to log back in and say that.

 

your tone and whats between the lines of your point of view are troubling, but before anyone goes and takes me literally, i just wanted to say that i realize that you didn't say anything like that.

 

I'm glad you retracted that allegation. It was unfounded. Sloppy Zhang was simply advocating the traditional role of the warrior ethos, the practice of cultivating oneself in order to protect the weaker members of society from those who use force and cruelty to take what they want. Twinner's pacifist idealism has noble origins as well but he's stretched the balance between resolve and yielding beyond practicality. If everyone who fought and died for gay rights had behaved according to Twinner's logic, the carnage would've been even greater than it is and he'd be much worse off. Taoism is about empowerment and warriorship. Jettisoning this tradition from the equation is like advocating vegetarianism on a meat-eater's forum.