What does the Dao say about fighting?

[Lotus7]

We all know that non-violence is the key... but what if we are put in a situation where we must fight? Is having the knowledge of martial arts beneficiary to our karma when in need or no?

Basically what I am saying: Should we fight back if necessary?

Namaste, Mateo

[thinker]

We all know that non-violence is the key... but what if we are put in a situation where we must fight? Is having the knowledge of martial arts beneficiary to our karma when in need or no?

Basically what I am saying: Should we fight back if necessary?

 

Firstly, when it comes to violence I know nothing of the sort (I'm a Daoist, not a Buddhist, and you might find it useful to read up on both). The old cliche "violence never solved anything" is garbage on the face of it. Violence frequently solves problems. Often with a morally desirable outcome, and when nothing else will. This is the case almost every time a police officer has to use violence to subdue a criminal.

 

If you must fight, kick ass. What alternatives are you contemplating? Newsflash from the real world: turning the other cheek just gets you hit on the other cheek. Submitting over and over again just gets you hit over and over again, until you die in agony, at the hands of an assailant who will then walk away with all of the marbles, never to be punished in any fashion for his misdeeds, in this life or any other. And you will get no prizes, in this life or any other, for your forbearance.

 

If you want to learn a martial art then by all means do so. Just realize that it takes a lot of time and effort to become proficient, and is no guarantee that you won't get the **** beat out of you. You might also think about carrying a gun. Regarding karma, as far as I know there's no concept of karma in Daoism. That's a Buddhist thing.

 

Of course you should fight back if necessary. The word "necessary" implies that you have no reasonable alternatives. Why would Laozi, or whoever we attribute with the creation of Daoist doctrine, want you to stand quietly by while you get the **** beat out of you? What possible purpose would that serve? I know that there are some who think that engaging in violence for any reason at all causes a form of "spiritual contamination" that dulls your spiritual senses (or something like that). Personally, I find that being kicked in the head repeatedly by a violent criminal, until I have permanent brain damage, is far more destructive to my spiritual senses, and I recommend avoiding it by any means available, including violence.

 

Daoism is no excuse for not using common sense.

Edited February 23, 2013 by thinker

[shanlung]

You dont start the trouble.

But you have the right to end that trouble.

 

Idiotic Taoist

[kaaazuo]

Modern Daoism of the west should not be confused with traditional Daoism of China.

 

Traditional Daoism begins and ends with courtesy. It speaks to the perfect man who never gets caught in an unsavoury situation, the lot of the uncultivated and the damned. Martial artists are like gunfighters who - sooner or later - ends up with a hole in the head.

[thinker]

You dont start the trouble.

But you have the right to end that trouble.

 

OK. That's pretty much what I meant. Idiotic Taoist is just way ahead of me on the whole "brevity" thing.

[dynamictao]

Lao-Tzu would say...

 

Chapter 69 of the TTC:

 

The advice for engaging in war is:

Don't be a host, but be a guest.

Don't advance an inch, but retreat a foot.

 

This is known as marching without a formation,

rolling up the sleeves without baring the arms, and engaging without the armies.

Then, we can really be fearless.

 

No misfortune is greater than belittling the enemy.

Belittling the enemy will nearly destroy our treasures.

Therefore,

when equal armies engage, the solemn one will triumph.

 

----------------------------------------------

Chapter 31 of the TTC:

 

Wars, means with ill omen, should be avoided.

Thus, men of Tao will not adopt them.

...

Wars are not means for men of principle.

Wars, as means with ill omen, should be used only as the last resort.

Their use should be with calm and without glorification.

Glorifying a war is to rejoice in killing people.

Whoever rejoices in killing people cannot remain successful in the world.

...

we should mourn with sorrow and treat a victory ceremony as a funeral.

 

-----

Excerpts from: Wayne L. Wang: The Tao Te Ching: An Ultimate Translation

[zanshin]

Do you all consider Sun Tzu Taoist?

 

 1. Sun Tzu said:  The art of war is of vital importance

    to the State.

 2. It is a matter of life and death, a road either

    to safety or to ruin.  Hence it is a subject of inquiry

    which can on no account be neglected.

 3. The art of war, then, is governed by five constant

    factors, to be taken into account in one's deliberations,

    when seeking to determine the conditions obtaining in the field.

 4. These are:  (1) The Moral Law; (2) Heaven; (3) Earth;

    (4) The Commander; (5) Method and discipline.

[shanlung]

You dont start the trouble.

But you have the right to end that trouble.

 

Idiotic Taoist

 

I should add the following. But I think that is self evident from the way I wrote.

 

That trouble should be ended to your own satisfaction and not to the satisfaction of the one who started it or the satisfaction of others who came only to judge later.

 

But it will be good to have witnesses that was forced onto you. And the consequences on the head that forced it on you.

 

 

Taoistic Idiot

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

We all know that non-violence is the key... but what if we are put in a situation where we must fight? Is having the knowledge of martial arts beneficiary to our karma when in need or no?

Basically what I am saying: Should we fight back if necessary?

Namaste, Mateo

 

 

The cumulative sum whole of martial arts application theory is to achieve balance and equality with all of your peers, be they friend or foehawk.

 

You do not defeat your opponent, you fight them into equal submission to which neither party seeks to continue any conflict.

 

 

The objective is not to win; it is not about avoiding personal loss. The purpose of martial arts is to equalize; harmonize; balance; relate; shared mutual continuation.

 

 

 

 

That being said, i get a genuine thrill out of fighting. but i feel genuinely terrible when so ever i bring about harm to another.

[Walker]

Regarding karma, as far as I know there's no concept of karma in Daoism. That's a Buddhist thing.

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8485166@N08/1525339120/

[Sifu ReL]

Your pose to fight to defend your self but you can't harm your opponent.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

Your pose to fight to defend your self but you can't harm your opponent.

 

 

Is that not judo?

[thinker]

The cumulative sum whole of martial arts application theory is to achieve balance and equality with all of your peers, be they friend or foehawk.

 

You do not defeat your opponent, you fight them into equal submission to which neither party seeks to continue any conflict.

 

The objective is not to win; it is not about avoiding personal loss. The purpose of martial arts is to equalize; harmonize; balance; relate; shared mutual continuation.

 

Some people may feel that this is the case. Certainly not all do. A long time ago I took several years of jujutsu (badly). Everyone in the class was there because the school explicitly rejected spiritualism and concentrated on how to hurt, cripple or kill people who were trying to do the same to you. Not only are there many schools like this, but there are many that are not like this but whose advertisements attempt to make it seem as if they are, because they know that this draws in more paying students. This is because no matter what philosophers/spiritualists want, most students are only going to put in that kind of time and money if they can effectively use it for self-defense. If you're unsure of this, visit a Krav Maga class sometime. Or better yet, count the number of commercially successful martial arts classes that explicitly state in their advertisements, in large letters, that what they teach has no self-defense value, but will enhance your spirituality.

 

If you're getting something spiritual out of it that's great. But I don't think that most practitioners would claim that that's what all martial arts theory amounts to.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

who do you think would make a more skilled martial artist?




One who can subdue his opponent(s) without bringing about harm upon them

or

one who thinks nothing of the well being of his opponent

[9th]

this one is dedicated to the 'marblehead deja vu fund for homeless children':

 

[thinker]

who do you think would make a more skilled martial artist?

 

One who can subdue his opponent(s) without bringing about harm upon them

 

or

 

one who thinks nothing of the well being of his opponent

 

Assuming even remotely equivalent aptitude and training, the latter. Don't ever go into a real fight with the attitude that you're going to be nice to your opponent. That may sound really good in the reading room or the dojo, but in the inner-city where the crack-head is willing to kill you for enough money for his next fix, and possibly already high enough to keep fighting even with a bullet in him, and may have a gun concealed on his person that he's willing to shoot you with as you walk away thinking that you've won, that's asking to die. If you're unsure of this and have the opportunity, as some cops how they would answer the question.

[shanlung]

who do you think would make a more skilled martial artist?

 

One who can subdue his opponent(s) without bringing about harm upon them

 

or

 

one who thinks nothing of the well being of his opponent

 

If he ask for money, I will hand over my wallet. No point to quarrel over mere money.

If it is not money, then it is a very different matter.

 

That depends on which side of the bed I got off from that morning. Go blame the bed if harm fell on the other.

 

Why do I care about the opponent. It is his role and duty to think of his own well being. Not go find trouble and then expect

the other to care and bother of his well being while the trouble is being resolved.

 

 

Idiot on the Path

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

Assuming even remotely equivalent aptitude and training, the latter. Don't ever go into a real fight with the attitude that you're going to be nice to your opponent. That may sound really good in the reading room or the dojo, but in the inner-city where the crack-head is willing to kill you for enough money for his next fix, and possibly already high enough to keep fighting even with a bullet in him, and may have a gun concealed on his person that he's willing to shoot you with as you walk away thinking that you've won, that's asking to die. If you're unsure of this and have the opportunity, as some cops how they would answer the question.

 

 

 

Whoever said tough Love was ever, EVER "NICE"?!? that's ludicrous.

 

Just because you are concerned of the well being of someone who is trying to kill you does not mean you cant harm them in order to protect yourself, but within the realm of necessity. There is no sense in harming your opponent in order to subdue them when all they have done is argue.

 

 

If you've no choice, you've no choice. i can understand fully. You must do what needs to be done in order to protect and preserve your health.

 

 

But i cannot help but hold in the highest esteem, a martial artist who treats their opponent as though they were fighting against themselves.

 

 

 

 

 

Edit: think of it this way:

 

 

It's tough love, the same you would apply to your children.

 

 

Treat your opponent as an unruly offspring.

 

 

 

Of course, if you're a 125 lb scrawny person up against a 350 lb body builder, i just hope you can either outrun the person, or you happen to have a cattleprod...

 

 

Just dont go looking for trouble

Edited February 24, 2013 by Northern Avid Judo Ant

[9th]

Morality is not absolute. It is a man-made construct, according to a particular place and a particular time period. Many things that were considered "morally right" in the middle-ages are entirely barbaric by today's standards.

 

Rather, concern yourself with the feeling of conscience - your emotional link to the dynamics between all things. This is the path of realization in which you eventually discover "I am THAT". In other words, everything is connected, and you cannot affect anything else without affecting yourself in the process. At the most basic level, there is no separation between the living essence of all sentient beings and even the material essence of things which are not considered sentient.

 

Regardless of your subscription to or agreement with some kind of externally imposed set of laws, or some code of conduct - if you cannot control your actions in an absolute way, you will be instead motivated by the inertial activity of your inner being. This is the true meaning of "karma". The more you engage in something, the more likely it will continue to happen. It is quite simple. This is also where the idea of "sin" comes from, because if you do consider yourself to be a follower of a certain code of conduct, but you transgress against it and fail to live up to the standard, you have "sinned". This is why the church says everyone is a "sinner", even the truest believers.

 

At the end of the day, these ideas of moral superiority and higher ethics and all of that must be examined deeply. Especially in so-called "spiritual" people, they tend to be a heavily fortified defense mechanism which hides the rampant hypocrisy of a life lived at odds with espoused principle. In other words, people who do not "practice what they preach" and who do not "walk the talk" will often hold such higher ethical standards as being a focal point for life itself.

 

Life itself does not have ethical standards. It has an order, an unimaginably vast and deep order of balanced workings and manifestations which are all of the same essential substance. But the institutionalization of ethical conduct is only a man-made creation based on the interpretation of a particular goal-oriented scenario in relation to it - which is limited by the understanding of the man in question who has implemented it - which is again limited by many other things which have made that man what he is, in terms of background motivations like culture, personal history, and so on.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

I've had 2 instances where someone took a swing at my face and seemed to have barely brushed my cheek, after which I just saw them as acting immaturely and didn't sink to their level. Neither time did I have to do anything more than look at them like "do you really realize what you're doing right now" for them to change their course of action. Whatever they were trying to get out of the incident was nothing I cared to have, so there was no reason to partake and the situation ended.

 

If what they wanted to get out of the incident was my personal well-being, then yes, I would have had to defend it. However, it wasn't really at risk, so there was no reason to retaliate.

 

There isn't usually much to gain from fighting, so I don't get involved in it. For the rare occasion that it's required, however, "anything worth doing is worth doing well" . In these rare occasions, you might even keep the person from accumulating more bad karma for themselves by acting this way.

 

As Shaolin monks say, they will only turn around the negative energy that someone is trying to give to them, I guess as in the parable "if someone offers you a negative gift you need only (politely) refuse to receive it."

[Basher]

I'm a BAD Taoist !!!!

I have worked hard for everything I own & am attached to all of it !!!

If I catch somebody trying to steal anything of mine, I'd have all sorts of strong emotions coursing through my veins.

If somebody threatened me or a loved one, I'd be inclined to defend myself / them very strongly indeed !

 

I'm studying Tai Chi etc to try & curb my quick temper & control my emotions.

But unfortunately I still have a long long way to go.....

 

In the late 1970's, early 1980's I studied under a Grandmaster of Kung Fu who never got involved in any trouble whatsoever.

He said that he could pick up on any Bad Vibrations, 10 minutes before anything actually kicked off !!!

So he'd just walk away & find somewhere more peaceful.

 

He also had a very modest home & few possessions.

 

Perhaps he knew the secret to a peaceful life ?

 

Basher

[deci belle]

…um, there's this taoist classic called the Sun Tzu (The Art of War).

 

It's about fighting.

 

It basically says there has never been a time without war (even making faces is war). There is a way to war if it is unavoidable. If it is unavoidable, there is a way to wage it. If one wages war, one should do so to the fullest extent and get it over with asap.

 

War is like fire. If you don't put it out you will be burned.

 

The Sun Tzu is included in the taoist canon. Waging war effectively is extremely compassionate and certainly profitable.

[doc benway]

We all know that non-violence is the key... but what if we are put in a situation where we must fight? Is having the knowledge of martial arts beneficiary to our karma when in need or no?

Basically what I am saying: Should we fight back if necessary?

Namaste, Mateo

Daoism is about finding and abiding in our true nature as humans.

I doubt there has every been a time when humanity was without violence.

The natural world is full of violence - everything alive eats something else that is alive.

That said, Daoism emphasizes cultivation of 德, which Shanlung points up so succinctly.

 

I think Taijiquan teaches very good lessons about the application of violence as it relates to Daoism -

 

沾黏連隨不丟頂 (how to yield and neutralize)

and, when necessary -

一搖二晃三擊 (how to attack)

 

edit - sorry, I didn't read deci belle's post before submitting mine so I sound sort of redundant

Edited July 20, 2013 by steve

[Marblehead]

... so I sound sort of redundant

I sound that way a lot of the time.

[shanlung]

You all heard of SunTsu Bin Fa or the Art of War.

 

There was this Taoist recluse Zhuge Liang, who was SunTzu Bin Fa personified.

Or the Art of War carried out and applied by a Taoist Sage.

 

The little I wrote of him might amuse you and be the catalyst for you to read a lot more of him

 

36 Stratagems// blah blah blah // blah blah blah

http://shanlung.livejournal.com/135845.html

 

 

Idiotic Taoist