Is self defense egotistical?

[soaren]

I have a simple question that I feel does not have a simple answer:

 

Is engaging in self defense an act of egotism (against a soul that obviously has ego issues)?

Basically there are two and a half answers that are possible:

 

Yes

No

Martial arts and all of the physical "monk-like" endeavors are utilized for their spiritual value and development, not self defense.

 

I'm kind of in the middle of such a hypothetical three way battle with myself, and I was looking for opinions based on the logic of Eastern Belief Systems on both sides of the debate so I can make up my own mind, which will help me understand the soul energy vs ego struggle that is going on in my spiritual plane at the moment.

Thanks!

 

- Soaren

Edited October 2, 2014 by soaren

[Ish]

Well there is such thing as healthy ego in my opinion. Like feeding ourselves, drinking, washing etc all could be seen as egoic but its natural and healthy...

 

If one can defend oneself without anger or hate, and in doing so stop the other person from harming others (including you) and themselves, that could be seen as a healthy action of ego too.

[Aetherous]

Taking care of yourself is just as important as taking care of others...so self-defense and defending others is good. When you take care of yourself at the expense of others, it becomes destructive to you primarily (in terms of your soul), and others secondarily.

Buddhists tend to think that any thought revolving around the self is tied to suffering. It's considered to be dualistic thought (self, vs all that is not the self)...and the idea of your self is considered to be the root of all negative emotions.

Instead of thinking that this means you shouldn't take care of yourself at all, it's actually just having to do with what you're doing with your mind. You should take care of yourself. Part of taking care of yourself involves penetrating through illusory thoughts of being a self. Another part involves protecting your body from enemies (if you actually have any).

Just some ideas.

[Marblehead]

I was going to do my normal ego speech but Ish's post is fine for now.

[GrandmasterP]

I have a simple question that I feel does not have a simple answer:

 

Is engaging in self defense an act of egotism (against a soul that obviously has ego issues)?

Basically there are two and a half answers that are possible:

 

Yes

No

Martial arts and all of the physical "monk-like" endeavors are utilized for their spiritual value and development, not self defense.

 

I'm kind of in the middle of such a hypothetical three way battle with myself, and I was looking for opinions based on the logic of Eastern Belief Systems on both sides of the debate so I can make up my own mind, which will help me understand the soul energy vs ego struggle that is going on in my spiritual plane at the moment.

Thanks!

 

- Soaren

 

No

Hope that helps.

[zerostao]

i think self defense is very practical

and fits into the self reliant/self responsible area.

[PLB]

Our lives are a lot more than vehicles of ego. What is egotistical is to not live that larger life.

We have to defend our lives from ourselves and from others. Sometimes the work is similar to each other, sometimes it is very different.

 

The Art of War says the highest and most excellent form of self defense is to influence yourself and the people around you in a way that causes the fight not to happen. This highest form of power is difficult to achieve and so the book describes a cascading series of strategies one should take in the face of falling short of that expression. You can only do what you can do.

 

There will be a test.

[Jetsun]

At some point in the cycles someone has to put the weapons down

[soaring crane]

Do you wear warm clothing in the bitter cold of winter?

[Unlearner]

Every martial art I've ever practiced that had a philosophy behind it, no matter what the style, has always taught a certain principle: combat is always a last resort, and you should only engage in a physical fight if you absolutely have to. If you can talk your way out of it, then talk. If you can run away, then run. Heck, if you can give them money and get them to leave, then do that. But if they pose a continuous threat to you or others, then you should use the skills you have developed to defend yourself.

 

Beyond that, it begins to vary somewhat, but some of the more "tranquil" martial arts, such as aikido, focus on limiting the physical harm done to your opponent. This should be done in relation to what your skill level might be, or whatever you can handle I suppose. Still, superiority in fighting skill is not something to lord over an opponent; rather, one should undertake the responsibility of being able to use that skill in a way that can benefit others and oneself. If you can defeat an opponent without killing them, don't kill them. If you can defeat opponent without breaking a bone, don't break any bones. If you can defeat an opponent without landing a single blow, then don't throw any blows.

 

Respect for all life is important in many traditions, and that includes oneself.

[Marblehead]

At some point in the cycles someone has to put the weapons down

Excellent statement and sound philosophy. Were it only that simple.

 

The history of humankind is that of kill or be killed. Sorry about being so bold but I think it is a realistic statement as well.

 

The only time weapons have been put down was by the loser after their defeat.

 

I wish I could be more optimistic about this but history indicates that this is the human way - to keep weapons so that we can defend our self and perhaps take from others what they have.

 

Lao Tzu spoke to this in Chapter 80. He didn't say to destroy the weapons, he said that there should be weapons but no one should use them. My understanding of this is that the weapons should never be used to conquer others but to have them for the purpose of defending ourselves if need be.

 

And this is in line with what has been said above, to use weapons (including the martial arts) only as a last resort.

[Silent Answers]

Serious follow up question that I feel doesn't need it's own thread...

 

Should a real Taoist eat regular chocolate, drink alcohol or ingest other unbenefitial foods/drinks? Even regular chocolate can be good for some conditions... But otherwise, isn't it just pleasuring the desires of the self?

 

How many of us are still sneaking unbenefitial snacks now and again?

[Marblehead]

 

How many of us are still sneaking unbenefitial snacks now and again?

I don't do it sneakingly. I do it in the open, in public, for all the world to see. No shame, no blame.

 

And yes, I keep chocolate in the house at all times.

[GrandmasterP]

Chocolate is one of our essential 'five a day' foods here.

 

[JinlianPai]

Kung fu is about freedom.

 

So you dont have to be bullied or controlled by anyone.

 

Kung Fu is about knowing how to take care of yourself. How to breath move and eat and a spiritual exercise and philosophy.

 

Kung Fu is about self defense from evil ignorance and death.

 

To preserve thy self.

 

In that sense only is it egotisical but its a healthy ego the ego of "I do exist" .

[BaguaKicksAss]

If I didn't mind getting raped or mugged, then I would really want to look into the fact that my ego (negative ego) had taken over control....

 

Not why I practice martial arts, since the chances are so slim, but it is the perspective that the thread seems to be started on for some odd reason.

[beyonder]

Serious follow up question that I feel doesn't need it's own thread...

 

Should a real Taoist eat regular chocolate, drink alcohol or ingest other unbenefitial foods/drinks? Even regular chocolate can be good for some conditions... But otherwise, isn't it just pleasuring the desires of the self?

 

How many of us are still sneaking unbenefitial snacks now and again?

 

And why should daoists be ascetics? You know what asceticism is, right? It's forced. Daoists tend to not do that forced shtick, since that's at odds with the Way of Emptiness:

 

"Does one scent appeal more than another? Do you prefer this flavor, or that feeling? Is your practice sacred and your work profane? Then your mind is separated: from itself, from oneness,from the Tao. Keep your mind free of divisions and distinctions.

When your mind is detached, simple, quiet, then all things can exist in harmony, and you can begin to perceive the subtle truth."

-Hua Hu Ching, Walker translation, chapter 11.

 

Also, Ruan Yi and Liu Ling where notorious drunkards in their time, so there's that too.

 

Regarding the OP, you are stuck in duality. Affirm one pole and you've implicitly called the other pole into existance. Dissolve both. To a daoist, there is no "egoism" or "non-egoism", since such dualistic notions are banned to the realm of fiction, where they belong. Holding on to such notions causes wildgrowth in your emotions. Keep your mind simple, and such questions won't even arrise.

Edited October 3, 2014 by beyonder

[Rocky Lionmouth]

If you look at all the people who would be hurt by someone hurting or killing you its not so very egoistic. Taking care of yourself is by extension being able to take care of those close to you, everyone matters to someone and pain is usually shared, unless people around you are serious sadists or psychopaths...

[Ilkka]

I think everything related to ego is egoistic in that sense, but it doesnt mean that it would be so "bad" thing that some might say. Another thing comes to mind about Yin & Yang. Yang represents the physical body that is basically ego and Yin represents soul "body" that is emotions, feelings etc. When in situation such as life threatening or similar threat to ones health or freedom I see that we respond with extreme emotion and feelings, and that takes us to act upon them physically. So I see this more of balance between ego and mind so not actual egoistic manner, however like others have already said that if used on ones own benefits it will be egoistic at that point.

 

Conclusion would be that it is egoistic and it is not egoistic depending on how you use the knowledge and agility gained by the certain martial art that have been practiced. Once again "it is not the size but how you use it", this saying applies for many different things I think.

[Marblehead]

If I didn't mind getting raped or mugged, then I would really want to look into the fact that my ego (negative ego) had taken over control....

 

Not why I practice martial arts, since the chances are so slim, but it is the perspective that the thread seems to be started on for some odd reason.

Well, sure, self defense is part of what people train for. And as you pointed to, most women wouldn't like to be raped or mugged. A good self defense would likely prevent an aggressor from following through with their plan.

 

I view martial arts as a defensive tool. Yes, very egotistical. It's called self preservation.

[Ilkka]

I view martial arts as a defensive tool. Yes, very egotistical. It's called self preservation.

As I mentioned above about the both body and the mind I would suggest that it is very egotistical and not at all, but in between positive and negative, in its truest form of course. Self preservation is everyones right to have, but I dont view it as egotistic at all. Tool part is correct, one can misuse pretty much any given tool for malicious purposes. Everything has their two opposing sides.

[Bud Jetsun]

If one doesn't demonstrate unlimited Compassion to those who wish to do you harm, how is one any different? If one harms someone 'back', one has still harmed someone, and is no better.

 

One was already going to die and have all of ones 'things' crumble to dust. Defending ones material life is like struggling against the ocean waves rising towards a sand castle. It was a lost effort from the moment of origin, there are just differing stages of harms or gestures of compassion one can cause before its inevitable conclusion.

[Marblehead]

If one doesn't demonstrate unlimited Compassion ...

There is no such thing as unlimited compassion. Yes, there is compassion. If you ever had to defend someone you love you would experience this in person.

 

Here is a good place for one of a warrior's codes: I will help you if I can; I will kill you if I must.

 

This too is compassion but limited.

 

Even Chuang Tzu never claimed there was such a thing as unlimited compassion but he did teach and practice compassion, more so than the average person would have been able to deal with.

[Bud Jetsun]

There is no such thing as unlimited compassion. Yes, there is compassion. If you ever had to defend someone you love you would experience this in person.

 

Here is a good place for one of a warrior's codes: I will help you if I can; I will kill you if I must.

 

This too is compassion but limited.

 

Even Chuang Tzu never claimed there was such a thing as unlimited compassion but he did teach and practice compassion, more so than the average person would have been able to deal with.

 

To think compassion cannot be unlimited is a failure to recognize it could only be limited or restricted by the moment a being ceases choosing compassion. Compassion is how Love manifests, if one destroys all fearful thoughts, one lives in unbreakable elation of Love and Compassion by default.

 

Death is only a fearful thing for those who do not embrace it equally as they do life. Recognize they are inseparable. Recognize no amount of causing harm to defend oneself results in liberation. For that matter, now amount of 'practicing' anything results in liberation. Only the choice to gain awareness and appreciation of ones inherently liberated state can cause liberation.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Another ingredient to add to the topic is "treat the small things seriously, and the large things lightly. This way nothing becomes unmanageable." (Dao De Jing)

 

Letting things get out of hand because I want to pursue my spiritual path, to me, is more egotistical than "taking out the trash" before someone else has to. Not that actively going around seeking conflict will help anybody.

 

As I see it, people who need to be put in their place are probably causing a lot more people problems than just me, so it's not in anyone's best interest to let people walk over us.

 

That said, the sooner we make it known that we will not let someone walk over us, the less likely they are to try and do so, which means the conflict is more likely to be avoided, or at least far less severe, by immediately standing one's ground.

 

To this I'll add, from King Solomon's Proverbs "sand is weighty and stone is heavy, but who can suffer the provocation of a fool?" You really need to know when you're responding out of fear and anger, ie. weaknesses.

 

Flexibility is strength, but when the bow is fully stretched, something's gonna give. Best not to let it get so far as to be "unmanageable."

 

That's my opinion

Edited October 3, 2014 by Harmonious Emptiness