# The religious connections to the Kamidana



## Infinite (Dec 28, 2006)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Here is some info on Kamidana from Wikipedia.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamidana
> 
> ...



Thank you that was exactly what I was looking for.

May I ask another question that could be sensative in regards to the spiritual aspect of the arts? 

I've noticed a lot of people seem to be Christian Oriented are you one of them? If so how do you reconcile this artifact with that faith?

If not then do you perscribe to any sort of structured faith?

Thanks 

--Will


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Dec 28, 2006)

I am a Christian and teach sunday school pretty regularly.  I have absolutely no problem with it at all nor do the priests that I teach.


----------



## Infinite (Dec 28, 2006)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> I am a Christian and teach sunday school pretty regularly.  I have absolutely no problem with it at all nor do the priests that I teach.



I do not want to digress into a religious discussion those rarely turn out benifical to anyone. I was more curious about the no god before me and idolitry aspects of Catholosism.

 thanks.


----------



## bencole (Dec 28, 2006)

Infinite said:


> I do not want to digress into a religious discussion those rarely turn out benifical to anyone. I was more curious about the no god before me and idolitry aspects of Catholosism.


 
I don't think most Christian churches adhere to that precept anyways. 

I was recently in Montreal and visited the famed Notre Dame cathedral there. It is *REALLY* beautiful, but I was astonished at how many idols (of Jesus, the disciples, Mary, other wise men, etc.) were on display! Behind the alter alone, there must have been about 15 or so life-sized statues from floor to ceiling!

And there adherents are, bowing and praying before these idols on a regular basis!!! Hmm.....

The sheer number of idols in Christian churches has recently been on my mind, since that trip. Sorry if I am detracting from the "ninja focus" here.

It's interesting because such idolatry is similarly prohibited in other religions, such as Islam. That's why Islamic mosques have ornate geometric patterns on display, rather than statues of individuals. 

These patterns reflect the glory of god's design *WITHOUT* crossing the line of idolatry. Makes one think a little about who is really adhering to the wishes that Abraham's god made known in the Old Testament, Koran and Torah, eh? 

In all seriousness, clapping one's hands before a model of a building does not constitute "worship" in my book. Worship is in the heart, which is why there is no need for churches or idols or any such trappings in order to worship. 

I know some instructors who allow their students to sit out the bow-in. 

I know others who think such actions are hypocritical given the preponderence of idols in these individuals' own places of worship.

Just something to think about, whichever way you swing.... 

-ben


----------



## Tenguru (Dec 28, 2006)

Infinite said:


> That clarifies things for me thank you.



Actually, the Kamidana has it's roots in the Shinto belief system.  To say that it is merely a symbol of respect for the founder is a substantial downplay of its history.  But if that makes you feel more comfortable with it ....


----------



## Bujingodai (Dec 28, 2006)

I always thought of it as a place for the warriors gone before to be revered. So in a way some form of worship. I am not a Christian in any way so that doesn't bother me.


Brian it is  an awesome Kamidana. That may start a new thread where people take pics of theirs


----------



## bydand (Dec 28, 2006)

Tenguru said:


> Actually, the Kamidana has it's roots in the Shinto belief system.  To say that it is merely a symbol of respect for the founder is a substantial downplay of its history.  But if that makes you feel more comfortable with it ....



Yes it does have its' roots in the Shinto religion and if I'm not mistaken it is still used in Shinto homes and temples as a focal point of the worship.  As used in every Dojo I've ever been in though it is not used as a religious object.  That is not to downplay its history, and I never did downplay the history, because I didn't mention it as it wasn't relevent to the discussion.  A training hall is not a Shinto temple, or a Shinto believers home temple; it is a place where the founders of the art are shown the respect and honor as though they are there.  Not to worship the founders and teachers who have been there before, but just as a reminder of their contribution to the art studied in that training hall.  It is the same thing as incense in some "Western" religions, in the old testament it was used to symboliclly carry supplications or prayers to God, and in the Catholic church it is still used sometimes.  Does that mean every time some hippy fired up an incense stick in the 60's they were worshiping God.  Nope, just meant they thought it smelled good.  Same thing here, it doesn't diminish the importance of the object to one using it as a form of worship, *but,* it doesn't have to hold the same religious symbolism to all who use it either.


----------



## Tenguru (Dec 29, 2006)

bydand said:


> Yes it does have its' roots in the Shinto religion and if I'm not mistaken it is still used in Shinto homes and temples as a focal point of the worship.  As used in every Dojo I've ever been in though it is not used as a religious object.  That is not to downplay its history, and I never did downplay the history, because I didn't mention it as it wasn't relevent to the discussion.  A training hall is not a Shinto temple, or a Shinto believers home temple; it is a place where the founders of the art are shown the respect and honor as though they are there.  Not to worship the founders and teachers who have been there before, but just as a reminder of their contribution to the art studied in that training hall.  It is the same thing as incense in some "Western" religions, in the old testament it was used to symboliclly carry supplications or prayers to God, and in the Catholic church it is still used sometimes.  Does that mean every time some hippy fired up an incense stick in the 60's they were worshiping God.  Nope, just meant they thought it smelled good.  Same thing here, it doesn't diminish the importance of the object to one using it as a form of worship, *but,* it doesn't have to hold the same religious symbolism to all who use it either.



All I'm saying is that Shinto is probably the most common religion in Japan.  It's no coincidence that you find Kamidana in Japanese dojos.


----------



## Don Roley (Dec 29, 2006)

Tenguru said:


> All I'm saying is that Shinto is probably the most common religion in Japan.  It's no coincidence that you find Kamidana in Japanese dojos.



It has been my experience and observation that most Japanese are not really religious, merely superspicious. They bow to the Kamidama because that is what people do and have always done. I amuse myself by asking questions about religion to my friends, co- workers and students. It is a rare person that can tell you anything about Shinto.

So I dare say that most people bowing to the kamidama in the dojos in Japan are doing it as a form of tradition and not as any form of religion.


----------



## Cathain (Dec 29, 2006)

bencole said:


> I don't think most Christian churches adhere to that precept anyways.
> 
> I was recently in Montreal and visited the famed Notre Dame cathedral there. It is *REALLY* beautiful, but I was astonished at how many idols (of Jesus, the disciples, Mary, other wise men, etc.) were on display! Behind the alter alone, there must have been about 15 or so life-sized statues from floor to ceiling!
> 
> And there adherents are, bowing and praying before these idols on a regular basis!!! Hmm.....


 
You are mistaken. These would only be idols if the people were praying _to_ them. These statues and crucifixes are simply to focus one's mind to more heavenly things and a reminder of the lives of Christ and the saints, much as wearing a cross might do.. They are not intended to be artifacts of worship anymore than showing reverance for a bible is worshipping it. I think any Catholic that understood even the basics of their religion would be appalled at the idea of worshipping statues or images themselves.



> In all seriousness, clapping one's hands before a model of a building does not constitute "worship" in my book.


Indeed, similarly with statues.
What is important is that someone praying in front of such an object is still praying with their mind to God, not the object in front of them itself.

Then there is also the important difference between adoration and veneration. Many people do not discern such a difference these days, which leads to similar charges of idolatory when it comes to Mary and the saints which are just as inaccurate.


----------



## Carol (Dec 29, 2006)

bencole said:


> These patterns reflect the glory of god's design *WITHOUT* crossing the line of idolatry. Makes one think a little about who is really adhering to the wishes that Abraham's god made known in the Old Testament, Koran and Torah, eh?


 
I agree with what Cathain said, and will add...this is a western approach to worship.

The geometric patterns that adorn Islamic Mosques and Sikh Gurdwaras are borne of a tradition that forbids making any kind of image of holy people.  The traditionalist way of thinking in these faiths is that not only God but the prophets/saints/gurus are not to be physically imaged in the form of pictures or statues but to be mentally imaged in meditation and prayer...focusing on the words of the holy ones.  This is an eastern approach to worship.

Neither is better or more accurate, IMO...just more reflective of the culture and scriptures of the different faiths.

That being said...its a beautiful Kamidana, Brian!


----------



## mrhnau (Dec 29, 2006)

Brian, this is from the Wiki you posted.



> Kamidana (&#31070;&#26842; in Japanese), literally meaning "kami shelf", is a type of miniature shrine placed or hung high on a wall in some Japanese homes. The Kamidana contains a wide variety of items related to the Shinto style ceremony. *Worship at the kamidana* is as simple as saying prayers, offering food (i.e rice, water etc) and flowers. *Before worshipping* at the Kamidana, it is ritually important for family members to cleanse their hands.



This is a snippet from your post from Dick's site


> [FONT=Times New Roman,Georgia,Times]The _kamidana_ or _kamiza_, is the spiritual seat of the traditional martial arts school and consists of a small house holding a calligraphy, photo or sculpture by or of the art's founder. This is purely a sign of reverence for the tradition of our art, *not a form of worship*.[/FONT]



I put conflicting statements in bold. Basically you guys are saying that Wiki is wrong? Or wrong for most people/Japanese?


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Dec 29, 2006)

No basically it is an object of reverance for the founders and teacher's that have trained before in Budo Taijutsu.  That is how I see it and nothing more. (It is a tradition)

Having said that if someone was an adherent of Shinto then it may have an entirely different meaning to them.

Just like looking at a cross in a church may have a certain meaning to myself a connection maybe so to speak.  While to someone who is not christian it is just an object and nothing more.

So basically both of the above are right it just depends on your viewpoint.

Now in my home I have a Buddhist statue.  Does that make me a devout follower of buddha?  No of course not.

I also have multiple statues of differnt hindu dieties.  Does that make me a follower of Hindu? Of course not.  They are objects of art. (to me)  Not of worship!  In other words they are just objects. (and precious to me for their artistic work)

All that is important to me is what is in my heart and mind and what I feel there.  That is what is important.  Heck really I do not even need to go to church because God is with me where ever I go. (though I go to church pretty regularly 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





)


----------



## bydand (Dec 29, 2006)

I would say the wiki is right in *one* use of the kamidana, and it is probably the most frequent (Just a guess on my part as Shinto is not a part of the area I live in) but it isn't the *only* use of the Kamidana.  Just as in most encyclopedias and dictionaries there is more than one definition or use of an item.  As used in the dojo or training hall, then yes it is too narrow of a statement of use.  If pertaining to the worship of Shinto, then it is right on the money.  I have never seen food, flowers, or prayers said to a kamidana in a training hall setting, if it did involve that combined with a sense of worship, then I would have a problem with the use of one.  As it stands though, there is none of the trappings of worship surrounding the kamidana in any training facility I have been in.  I look at them in a training hall as sort of an honored place of rememberance.  Kind of like having a momento, drawing, or photo of an ancestor, or close friend that is no longer with us, just to keep them in our thoughts.  That is just my own thoughts and I can point to no written backing of that last statement, just the feelings of everyone I have trained with over the years are the same.  Others may have a deeper meaning in their Kamidana, but that just boils down to the individuals use/significant of and in the object.


----------



## mrhnau (Dec 29, 2006)

for further information, you can read about the kami on wiki. Found it kind of interesting...


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Dec 29, 2006)

mrhnau said:


> for further information, you can read about the kami on wiki. Found it kind of interesting...


 
That is a nice link.  Thanks.


----------



## bencole (Dec 29, 2006)

Cathain said:


> You are mistaken. These would only be idols if the people were praying _to_ them.


 
Yes and no. First, when the scripture discusses God's displeasure with praying before idols, it was during the time when people were bowing before idols of cats and other such objects. Did these people actually pray _to_ the cat statues? Nope. They prayed to what the cat statues _represented_.

Still, as a result of God's language, people went around smashing these other statues. These followers of Abraham's God were not smashing actual gods when they were smashing statues, but instead _representations_ of gods. Your insistence on this difference simply does not follow with historical or scriptural fact.



			
				Cathain said:
			
		

> What is important is that someone praying in front of such an object is still praying with their mind to God, not the object in front of them itself.


 
Second, many Catholics to not pray with their mind to God. Many of them pray to Jesus and/or Mary. The latter was definitely a human--granted a human who acted as a vehicle for the son of God, but not someone that even God would want people to bow to. Remember, "I am a jealous God."



			
				Cathain said:
			
		

> These statues and crucifixes are simply to focus one's mind to more heavenly things and a reminder of the lives of Christ and the saints, much as wearing a cross might do.. They are not intended to be artifacts of worship anymore than showing reverance for a bible is worshipping it. I think any Catholic that understood even the basics of their religion would be appalled at the idea of worshipping statues or images themselves.


 
Actually, I've rarely met a Catholic who understands even the basics of their religion _based on the original scriptures_. They rely on translations of translations of translations, and form opinions and interpretations based on an imperfect understanding of the texts. What's worse, they pick and choose which aspects of their scriptures they want to adhere to and which aspects they conveniently want to ignore. 

Catholics regularly ignore those who steal (i.e., embezzle), commit adultery, blaspheme the name of the Lord, and work on the Sabbath--all *DIRECT* violations of the Ten Commandments. 

Yet, somehow these individuals seek to create *HUMAN LAWS* to forbid gay marriage and the like. Nothing in the Ten Commandments about gays, but somehow a rare mention of homosexuality becomes far more important than other religious admonishments in the bible, such as sleeping with a woman during her menstral cycle or eating pork. 

(Just to jar your memory, the Lord spoke to Moses in Lev. 24:13-16, telling him that all should stone Shelomith's son for blaspheming the name of the Lord. We also see admonishments that those who work on the Sabbath should be put to death (Exodus 35:2). These are clearly things that *REALLY* upset God, but we don't see our supposedly religious Congressional leaders trying to create laws to outlaw working on the Sabbath. Instead, they try to outlaw homosexuality, even though it is not even as "bad" in the eyes of God himself. Again, selective, convenience religious zealousness that serves personal goals and not God's goals. I feel this comes from relying on interpreters, rather than personal interpretation of the original texts.)

I speak bluntly because I have deeper experience than most--I was head alter boy at my Catholic church and my father was in seminary to become a priest before falling ill, then in love, and then into marriage and children.

Aside from those pursuing priesthood, I have never *EVER* met a Catholic/Christian who had enough interest in the scripture to *LEARN* the actual languages in which the scriptures were written, and seek out the original texts. This the despite the fact that so many Catholics/Christians claim that the scriptures guide their life. Both Jews and Muslims are very different on this point. Both Jews and Muslims read their original texts in their original languages, and subsequently, are far more strict with the way that they read the scriptures.

Some believe that this "talk of religion" has nothing to do with "Ninjutsu", but I disagree. 

As someone who spent years as translator for Hatsumi-sensei, I know the dangers of people relying on translators to tell them what to do and how to think about the teachings of this art. It will only get worse, after Hatsumi-sensei passes, in my opinion.

I already see signs of trouble as to "what Soke meant" and people without any true knowledge teaching others what this art supposedly entails. Most of the time I shake my head in dismay.

I think it is *VERY* important that people *THINK* about what is important and what is not important. I also think that people should first go to great lengths to understand the original language of a teaching, *IF* you plan on having those teachings play a guiding role in your life.

Both Catholics and Bujinkan practitioners fail to do this, in my humble opinion. Both instead rely on others to interpret for them and guide them. This leaves far too much "power" in the hands of those who act as translators and guides, which has been a traditional problem among followers of both teachings, again in my opinion.

May all your choices be good ones!

-ben


----------



## mrhnau (Dec 29, 2006)

bydand said:


> Same thing, different word.  It's all in the usage.


I think Kamidana means literally "Kami shelf".



> Kami is also several charcters in games and cartoons, as well as being the name of a few towns and villages.  As used in the Shinto Religion, yes it is an object of worship and to focus worship.  Used in a dojo, it is an honorific shelf; no more, no less.


I understand that. Perhaps for me, its just a cultural misunderstanding. I have taken alot of classes in college, privately from individuals and in various schools. I don't recall ever bowing to a shrine representing/honoring Einstein, Freud, Popper, my parents, etc..  I'd think it rather odd if my teacher asked us to. I understand that most Japanese don't look at it as spiritual, but that does not make it "normal" for me I guess... I've seen pictures of Hatsumi in dojos. I ask myself, if I happen to found an art, would I want my picture all over the place? What do I want my legacy to be? A picture or my art? I realize you can have both, and the notion of respect exists, but I think in that regard, I do have a cultural "gap", and I admit that.



> If someone has a problem with the usage in their particular dojo or training hall, then don't take part in the bow-in and bow-out.


I agree with that. I am not aware of any instructors that would have issues w/ that.



> I still say it is beautifully done and looks great Brian.


yes, I agree, I think it looks very nice


----------



## bydand (Dec 29, 2006)

mrhnau said:


> Perhaps for me, its just a cultural misunderstanding. I have taken alot of classes in college, privately from individuals and in various schools. I don't recall ever bowing to a shrine representing/honoring Einstein, Freud, Popper, my parents, etc..  I'd think it rather odd if my teacher asked us to.



I think we agree with the usage in the dojo setting, but you hit the nail on the head with the cultural misunderstanding I think.  I was lucky enough to have my parents be open enough to have a Japanese exchange student stay with us when I was 8 or 9.  From Kazumi I was made aware that bowing in her culture was about the same as the handshake in my culture.  I have gone on to have friends from Japan and other Asian nations who regularly would bow upon meeting and then remember halfway through we shake hands over here.  No difference to me, if they bowed, I did.  I think of it the same way during bow-in and bow-out, just saying hello and showing respect.  We had a couple people who train that did have a problem with the bowing and so therefore did not participate.   As this is a Japanise art, I  have no problem with maintaining some japanese traditions  because it helps  me make the connection back to the beginnings.  Kind of like training in barefeet for the TKD schools I've been in, I don't really know the  tradition behind that practice, but didn't have a problem with that either, along with a bow toward the Korean flag to show respect for the country where the art began.


----------



## Infinite (Dec 29, 2006)

See I'm sorry I specifically stated I didn't want to do what just happened!

Faith interests me a great deal. Yet this might not have been the proper forum/thread for it


----------



## bencole (Dec 29, 2006)

Infinite said:


> See I'm sorry I specifically stated I didn't want to do what just happened!


 
The question of whether saying "Shikin Haramitsu Dai Ko Myo" is a prayer, or bowing to a kamidana is a form of idol worship was bound to come up. It always does. Don't fret about that.

As was pointed out, there actually *ARE* people who do not participate in the bow-in ceremony before a kamidana. The reasoning provided is that they do not want to bow to an idol, in violation of their beliefs.

Sadly, I will bet you real money that these same individuals would not bat an eye about praying to Mary at Notre Dame cathedral (i.e., violate Commandments 1 and 2), voting *AGAINST* political candidates that represent "pro-choice" perspectives (i.e., violate Commandment 6), and voting *FOR* candidates who cheat on their wives (i.e., violate Commandment 7), embezzle money (i.e., violate Commandment 8), work on the Sabbath (i.e., violate Commandment 4), and regularly curse the Lord's name (i.e., violate Commandment 3) because these latter candidates preach about the need to "protect marriage" from homosexuality (i.e., not even mentioned in the Ten Commandments).  

I hope this example is clear.... 

The only thing I seek is to see people *CONSISTENTLY* apply their teachings to their lives, not pick and choose.

If you want to understand a teaching, and discern whether it violates other teachings, it is *VITAL* that you know what each teaching truly is, and that you are consistent in your following of those teachings.

I have no tolerance for people who pick and choose which teaching to follow and which to discard out of convenience, and who are satisfied to have others do their thinking for them. 

It behooves me how someone could make a teaching, whether Ninjutsu or Christianity, "the guiding light of their life" without learning the language of the teachings and interpreting them first-hand.

Individuals who place such importance of these teachings in their lives yet make excuses for why they do not want to learn the original language and explore the subtleties of the teachings at an individual level do a terrific disservice to the God of Abraham (i.e., the god of Christianity, Judaism and Islam) and to the God of War, in my opinion.

(Note: For the record, my translation of the characters for "Bujinkan" is "Hall of the War God." Most others translate it as "Divine Warrior Training Hall" or some other hippy-esque garbage like that. ;D )

I'm certainly not going to make any friends by coming out so strongly in this way. There are a *LOT* of Christian and Catholic practitioners in the Bujinkan, many of whom are probably aghast that I am so virulent on this topic. Many of them may not even want to "play" with me any more, once this thread makes its rounds. 

Alas, my only demand of anyone is that s/he actually desire to understand the teachings that guide their lives in their original languages, have created their own interpretations of those teachings, and apply those interpretations consistently in all that they do. 

Otherwise, they are doing a great disservice to the teachings they supposedly are upholding.

This demand holds irrespective of whether the teachings are ancient ones handed down by God himself, or by some little guy in Noda, Japan.

-ben


----------



## Grey Eyed Bandit (Dec 29, 2006)

bencole said:


> The question of whether saying "Shikin Haramitsu Dai Ko Myo" is a prayer, or bowing to a kamidana is a form of idol worship was bound to come up. It always does. Don't fret about that.
> 
> As was pointed out, there actually *ARE* people who do not participate in the bow-in ceremony before a kamidana. The reasoning provided is that they do not want to bow to an idol, in violation of their beliefs.
> 
> ...


 
"Our freedom of speech is freedom or death, we've got to fight the powers that be!" :mst:


----------



## Don Roley (Dec 30, 2006)

bencole said:


> Alas, my only demand of anyone is that s/he actually desire to understand the teachings that guide their lives in their original languages, have created their own interpretations of those teachings, and apply those interpretations consistently in all that they do.



That seems reasonable since the majority of native speaking Japanese would not say that to bow to the kamiza/ kamidama means that you have to have a belief in Shinto. It is rather amusing to see those that have no understanding of the language or real practice of the religion put an importance on things that the majority of the folks that are training do not.

As an aside, if you (Brain) want some of the accesoraries that go with the kamidama, I would be willing to go out and get them if you pay for them *and* record some programs that I can't get here in Japan. The holy ropes that you see hanging from many kamidana are easy to get on January first. I can get everything else from a store not five minutes from my house. If I break even on the cost and get a tape of some programs for my time I would be more than willing to do the trade.

I like CSI, Blue's clues (for my kids), and a few other programs (just in case anyone else wants the rope in the next 48 hours.)


----------



## bencole (Dec 31, 2006)

Don Roley said:


> That seems reasonable since the majority of native speaking Japanese would not say that to bow to the kamiza/ kamidama means that you have to have a belief in Shinto. It is rather amusing to see those that have no understanding of the language or real practice of the religion put an importance on things that the majority of the folks that are training do not.


 
I agree. I've only met one person who would not do the bow-in, who also strictly followed *ALL* of the precepts of his religion. Granted, he was a Hasidic Jew. I'm not saying that one needs to be overzealous, I just believe that you should not be overzealous about some things, but not overzealous about other things, when the things you are not being zealous about upset your god even more than the things you are being overzealous about.... 

Anyway, sorry to detract from all of the compliments to the kamidana with my tirade. 



			
				Don Roley said:
			
		

> As an aside, if you (Brain) want some of the accesoraries that go with the kamidama, I would be willing to go out and get them if you pay for them *and* record some programs that I can't get here in Japan. The holy ropes that you see hanging from many kamidana are easy to get on January first. I can get everything else from a store not five minutes from my house.


 
Brian, you should take him up on the offer. Right now in Japan, those rope-like things (Shimenawa) should be widely available. They look great on a Kamidana, imo.

-ben


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 1, 2007)

Hey Don,

Thanks for the offer and see the pm I sent you regarding getting me a shimenawa.  Thanks.


----------



## Bigshadow (Jan 1, 2007)

_Moderator Note._ 

This thread was split from the thread linked below.

New Kamidana!

  -David Russ
  -MT Moderator-


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 1, 2007)

Bigshadow said:


> _Moderator Note._
> 
> This thread was split from the thread linked below.
> 
> ...



Since the religious issue has been split out... I'd like to take a moment and address a few things that have been said regarding Catholic beliefs.  I stayed out of it because I felt that it was getting way off topic under the original thread, and felt that it might become disruptive.  So -- you're warned.  Stop now, and move on if you're not interested or simply want to argue for arguments sake.  (I do believe there's a whole 'nother forum here for that, and would be happy to take part in an in-depth discussion of this there!)

I'm not going to try to pull and quote each issue; I think that would simply become confusing.  And I'm not doing a thesis on apologetics, either.  

First -- on the basis of the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.  One -- but only one -- source of the Church's theology and doctrine is indeed the Holy Scripture; the inspired Word of God.  Scripture is seen as being fundamentally true, not necessarily literally true.  There are two accounts of creation in Genesis, for example, and they have notable differences; does that mean that God created the universe twice?  The Church recognizes that the Scripture was not being written solely for the person writing it then, nor for the people who interpreted it in the 1st Century AD, nor solely for us today.  It was written for all of us who ever have been or ever will be.  And the Bible is not the sole source of truth, either.  Sacred tradition is another element from which the Catholic Church draws it's teachings.  The Gospel of John concludes with: _There are many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think that the whole world would contain the books that would be written._ (St. Joseph edition of the New American Bible; John 21:25.)   I think martial arts provide a very apt analogy here; most systems contain both written/formalized teachings and "secret" teachings that are only passed on orally from master to senior student.  A third source for Catholic theology is the teaching authority of the Pope and the College of Cardinals.  On matters of faith, we Catholics believe that the teaching authority of the Church is protected by God from error.  That said -- it's vitally necessary to remember that the Church on Earth is made up of fallible humans who have indeed sinned, and sometimes sinned greatly.  We see a line between the TEACHING and the TEACHER in a very few of these cases, since very few of the most notoriously fault ridden really ever said much in the line of teachings.

With regard to prayers before statues, crucifixes or even the Blessed Sacrament...  We don't substitute an idol for the real thing; the Blessed Sacrament or Holy Eucharist is, in Catholic teaching, the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ, Our Lord and Savior.  It's not a symbol, it's not a reminder -- it IS the Lord through the miracle of transubstantiation.  In Eucharistic Adoration, we spend time in front of the Lord, not just a piece of bread.  The various statues, images, icons, and other symbols found within the church building are just helpful reminders and images for us.  

Finally, on the matter of prayers to the various saints and the Blessed Mother -- we do indeed speak to them in our prayers.  We see them as intercessors; people who have a special position and can intervene on our behalf with God.  It's kind of like if I were to go to Japan, and asked Don Roley, bencole, or some other Bujinkan practitioner to set up an interview with Hatsumi.  Hatsumi doesn't know me from Adam, and has no reason to meet with me.  But one of these people do know him, and I'll flatter myself for the moment that they might take the time to arrange the meeting on my behalf.  I'm not substiting that person for Hatsumi; I'm asking that person to use their relationship to facilitate my goals.  Hatsumi might say yes, he might say no -- that's out of their control.  But they probably have a better chance of getting a yes than if I just showed up or sent a letter, right?  Of course, this analogy isn't perfect -- but it's a reasonable facsimile according to what I've been taught.  Catholics don't mistake a Saint for God; we don't worship the saints.  We just look to them as examples of holy lives, and ask them to pray for us.  It's really not any different than a prayer tree among the members of a church.

Now -- of course there are many Catholics who have never bothered to study their faith, and don't know how to explain these things.  Also, there are many Catholics who only attend Mass at Christmas and Easter, and many who don't let their faith move outside of the walls of the church they attend each week.  There are even plenty of blatant hypocrites who happen to be Catholic, but I don't think that Catholicism has any patent on that!  I think you can say the same about any religion -- and quite a few martial artists, too, in regards to their training!  And, unfortunately, many Catholics from other parts of the world have just plain been poorly catechized, and they don't know any better.

When it comes down to various actions within the dojo or training hall -- I don't personally see a problem with showing respect by bowing to a kamidana or other similar reminder of those who went before me and passed the system on to me.  I don't see a problem with having pictures of the most senior instructors or founders of the system on the walls, either.  I'm not worshiping them; I'm respecting them.  I hope that my students who bow to me aren't worshiping me!  But if someone does have a problem with it, I'll respect their beliefs.  I'm certainly not fit to judge them or their faith!  So long as they can be respectful about it -- we'll be fine.  Let me liken it to starting a school day or athletic event with the Pledge of Allegiance, the National Anthem or some similar patriotic activity.  I don't want students or participants required to recite the Pledge, or render honors to the US flag (or the flag of any other country) -- but I do expect them to be respectful during the ceremony.  They can stand or sit quietly while I do it.


----------



## bencole (Jan 1, 2007)

Thanks for being willing to bite this off, jks....



jks9199 said:


> Scripture is seen as being fundamentally true, not necessarily literally true.



But even this point is a source of concern. When the King James Bible describes eating shellfish as "an abomination" is is *REALLY* an abomination as *WE* speaking English consider "an abomination" or is it another adjective?  

If you do not know the linguistic context in which these words are written, then you cannot even assess whether you should interpret things in one way or the other. 

As an example, the original Hebrew word that is translated as "abomination" is "[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]_to'ebah."_[/FONT]  Even a simple word as this has *A LOT* of "baggage," so to speak  It could be translated any number of ways: "Pagan", "contemptable", "wrong", even "foreign."

If you do not understand what [FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]_to'ebah_[/FONT] means in its Hebrew context, then you cannot really understand the scripture. This means that you cannot form actions based upon the teachings held in those scriptures....

It is the same as if Hatsumi-sensei said, "_Sore wa dame_!"  The word "dame" has a *HUGE* cultural usage that completely overwhelms the simple translation of "no good" or "bad" or "unacceptable."

This is *VERY* important, imo, and something that is frequently overlooked.



jks9199 said:


> Finally, on the matter of prayers to the various saints and the Blessed Mother -- we do indeed speak to them in our prayers. We see them as intercessors; people who have a special position and can intervene on our behalf with God. It's kind of like if I were to go to Japan, and asked Don Roley, bencole, or some other Bujinkan practitioner to set up an interview with Hatsumi. Hatsumi doesn't know me from Adam, and has no reason to meet with me. But one of these people do know him, and I'll flatter myself for the moment that they might take the time to arrange the meeting on my behalf. I'm not substiting that person for Hatsumi; I'm asking that person to use their relationship to facilitate my goals. Hatsumi might say yes, he might say no -- that's out of their control. But they probably have a better chance of getting a yes than if I just showed up or sent a letter, right? Of course, this analogy isn't perfect -- but it's a reasonable facsimile according to what I've been taught. Catholics don't mistake a Saint for God; we don't worship the saints. We just look to them as examples of holy lives, and ask them to pray for us. It's really not any different than a prayer tree among the members of a church.



Firstly, most people do not ask Mary to "pray for me." At least that I've ever seen over the years. They pray "to" Mary for something. But we'll set this point aside (and any of the selfish implications of these actions in light of Jesus' stated goals) and get to the primary issue--the fact that you need Don Roley or bencole to act as facilitators.

I honestly believe that most of the "problems" that exist now in the Bujinkan started because people relied upon intercessors rather than doing things themselves. Luckily, the doors have been blown open by many people over the past 15 years or so, and these teachings are directly digestible by anyone.

I honestly feel that you *CANNOT* learn Soke's budo unless you understand the Japanese heart. This contextualization cannot be translated. The more people understood the Japanese heart, the less "crap" we would see--both in terms of movement, and in terms of money-making decisions by some of these practitioner/teachers.....

I shake my head a lot these days as websites and seminar descriptions make my way into my inbox. This, and an incredible inconsistency in action, was the impetus for my rant. Hope that clarifies....

-ben


----------



## Cathain (Jan 2, 2007)

bencole said:


> Yes and no. First, when the scripture discusses God's displeasure with praying before idols, it was during the time when people were bowing before idols of cats and other such objects. Did these people actually pray _to_ the cat statues? Nope. They prayed to what the cat statues _represented_.


Accepting that as the case, then do you have a problem with praying to what Christian imagery represents (ie. God?)



> Still, as a result of God's language, people went around smashing these other statues.


Yes, there was a heretical sect in history called the _Iconoclasts_ who, as one writer put it, were siezed by a fit of collective vandalism and went around smashing Christian statues, artwork, etc until theyr had to be forcebally restrained. It is interesting to see how their ideas influenced others, including neighbouring non-Christian religions.



> Second, many Catholics to not pray with their mind to God. Many of them pray to Jesus and/or Mary. The latter was definitely a human--granted a human who acted as a vehicle for the son of God, but not someone that even God would want people to bow to. Remember, "I am a jealous God."


This is the difference between Adoration and Veneration I referred to earlier. The Early Christians were well aware of this difference and this discernment is retained in the Catholic Church. To pray to someone is not necessarily to worship them. There is another meaning to the word "pray" which is retained in the English language through archaic phrases such as "pray tell me".
It literally means "to ask".
When Catholics pray to Mary or the Saints, they are asking them to petition God on their behalf. Catholics pray to the entire Church (Church Militant & Church Triumphant) to intercede on their behalf.
St Paul himself asked his fellow Christians to pray for him. Catholics do the same but they also include the saints and Mary as full members of the Church.
The saints and Mary are venerated (as said in the Bible during the Annunciation and the Visitation - "Hail Mary, full of Grace" and "Blessed art thou amongst women" and "All generations shall call me blessed"), that is that they are accorded great respect due to their virtue and being favoured by God.
Adoration, however, is true worship and is reserved for God alone.



> Actually, I've rarely met a Catholic who understands even the basics of their religion _based on the original scriptures_.


Or rather, your interpretation of the Scriptures?



> They rely on translations of translations of translations, and form opinions and interpretations based on an imperfect understanding of the texts.


As opposed to what? What do you base your interpretation on?
Private interpretation of the original Greek texts and a thorough background in ancient Hebrew linguistic and cultural nuances?
I'm interested in the scriptural authority you subscribe to.
I seem to recall scripture itself saying that there is definitely no Private Interpretation  (2 Peter) . So what is your scriptural authority and where does it derive it's authority from?



> What's worse, they pick and choose which aspects of their scriptures they want to adhere to and which aspects they conveniently want to ignore.


This applies to most people I know, Catholic or otherwise.



> Catholics regularly ignore those who steal (i.e., embezzle), commit adultery, blaspheme the name of the Lord, and work on the Sabbath--all *DIRECT* violations of the Ten Commandments.


Specific Catholics you know or all Catholics as a general rule?
I know of no perfect people personally, nor do I believe them to exist in our world.



> Yet, somehow these individuals seek to create *HUMAN LAWS* to forbid gay marriage and the like. Nothing in the Ten Commandments about gays, but somehow a rare mention of homosexuality becomes far more important than other religious admonishments in the bible, such as sleeping with a woman during her menstral cycle or eating pork.


I do not consider the Ten Commandments to be the sum total of Christian morality. Even if I were a Sola Scriptura adherent, there is plenty of talk regarding sexual immorality in the bible. Were not the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah engaging in "unnatural relations"? It specifically mentions that "even their women engaged in unnatural relations with each other" and the "men were inflamed with lust for each other".

If you are accepting of homosexuality, then that is fine & entirely your own business. I do not tell people that their sexual urges are wrong or whatever. I have an opinion based on my religion but I do not moralise but rather respect the individual's Free Will. But to claim it sits fine with Christian morality is, I feel, a gross misrepresentation.



> (Just to jar your memory, the Lord spoke to Moses in Lev. 24:13-16, telling him that all should stone Shelomith's son for blaspheming the name of the Lord. We also see admonishments that those who work on the Sabbath should be put to death (Exodus 35:2). These are clearly things that *REALLY* upset God, but we don't see our supposedly religious Congressional leaders trying to create laws to outlaw working on the Sabbath. Instead, they try to outlaw homosexuality, even though it is not even as "bad" in the eyes of God himself. Again, selective, convenience religious zealousness that serves personal goals and not God's goals. I feel this comes from relying on interpreters, rather than personal interpretation of the original texts.)


We do not live by the Old Law anymore. Christ was very specific about that. In any case, with Private Interpretation you simply exchange one interpretor with another (yourself).



> I speak bluntly because I have deeper experience than most--I was head alter boy at my Catholic church and my father was in seminary to become a priest before falling ill, then in love, and then into marriage and children.


No offense intended, but I find that some of the most vociferous anti-Catholics have had negative personal experiences in the past.
Same with ex-smokers, etc. Pople who reject what they once were or had tend to become the biggest opponents. It is not limited to Catholicism.
I think it fair to objectively say that if your father had not left the seminary then you would not be here, thus you have a vested interest in opposing it, right?



> Aside from those pursuing priesthood, I have never *EVER* met a Catholic/Christian who had enough interest in the scripture to *LEARN* the actual languages in which the scriptures were written, and seek out the original texts.


Never met anyone, period.
Again, as I reject Sola Scriptura as a heresy then it is not so important for me.



> This the despite the fact that so many Catholics/Christians claim that the scriptures guide their life.


Christ guides my life through his divinely ordained Church. I believe that Christ founded a Church to guide with authority otherwise he would have written the Bible himself and simply used the Apostles to flog his book.  I do not rely _solely_ on the writings of the early Christians (assembled and pronounced infallible by the Catholic Church, btw  ). The Church existed before there was a Bible.
let us not put the cart before the horse



> Both Jews and Muslims are very different on this point. Both Jews and Muslims read their original texts in their original languages, and subsequently, are far more strict with the way that they read the scriptures.


Rather, they are more literal...or as the bible puts it - their understanding of scripture is "carnal"
However, a biblical scholar of any worth would rightly tell you that much of the bible is written in allegorical, rhetorical and un-literal form.
This is why Private Interpretation is such a bad idea and is denounced in scripture itself. The pratical proof? Look at all the countless sects and demoninations, reading their bible, privately interpreting it, and coming away with countless doctrinally-contradicting creeds. This one believes in the Real Presence, that one doesn't, this one believes in infant baptism, that one doesn't believe in it at all, this one believe in seven sacraments, that one three, the other none, this one believes in the Trinity, this one believes in only One indivisible God, etc.
This is the fruits of Private Interpretation where every man sets himself up as his own Pope and supreme authority.

Anyway, interesting discussion


----------



## Grey Eyed Bandit (Jan 2, 2007)

Excuse me in advance...but I just couldn't resist.


----------



## Cathain (Jan 2, 2007)

Dinosaurs? Surely nobody believes in giant Godzilla type creatures roaming the earth millions of years ago. Even makes the concept of God seem credible


----------



## bencole (Jan 2, 2007)

Cathain said:


> Accepting that as the case, then do you have a problem with praying to what Christian imagery represents (ie. God?)


 
I was pointing out the flaws in your statement that "These would only be idols if the people were praying _to_ them."



			
				Cathain said:
			
		

> There is another meaning to the word "pray" which is retained in the English language through archaic phrases such as "pray tell me".
> It literally means "to ask". When Catholics pray to Mary or the Saints, they are asking them to petition God on their behalf.


 
Completely unnecessary given God's omnipotence. Anyhow...



			
				Cathain said:
			
		

> As opposed to what? What do you base your interpretation on? Private interpretation of the original Greek texts and a thorough background in ancient Hebrew linguistic and cultural nuances?


 
Well, if you are going to base your human actions on what is supposedly God's desires, one would think that you would desire to know what God's desires are. I think this is especially important if you are trying to make human laws to govern behaviors.



			
				Cathain said:
			
		

> I do not consider the Ten Commandments to be the sum total of Christian morality.


 
Why not? Those are explicit rules that God gave mankind. Many of the other admonitions in the Bible do not *DIRECTLY* come from God.



			
				Cathain said:
			
		

> Even if I were a Sola Scriptura adherent, there is plenty of talk regarding sexual immorality in the bible. Were not the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah engaging in "unnatural relations"?


 
What was the original Hebrew used to describe these relations--_dame, fushizen, yurusarezarumono_? Each has its own baggage in terms of translation.... Thank you for reinforcing my point.



			
				Cathain said:
			
		

> If you are accepting of homosexuality, then that is fine & entirely your own business. I do not tell people that their sexual urges are wrong or whatever. I have an opinion based on my religion but I do not moralise but rather respect the individual's Free Will. But to claim it sits fine with Christian morality is, I feel, a gross misrepresentation.


 
I'm sure you don't have time nor desire to read this, but I will at least provide a worthwhile source here for you: 



			
				Cathain said:
			
		

> No offense intended, but I find that some of the most vociferous anti-Catholics have had negative personal experiences in the past. Same with ex-smokers, etc. Pople who reject what they once were or had tend to become the biggest opponents. It is not limited to Catholicism.


 
I am not anti-Catholic any more than I am anti-Bujinkan. I find inconsistency between heart and action deplorable. I've never had a "negative personal experience" in either organization. I do shake my head though at how people rely on others as gate-keepers though, and excuse behaviors that are deplorable by the teachings of both.



			
				Cathain said:
			
		

> I think it fair to objectively say that if your father had not left the seminary then you would not be here, thus you have a vested interest in opposing it, right?


 
In a Freudian sense, you could argue that. LOL!  That still wouldn't explain why I spent many years as an alter boy, nor considered entering the cloth myself. I was never "forced" to think or do certain things.



			
				Cathain said:
			
		

> Christ guides my life through his divinely ordained Church.


 
Could you please provide information about where precisely God ordained that the circle of Cardinals should send up clouds of differently colored smoke to signal the choice of its leader? Or as a matter of fact, that there should even *BE* a leader who serves until death or retirement?

I can already see the Bujinkan Jugodans lining up to "lead us" after Soke's passing, with the authority vested to them by Hatsumi-sensei himself.  LOL!

-ben


----------

