# Philosophy and Spirituality in the Arts



## Kacey (Jan 2, 2008)

So... the title of this post is the same as the title of this subforum - and for a reason.  How do you include philosophy and spirituality in the art(s) you practice?  How do you define philosophy and spirituality in terms of the art(s) you practice?  Do you include them at all?  Why or why not?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 2, 2008)

I train CMA and it is intrinsic not additional not extra and not really discussed just there. Chinese ideas on just about everything do not generally seperate things like westerners do. Yin and Yang is everywhere in CMA and from my experience it has never been discussed by any CMA Sifu I have ever trained with from China or trained by someone from China it is just part of the theory behind it, not seperate. 

From my point of view in CMA (and the JMA and KMA I trained) and from my time when I taught some CMA as well; If you want long discussions Taoism, Buddhism, or Legalism or Confucianism go to a Taoist or Buddhist Temple or read a book on the topic and start a discussion group it is not really up to the Sifu to teach you or show you any of it since it is already there. And there is not enough time in a class to train the students what they need to know in their chosen style to sit down and discuss spirituality

Outside of class I read a lot of books on Taoism and Buddhism as well as various other Eastern Religions and eventually I imagine I will get around to more in depth study of the religion that is indigenous to that country I live in. But for now any spirituality for me is individual and self study.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 2, 2008)

I think that in terms of martial arts philosophy and spirituality are a result of doing, much more then any concious sit and think about what we are doing sort of approach.  We train, we sweat, we bleed, and we take our partners safety into our own hands, and put ours into theirs. 

Hard training tests your limits, it tells you who you are.  If you have the internal stuff to keep going when you are beat up and exhausted, or whether you curl up in a ball in the corner. 

There is growth there, learning that if you fall down you can get back up.  That if you get hit in the face it's really not that bad.  

But one of the most important things I think that people can get out of there training is the ability to fight fair.  We go in as friends, we fight as friends, and we are still friends afterwards.  When someone is hitting you in the face and you can press on, without anger, and with respect for that person, and do so fairly, that's something to be reached for.

I think that goes a lot farther then memorizing creeds or codes, and reciting koans.  Anyone can think about what it should be like to be a good person, but to actually be a good person under fire is a much harder thing.


----------



## Steel Tiger (Jan 2, 2008)

I fall into the same boat as Xue, philosophy is so much a part of my art that it is ever-present.  Even more so than taiji, bagua is based almost completely on fundamental Taoist concepts (the gua, taiji and constant change).  Because of this I do have to explain some of the concepts from time to time so that what we are doing makes sense.  I also sprinkle training session with quotes from Laozi and Zhuangzi, for colour more than anything else.

There is, however, a formal requirement to understand some of the basic concepts of Taoist philosophy.  As part of the testing for the second highest grade we have (we only have five remember) there is a written and oral test on Taoist philosophy including a knowledge of Laozi, Zhuangzi and the poet Li Bai.  Its not hard and is more about understanding than being right or wrong.


----------



## exile (Jan 2, 2008)

I am, I suspect, going to be _very_ much the odd man out. But spirituality plays no more part in my MA training than it did in my ski racing training when I did that. 

I take as my models MAists such as Bushi Matsumura, Chotoku Kyan, and Choki Motobu, who made it clear in both their words and deeds that their MA was, for them, first and foremost a set of fighting skills. A set of physical actions which had a particular kind of physical result. 

I went to junior high school and high school with a disproportionate number of aggressive bullies who make Dudley Dursley look like the bookies' favorite for this year's Nobel Prize in physics, and to university in a very dangerous, unpredictable city where many nice, ordinary people, people much like me, travelled armed to the teeth for personal self-protection. So, many decades before I started studying MAs, I was in the market for any kind of self-defense system which would allow me to defend myself effectively and&#8212;this is a little hard to explain concisely&#8212;_elegantly_, in the sense that a forced mate in chess is elegant. I wanted a technique set that I could apply to a variety of violent attacking moves that would, all other things being equal (no weapons, equal shares of luck, etc) give me heavy odds-up on my attacker and force him out of the fight, badly injured most likely, regardless of what he did after throwing the first punch. I also had weapons at hand, but those were for situations where I had lead time to deploy them prior to an attack and very likely scare it off (as happened on several occasions&#8212;it's remarkable how fast the sight of eighteen inches of inch-long motorcycle chain link in your would-be victim's hand convinces you to that the path of virtue, arduous though it is, is definitely the better path! ).

When I finally started formal MA training, many decades later, my views and expectations hadn't changed. MA = CQ H2H SD. For many people it has other dimensions, I know, and that's fine; I do calligraphy, and used to know calligraphers who viewed calligraphy as a spiritual exercise. And there are probably ski racers who think of ski racing that way... and if you think it is, then, in a sense, it _is_. It's just... I _don't_, and so for me, it isn't.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 2, 2008)

exile said:


> and if you think it is, then, in a sense, it _is_. It's just... I _don't_, and so for me, it isn't.




That's a very important piece, trying to force your own sense of "spirituality" on someone else is always a big mistake IMO.


----------



## Steel Tiger (Jan 2, 2008)

exile said:


> I am, I suspect, going to be _very_ much the odd man out. But spirituality plays no more part in my MA training than it did in my ski racing training when I did that.
> 
> I take as my models MAists such as Bushi Matsumura, Chotoku Kyan, and Choki Motobu, who made it clear in both their words and deeds that their MA was, for them, first and foremost a set of fighting skills. A set of physical actions which had a particular kind of physical result.


 
I think you are, in fact, voicing the opinion of the vast majority of MA practitioners in the world.  Martial arts is something they chose to do to give them fighting skills.  Its why I started studying, and there was no philosophical content at my first school (a very practical JKD-based school).

A lot of the old masters, especially in Japan, re-invented themselves after they became established.  the image of a rough and tumble fighting man was no longer appropriate.  As a result, Karate became an art designed to enhance perceptions and grow the spirit, not an art designed to put an opponent down as fast as possible.

In the Japanese, and by a certain extension the Korean, arts one can study an entire system of combat with no reference to philosophy at all.  Philosophical concepts do not intrude into the content of the system unless you want them to.  One does not need to know about Zen in order to learn kata.

In the Neijia, internal arts of China, one simply cannot avoid philosophy.  It is at the very core of the arts.  Most only skim it however, taking just what they need to understand the combat system.  I like to go deeper with the hope that a better understanding will give me a greater grasp of my art.  I don't know if it is working.  Its Daoism, you just can't tell most of the time :idunno:.


----------



## Lisa (Jan 2, 2008)

I don't think I could take spiritual leadership from someone that I pay to teach me a skill.  It just doesn't work that way for me.


----------



## exile (Jan 2, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> That's a very important piece, trying to force your own sense of "spirituality" on someone else is always a big mistake IMO.



I've seen it lead to some very negative and inappropriate value judgments in both directions... sometimes xtrmshock) on the pages of MartialTalk!

This is one area where 'live and let live' absolutely must rule.



			
				Steel Tiger said:
			
		

> A lot of the old masters, especially in Japan, re-invented themselves after they became established.  the image of a rough and tumble fighting man was no longer appropriate.  As a result, Karate became an art designed to enhance perceptions and grow the spirit, not an art designed to put an opponent down as fast as possible.



Absolutely. Check out Rob Redmond's take on Funakoshi's pre- and postwar about-face in this respect.



Lisa said:


> I don't think I could take spiritual leadership from someone that I pay to teach me a skill.  It just doesn't work that way for me.



I feel the same way. Your tennis pro, golf pro and Gojo-ryu instructor are all equally entitled&#8212;not!&#8212;to knee-jerk guru status. 

I think the MAs _can_ be a spiritual path for people, just as I believe any human activity can be. That's the key thing: there isn't anything specially privileged about the MAs. Ethical considerations loom large, sure, but that's a different story, I think.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 2, 2008)

exile said:


> I am, I suspect, going to be _very_ much the odd man out. But spirituality plays no more part in my MA training than it did in my ski racing training when I did that. .



:duh: And youre *ALLOWED* to post on MT!!!:tantrum:

:uhyeah:

Actually you are not the odd man out, it is not thought of as anything separate in any of the CMA styles I have trained anymore than it is thought about in skiing that you are wearing socks in your ski boots.

 It is just part of it, It is there and that is all.


----------



## Doc_Jude (Jan 2, 2008)

Personally, I don't feel that spirituality has much of a place in Martial Arts. Ethics and Self-empowerment, certainly. Knowing when and how to use such violent physical force, and having the willingness to use such force to protect yourself or your loved one is paramount. 
Besides, true spirituality requires training and study, and few if any of the martial arts instructors I have met or trained with have the requisite expertise to guide anyone spiritually, specifically since the coupling of both positions of martial arts master and spiritual advisor bring too much temptation from both student and teacher for ego abuse.


----------



## Monadnock (Jan 2, 2008)

In the animal kingdom, animals will fight to defend themselves and their young. It's sort of programmed in all creatures. Are humans no different? What sets us apart from them -- oh yeah... that ability to reason.

For the Buddhists:
"Does a dog have a Budda nature?"

For the Christians:
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

Something tells me that if you're a human, you are above the animals. Hopefully over the past few thousand years we have developed some sort of philosophy on how to conduct ourselves. I think these philosophies and ethics extend to the martial arts as well. Many were developed out of the need to preserve life - a spiritual decision IMHO. But it is too easy to misuse them. Without some sort of guidelines on how, when and why to use these skills, they may as well be for the animals.


----------



## exile (Jan 2, 2008)

Doc_Jude said:


> Besides, true spirituality requires training and study, and *few if any of the martial arts instructors I have met or trained with have the requisite expertise to guide anyone spiritually,* specifically since the coupling of both positions of martial arts master and spiritual advisor bring too much temptation from both student and teacher for ego abuse.



This ties in with Lisa's point exactly. MA skill, teaching skill, and spiritual knowledge&#8212;whatever _that_ may be&#8212;are three quite different things. For societies in which spirituality is a persistent theme in the culture, it is something you pursue in a disciplined fashion over decades. 

In fact, I think this is one of the major pitfalls that people studying the MAs need to be very careful about: these TMAs come from societies in which spirituality is highly respected, and explicitly linked to concrete human activity: labor in the fields is sometimes identified in Vedic literature, for example, as an act of worship. But the flip side is, there are strict paths and disciplines which are considered to be necessary to fully detach oneself from the distortions of the material world in order to reach a vision of a deeper level of Being, and those disciplines are just that&#8212;tough, demanding and spartan. You _train_ them, as hard as our top MAists train their skills, and over the same kind of time frame: decades. It's that kind of severe training&#8212;both physical and mental&#8212;that is supposed to be a prerequisite for enlightenment.

How many spiritual leaders of _any_ stripe in our society carry out that kind of discipline? There are members of the professional clergy who can, but not that many others. Yet the cultural associations of the TMAs with cultures in which that sort of authority clings to teachers can lend a false spiritual authority to someone in our own western/urban context who wants to claim such authority and has learn how to talk the talk. It's not a problem people with my own view of the MAs strictly as combat technique sets are faced with, but for people looking for something beyond that... caveat emptor with a vengeance, eh?



Monadnock said:


> Hopefully over the past few thousand years we have developed some sort of philosophy on how to conduct ourselves. I think these philosophies and ethics extend to the martial arts as well. Many were developed out of the need to preserve life - a spiritual decision IMHO. But it is too easy to misuse them. Without some sort of guidelines on how, when and why to use these skills, they may as well be for the animals.



There's a lot of truth in this&#8212;but the same thing applies to how, when and why to use a gun in self-defense, to inform law enforcement agencies of suspected abuse of your neighbor's kids, to inconvenience yourself by showing up in court to provide testimony in the case of a hit-and-run accident where you don't want someone to have been able to get away with criminal negligence... in other words, ethics, period. Sure, the violence inherent in the use of MAs raises very tough ethical issues, requiring careful thinking about the consequences of our actions... but so does a lot of the rest of life. I _think_ (though I know I could be dead wrong about this) that Kacey's question was about some particular aspects of spirituality that are specifically connected to the activity of doing MAs even if you don't ever intend to use them for self-defense purposes.


----------



## Steel Tiger (Jan 2, 2008)

exile said:


> This ties in with Lisa's point exactly. MA skill, teaching skill, and spiritual knowledgewhatever _that_ may beare three quite different things. For societies in which spirituality is a persistent theme in the culture, it is something you pursue in a disciplined fashion over decades.
> 
> In fact, I think this is one of the major pitfalls that people studying the MAs need to be very careful about: these TMAs come from societies in which spirituality is highly respected, and explicitly linked to concrete human activity: labor in the fields is sometimes identified in Vedic literature, for example, as an act of worship. But the flip side is, there are strict paths and disciplines which are considered to be necessary to fully detach oneself from the distortions of the material world in order to reach a vision of a deeper level of Being, and those disciplines are just thattough, demanding and spartan. You _train_ them, as hard as our top MAists train their skills, and over the same kind of time frame: decades. It's that kind of severe trainingboth physical and mentalthat is supposed to be a prerequisite for enlightenment.
> 
> How many spiritual leaders of _any_ stripe in our society carry out that kind of discipline? There are members of the professional clergy who can, but not that many others. Yet the cultural associations of the TMAs with cultures in which that sort of authority clings to teachers can lend a false spiritual authority to someone in our own western/urban context who wants to claim such authority and has learn how to talk the talk. It's not a problem people with my own view of the MAs strictly as combat technique sets are faced with, but for people looking for something beyond that... caveat emptor with a vengeance, eh?


 
There is no doubt that some of us, because of the art we have chosen to pursue, must embrace philosophy and spirituality more than do others.  It simply cannot be avoided.  That being said, I think you are right.  Many people are taking advantage of the philosophical cultural baggage carried by many MAs to gain power over others.  They use their hodge-podge, new age understanding of associated philosophy and spirituality to create small kingdoms for themselves.  In the process completely missing the point of the philosophy they are so abusing. 

As I said earlier, we have a testing requirement for knowing something of Daoist philosophy, but I simply cannot imagine myself as some sort of martial arts god-king imparting to my followers the distilled wisdom of the cosmos.  That all sounds just a little too stuck up for my taste.  I would rather see my students fascinated by qinna than waiting for me to attempt to enlighten them with quotations for Laozi (and yes, I did say I do occassionally drop such quotes in class, I don't think anyone pays too much attention most of the time though).

When it comes right down to it, martial arts is not, in and of itself, about understanding philosophy or developing spirituality unless you want it to be.  If that's your choice, explore to your hearts content.  If it isn't, that's good too.  I expect both camps are happy and content with what they are doing.


----------



## Doc_Jude (Jan 2, 2008)

Monadnock said:


> In the animal kingdom, animals will fight to defend themselves and their young. It's sort of programmed in all creatures. Are humans no different? What sets us apart from them -- oh yeah... that ability to reason.
> 
> For the Buddhists:
> "Does a dog have a Budda nature?"
> ...



Actually, philosophy in martial arts doesn't teach you how to conduct yourself so much as it justifies, after the fact, the prudent use of preservation instinct.

We don't act much better than insects, let alone higher mammals.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 2, 2008)

One more thing, if I look at this from the POV of Taiji and even Xingyiquan it is intrinsic. 

Form my little exposure to Wing Chun and what I have read about it tends more towards Confucianism which I would not exactly call spiritual but philosophical

However if I look at it form the POV of Sanda it is non-existent there is no spirituality just self defense and self preservation.


----------



## Kacey (Jan 2, 2008)

exile said:


> Sure, the violence inherent in the use of MAs raises very tough ethical issues, requiring careful thinking about the consequences of our actions... but so does a lot of the rest of life. I _think_ (though I know I could be dead wrong about this) that Kacey's question was about some particular aspects of spirituality that are specifically connected to the activity of doing MAs even if you don't ever intend to use them for self-defense purposes.



Actually, I was just trying to start a discussion... which seems to have worked quite nicely!

While I believe that I, as an instructor, have a responsibility to teach moral/ethical use of the physical/mental skills I teach, I work _hard_ to keep spirituality out of my class - first, because, being Jewish, I am not the a member of the same spiritual persuasion as any of my students (I've had Jewish students in the past - but none at the moment).  

Philosophy, however, is a different issue; I use philosophy, in the sense of historical examples and discussions of scenarios, to teach moral/ethical use of the physical/mental skills I teach in class.  Whether or not others consider that philosophy is up for discussion as well.


----------



## exile (Jan 3, 2008)

Kacey said:


> Actually, I was just trying to start a discussion... which seems to have worked quite nicely!
> 
> While I believe that I, as an instructor, have a responsibility to teach moral/ethical use of the physical/mental skills I teach, I work _hard_ to keep spirituality out of my class - first, because, being Jewish, I am not the a member of the same spiritual persuasion as any of my students (I've had Jewish students in the past - but none at the moment).
> 
> Philosophy, however, is a different issue; I use philosophy, in the sense of historical examples and discussions of scenarios, to teach moral/ethical use of the physical/mental skills I teach in class.  Whether or not others consider that philosophy is up for discussion as well.



This rings true for me.

Ethical considerations are going to loom large when any skill that has the potential to do harm to someone else is involved, because the instructor, by virtue of teaching those skills, is in effect empowering students to put themselves in positions where they _can_ do harm and therefore are, in my view, implicated, even if indirectly,  in the way those skills are applied. A number of people on this board have stated, at one time or another, that they would not teach martial arts to someone who they had reason to believe would use them for criminal or gratuitously destructive purposes. At bottom, the reason for such statements always seems to be a recognition by the instructor that they share, to some degree, ethical responsibility for how the skills they teach are applied.

This doesn't mean that it's _necessarily_ your failure as an instructor if a student does something ethically irresponsible with the training s/he's received&#8212;we don't get provided crystal balls when we start teaching&#8212;but it does seem as though there's an inherent obligation to explain to the student just how destructive the MA techs you're teaching can be, and emphasize that the force you apply shouldn't exceed the danger you believe you're facing in defending yourself. Those kinds of moral assessments do rest on certain assumptions about the balance of rights and responsibilities amongst individuals living in civil societies that need to be discussed explicitly, I think.


----------



## Monadnock (Jan 3, 2008)

Doc_Jude said:


> Actually, philosophy in martial arts doesn't teach you how to conduct yourself so much as it justifies, after the fact, the prudent use of preservation instinct.
> 
> We don't act much better than insects, let alone higher mammals.



I think there is an equal emphasis on what you do to prevent an attack. If not, it's time to leave the mall dojo for something a little deeper.


----------



## morph4me (Jan 3, 2008)

I'm of the opinion that spirtuality has no place in the martial arts, however philosphy is intrinsic. I don't believe that a teacher can help but let his or her philosphy come through in their teaching. It is up to the student to decide to accept, reject or amend the philosophy of their teacher.


----------



## JadecloudAlchemist (Jan 3, 2008)

> the title of this post is the same as the title of this subforum - and for a reason. How do you include philosophy and spirituality in the art(s) you practice? How do you define philosophy and spirituality in terms of the art(s) you practice? Do you include them at all? Why or why not?


 First the defination of Philosphy from the root word meaning Philo-love and sphy-meaning wisdom. Spiritual coming from Spiritualis- breath of wind and matters of religious value. And Religion- meaning restrain tie back from its root word. These are not my definations but a dictionary defination. Now that we have that how and what I include will vary from others. I tend to see martial practices as a method of culivation of spirituality to obtain a higher level. I have always looked at martial arts as a vessel for spiritual growth rather than the latter of self defense which to me is a side addition for perserving oneself for spiritual growth.
I tend to think both go well together in many stories of the past we here of the tired warrior who old and tired of battle and blood shed looks for a deeper meaning and understanding of purpose and life. I think Philosphy sets the blue prints and ideas to obtain spirituality kind of like tempering a sword. I include Philopshy because it helps shape my mind and direction I allow myself to go I include spirituality to help my understanding of purpose and I include religion as the manifestion of spiritual practice.
These are just my thoughts on the matter take what you will disregard what you will as well.


----------



## tellner (Jan 3, 2008)

A lot of the important points have already been covered, especially by Steel Tiger, Exile. Kacey and Xue Sheng. 

There's a lot of fortune cookie philosophy in the MA. People expect martial arts teachers to be imbued with The Philosophy of (fill in the blank). Sometimes those people are the teachers themselves. If their best training is in how to hit people rather than Confucian ethics or Buddhism, so it doesn't really fit. A Black Belt doesn't make you a qualified philosophy or religion teacher any more than seminary makes you a boxer.

But anything pursued seriously enough with the right intention can become a vehicle for growth in other areas. Motivational psychology and sports performance visualization can approach areas that were traditionally thought to be philosophy or spiritual practice. Ethics in self defense can start off as simple as "shoot, don't shoot". Take the questions to heart they can lead to some pretty deep things. The old military arts of Japan often include esoteric Buddhist teachings and practice. Some of this is because the students had to function in a world that was brutal and bloody without going mad or turning into monsters.

So I'm left with a very unsatisfying "Yes, yes, yes, yes, it all depends."

In a self defense class I cover the legal and ethical issues. Other things are only hinted at. Students sometimes say they could never do this or that to defend themselves. Could they if their child was being threatened? You can practically see them grow fur and sprout fangs at the question. I guess it's injecting philosophy to say "If there's a difference between your answers ask yourself why." That's about as far as it goes.


----------



## Doc_Jude (Jan 3, 2008)

Monadnock said:


> I think there is an equal emphasis on what you do to prevent an attack. If not, it's time to leave the mall dojo for something a little deeper.



That's not Philosophy or Spirituality, that's Threat Avoidance.


----------



## Kacey (Jan 3, 2008)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Monadnock*
> 
> 
> _I think there is an equal emphasis on what you do to prevent an attack. If not, it's time to leave the mall dojo for something a little deeper._





Doc_Jude said:


> That's not Philosophy or Spirituality, that's Threat Avoidance.



Yes and no... part of the philosophy of self-defense I teach includes avoidance, and what to do when avoidance is not possible.


----------



## theletch1 (Jan 3, 2008)

Lisa said:


> I don't think I could take spiritual leadership from someone that I pay to teach me a skill. It just doesn't work that way for me.


I felt very much the same way until I began training with my current instructor.  He doesn't attempt to "teach" spirituality at all.  He is who he is.  He's a good man, a great instructor and someone who I am proud to call friend.  The spiritual leadership that I get from him is what I take through observation...not what he is willing to impart.

As for spirituality in training, it's either a part of you (not your training) or it isn't.  I feel that your own spirituality will color the way YOU do your martial art more than it will affect your art as a whole.  Make your art your own and it will contain parts of who you are on all levels.  Yeah, there's a place for spirituality in the arts but only as far as the individual artists needs to have it.


----------



## Doc_Jude (Jan 3, 2008)

Kacey said:


> Quote:
> [/I]
> 
> 
> Yes and no... part of the philosophy of self-defense I teach includes avoidance, and what to do when avoidance is not possible.



I get what you're saying, really, but I'm not trying to get into a semantic argument. From the OP, I thought we were talking about Taoism / Buddhism / Confucianism / Shintoism / Advaita / Sanatana Dharma / et cetera, not "Self-Defense philosophy" or nit-picking ethics (which can be contained within Philosophies or Spiritual systems, but exists independent also). 

Pls correct me if I'm wrong about that.


----------



## Monadnock (Jan 3, 2008)

Doc_Jude said:


> That's not Philosophy or Spirituality, that's Threat Avoidance.


 
I seem to recall reading of a man who wanted to use his art to spread world peace. Ues...Ueshi...Ueshib.....ahh, the name escapes me but it'll come to me some time....


I'm sure it had nothing to do with his philosophy or his religion. The martial arts began long before him, and continue on long after him, but he started his own art and it was very much derived from a philosophy.

Chicken before the egg, cart before the horse - perhaps it is debatable on which infuences what, but the arts and philosophy are certainly entwined, there is no denying that.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 3, 2008)

Monadnock said:


> I seem to recall reading of a man who wanted to use his art to spread world peace. Ues...Ueshi...Ueshib.....ahh, the name escapes me but it'll come to me some time....
> 
> 
> I'm sure it had nothing to do with his philosophy or his religion. The martial arts began long before him, and continue on long after him, but he started his own art and it was very much derived from a philosophy.
> ...


 
Morihei Ueshiba and you still don't get am overt lesson about Zen in an Aikido dojo either


----------



## Monadnock (Jan 3, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Morihei Ueshiba and you still don't get am overt lesson about Zen in an Aikido dojo either


 
Did you just use "overt" and "Zen" in the same sentence???

Oh - where did Ueshiba study zen? I'd like to read up more on that while I am at it.


----------



## theletch1 (Jan 3, 2008)

As I understand it the spiritual side of aikido came into play after the art was established.  The older and more spiritual Ueshiba became the more a part of the art his philosophy became.  I believe that is one of the reasons there are such a diverse group of sub-styles of aikido in the world...different takes on the "spiritual" influence on the art.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Jan 3, 2008)

Kacey said:


> So... the title of this post is the same as the title of this subforum - and for a reason. How do you include philosophy and spirituality in the art(s) you practice? How do you define philosophy and spirituality in terms of the art(s) you practice? Do you include them at all? Why or why not?



Kacey,

I will try to answer your question the best I can, please see below.

(* PS: Thanks for the note in the rep on my Logic  *) 




exile said:


> I am, I suspect, going to be _very_ much the odd man out. But spirituality plays no more part in my MA training than it did in my ski racing training when I did that.
> 
> I take as my models MAists such as Bushi Matsumura, Chotoku Kyan, and Choki Motobu, who made it clear in both their words and deeds that their MA was, for them, first and foremost a set of fighting skills. A set of physical actions which had a particular kind of physical result.
> 
> ...



Exile,

I agree that I found martial arts as a stress reliever but mainly as a way to learn how not to break (* by strength/fear/adrenaline *) the people I touched who were in general trying to hurt me. The questions were getting boring being repeated so often as well as knowing the officers by name. 

I really enjoyed the arts for the movement itself. So one could say I have found a "ZEN" like approach for me. And this is good. But it is no what we teach nor what is expected. 

In Balintawak there is no formal philosophy or spirituality. My instructor is Catholic and that is not surprising being from the Philippines. 

In Modern Arnis we introduce the students to the following:


> * Personal Attitude*
> 
> *          1.) Use The Flow in all Aspects of Life.*
> 
> ...



They are from the Founders books. The student may be asked about them. If they can memorize it they are fine. No other requirements are there. 

I guess in the end I did listen to them, and apply them in varying levels of success depending upon the given day. But, even here it is not a real documented philosophy and it most definitely is not spiritual. 

There are stories of Anting Anting and other beliefs do exist in the FMA's. As I have not looked into it for myself and it was not taught I would have to say it would be up to the individual and not an issue for the art. 

As to working / going to school in non-friendly cities, I agree. It can be tough and lead one to look for forms of self-defense most educated people would never even think of. Carrying screw drives up your sleeve (* they are used at work and are a normal tool right.  *) , having a baseball bat and glove in your car all the time (* I go to the all sports dome and hit a few honest *) and realizing that you pack your book bags to work as a shield and a bludgeon type weapon or to drop on their feet. (* Oh Sorry about that.  *)   I am glad you survived it just as I am glad I survived it. Ahh the adventures of a misspent youth.


----------



## exile (Jan 3, 2008)

Rich Parsons said:


> Kacey,
> 
> I will try to answer your question the best I can, please see below.
> 
> ...



Rich, these strike me as basic rational, sensible and completely _responsible_ guidelines to embed one's knowledge, practice and teaching of martial arts in. They make _sense_. And I think that it's very important that instructors explain to their students that their actions have consequences that they will have to live with&#8212;particularly in view of the way popular culture glamorizes violence and in a sense tells you that you can do what you like as long as the guy you're doing it to is enough of a 'bad guy'.

I particularly like the point I've bolded above in your post. There is nothing antagonistic in any of the traditional MAs to a relationship between the practice of that MA and something with spiritual content; but there's nothing in these MAs which _imposes_ such a relationship either. In one of Isaac Asimov's _Foundation_ series novels, one of the characters says to another something like, 'You are getting mystical, and I always find it difficult to penetrate another person's mysticism', and boy, is that ever true. 

In a way, I like to think the the kind of experience you had, and that I had when I was a student in New York City, are similar in certain respects to what early MA students had to cope with: they were largely reasonable people who were looking at potential violence of a very dangerous kind and, in order to get on with their lives, did what they had to do to prepare themselves to apply counter-violence. They didn't want to get into fights, but they recognized that the nature of the fights they might have to get into could leave them dead, or severely injured, if they didn't have a few well-thought-out, well-trained tricks up their sleeves. And that's my guess&#8212;of course it could be all wrong, but it's compatible with what I've read&#8212;as to how they regarded their MAs: a set of highly effective techniques, tricks if you like, to shut a violent attacker down before he knew what hit him. For spiritual depth and enlightenment, they had their own religions. There's a certain danger in romantically projecting our own longings and yearnings onto cultural practices in other societies which have little or nothing in fact to do with those desires of ours (a point implicit in one of tellner's posts above), based in many cases on our own dissatisfactions with the way we live, and our need to identify a morally, or spirtually, or heroically, 'purer' way of life. I think a lot of our eager desire to buy certain myths about the supposedly ancient history of particular MAs comes from the same source... but that's a different topic! :wink1:


----------



## tellner (Jan 4, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Morihei Ueshiba and you still don't get am overt lesson about Zen in an Aikido dojo either



You won't even get a covert one. Ueshiba was not a Buddhist and got annoyed when his students did Buddhist practices. He was a follower of the Omotokyo Shinto/Nationalist religion.


----------



## Doc_Jude (Jan 4, 2008)

theletch1 said:


> As I understand it the spiritual side of aikido came into play after the art was established.  The older and more spiritual Ueshiba became the more a part of the art his philosophy became.  I believe that is one of the reasons there are such a diverse group of sub-styles of aikido in the world...different takes on the "spiritual" influence on the art.



That was my understanding also. Well, at least after he had been doing Daito-Ryu for many, many years, among other things...


----------



## Carol (Jan 4, 2008)

While there is some intertwining of philosophy/spirituality in the arts, I prefer to keep my own path a bit separate from my training. 

Perhaps because I'd like one person to teach me how to crack a skull and someone altogether different that can help me find absolution for cracking a skull. :lol2:


----------



## tellner (Jan 4, 2008)

But Carol, isn't combative skill and camaraderie an important part of your spiritual tradition?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 4, 2008)

Monadnock said:


> Did you just use "overt" and "Zen" in the same sentence???
> 
> Oh - where did Ueshiba study zen? I'd like to read up more on that while I am at it.


 
And here ya go 

http://www.cs.ucsd.edu/users/paloma/Aikido/morihei.html

http://books.google.com/books?as_auth=Morihei+Ueshiba&ots=ZfQgkvebu-&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=author-navigational&hl=en

http://www.aikidojournal.com/encyclopedia.php?entryID=723

http://www.cs.ucsd.edu/users/paloma/Aikido/artpeace.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iehh1a40IZI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccNOiFwOMtY&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYlFOIfLhDk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1I7riJM16i4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gP8QtryeL0&feature=related


And just as a note; grow up in Japan and you study Zen and Shinto, it is just the way it was and the way it is, it is ingrained in the society.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 4, 2008)

tellner said:


> You won't even get a covert one. Ueshiba was not a Buddhist and got annoyed when his students did Buddhist practices. He was a follower of the Omotokyo Shinto/Nationalist religion.


 
Since I do not train Aikido or a Japanese MA......

The point being There are no overt spiritual practices in Aikido... which is by many considered somewhat spiritual

Let me rephrase 

...you still don't get an overt lesson about Shinto in an Aikido dojo either


----------



## Carol (Jan 5, 2008)

tellner said:


> But Carol, isn't combative skill and camaraderie an important part of your spiritual tradition?



Tradition, yes, but not so much in practice...at least so much in my local diaspora :lol:


----------



## tellner (Jan 5, 2008)

Drat. And here I was hoping we'd see you riding dressed in mail with a lance, bow and tulwar.


----------



## lmission (Jan 8, 2008)

martial arts == music
music == martial arts
same same

philosophy:

martial arts -- don't think about it much. just do
music -- it's all the same

spirituality:

martial arts -- don't think about it much.  just do...happily, thoughtfully(?)
music -- like breathing

..2cents


----------



## tellner (Jan 8, 2008)

lmission said:


> martial arts == music
> music == martial arts
> same same
> 
> ...



My Silat teacher says "You think, you stink." That's in the fight or while you're performing (he's also a musician). You need to do a lot of thinking and hard work to get to the point where it all looks easy.


----------



## Shinzen (Feb 4, 2008)

From my point of view, Philosophy and spirituality in the martial arts are two separate subjects, yet intertwined.    

Philosophy in the martial arts can range from 'new age spirituality' to 'let's just crack your skull' philosophy.  both are philosophies to the arts.

Spirituality incorporates philosophy but typically is an attempt to explain the 'why' we are on earth question and 'what happens to us when we die' question.  At times spirituality implies religious beliefs...I don't believe the dojo is a place for this unless you go to that dojo for that belief.  (I am a Zen Buddhist and incorporate many Zen concepts in my training...but you don't need to be a buddhist to practice with me...but many of my students study for the Zen practice)

My martial art is about 'if you touch me...I hurt you philosophy' but wrapped in the nonviolent zen teachings.  yes, a paradox, but that's zen for you.

Both can be used and misused, dependent on your philosophy or spirituality.  So, to be long winded I do feel all martial arts already have philosophy, but don't necessarily need to have spirituality. If you stress a spirituality in your martial arts you should be upfront about it.  Some people like it, others don't. There is room for all types of martial art studios.


----------



## lmission (Feb 4, 2008)

tellner said:


> You need to do a lot of thinking and hard work to get to the point where it all looks easy.



agreed.

the point is, you don't want to think. 

for example:

i rarely practice music anymore because at this point in my career, it is the 'singing' part of the music is what interests me and is ultimately what is important.  as long as i can play that melody that is in my head with my hands hopefully (usually) it resonates with other people and they are entertained. 

i practice with dr. remy presas jr. in the bay area and we have come to an understanding that modern arnis continues to evolve.  the point that we are both trying to attain (of course through his grace, intelligence and profound skill) is to express this martial art with the same economy and ease and artistry that i experience in my music.  

with respect to this, i feel that at this point in my arnis studies, i can now say with clarity that i know what it is that i am trying to do and that eventually the difficulty that i am experiencing will go away as i refine what it is that dr. presas and all of his students are working towards -- ease, grace and artistry. 

...yung dos centavos ko.  salamat po


----------

