Continued from 2004-06-26 Spirituality...
Chad added a comment to his post ¹, saying that these post were in fact for himself, a way to think things through, and by doing it in public, a way to connect to similar-minded people. He also says that this kind of discussion was interesting for some, but not for all people he approached.
This reminds me of a chat I had with JohnWiegley where he said that there are two interesting ways of dealing with the perception of our environment:
1. Some people strive to understand the higher principles and ideas behind the limitless variety of phenomena, eg. to understand *beauty* of women. He counted himself amongst these people.
2. Others strive to enjoy the uncounted manifestations of the higher principles, eg. to admire the countless variety of beautiful women. I count myself amonst these people.
And that brings me back to Chad’s post: I can imagine John being interested in the discussion, trying to establish the governing principles of progress in the martial arts, naming them, discussing them, whereas my initial reaction is: “Boring!” Instead, I want to experience all the moves, all the counters, do the steps and think as little as possible.
Something about distilling the higher principles and the immersion into the world. The ones striving for the higher principles call the immersion into the world a dellusion, they call the environment Maya, something unreal and ephemeral, whereas the ones trying to experience it the fullest will say that dry scholarship and lore will not advance you one iota towards wisdom, that you need experience life and the world in order to transcend it: Instead of staying aloof, be one with it.
In the end it is all the same, I guess. 😄 And here I revert to my original way of thinking. I wrote the above paragraphs for people like John, interested in the higher principles.
#Spirituality
(Please contact me if you want to remove your comment.)
⁂
A thought.
Don’t you think that the two ways of looking at things reinforce each other rather than divide people into two classes? Seeing the manifestation of a general principle in a large number of things makes them all the more beautiful. Observing the variety of ways in which a general principle (which perhaps till now existed only in your head) makes you marvel at creation itself.
I’d personally try to experience something holistically. I’d want to experience every move of a martial art as well as know the theory and the general principles that go behind it. Otherwise, I think understanding becomes lopsided.
I used to think that getting totally detached with reality was cool and that’s the way to think about stuff (perhaps, that was just my immaturity). But of late, I feel that it just limits your learning and growth. The real world is as wonderful as the place I’ve created inside my head. 😄
– NoufalIbrahim 2004-06-29 03:20 UTC
---
I was going to come back to this discussion to defend Chad’s post, but I see the defense has already been done - or rather, the ideas I would like to convey were expressed - more eloquently than I would do. In any case, I will just add a small piece to it to make my mark here and satisfy my ego 🙃
I agree with Noufal that the two outlooks reinforce each other, and give you in the end more appreciation. I also think that there are more than two ways of getting to the bottom of the concept: there is the physical aspect of practising the martial way, there is the emotional aspect of how we feel when we practise it and how we feel about practicing it, there is an intellectual aspect in that how we analyze it, and there is the spiritual aspect in that how it teaches us about God - how is God manifested in all of the above (or below (-; concepts).
All of us are looking at one immense perfect body of knowledge, and each one of us from their unique perspective sees a glimpse. Out of the meeting of our seemingly differing opinions, we get the synergy or spark of truth.
– Daniela 2004-06-29 05:24 UTC
---
I think you are both right, Noufal and Daniela: These are in fact just different ways of looking at our life, and there will probably be more than one. When JohnWiegley and I talked in the streets of Firenze, we were just finding words for ourselves – how we both appreciated being there and yet being so different in our approach. 😄
– Alex Schroeder 2004-06-29 12:04 UTC
---
Hi alex, I appreciated your perception that in the end it is all the same. It begins and ends with the experience. Thinking can add clarity but more often is a distraction for the ego. When clarity is achieved though, in those moments, we can see God and Oneness in all creation.
– Chad Badiyan 2004-06-30 04:16 UTC
---
I echo Chad’s sentiment about thinking adding clarity, with the threat of distraction. Not so many people are truly reflective, however. This is an observation, not a judgement. A sincere question, Chad: have these moments of insight allowed you to form an opinion on the overall meaning of life? More specifically, can you shoot two arrows into the mist and guess where ’life’ came from, and where it goes? My name hints at my bias... 😄
– ChristopherSmith 2004-07-31 12:03 UTC
---
Ich habe gerade einen schoenen Abschnitt ueber die Schoenheit zur Hand, den ich nicht vorenthalten will: Wenn ich sage, A. habe schoen Augen, so kann man mich fragen: was findest Du an seinen Augen schoen, und ich werde etwa antworten: die Mandelform, die langen Wimpern, die zarten Lider. Was ist das Gemeinsame dieser Augen mit einer gothischen Kirche, die ich auch schoen finde? Soll ich sagen, sie machen mir einen aehnlichen Eindruck? Wie, wenn ich sagte: das Gemeinsame ist, dass meine Hand versucht ist, sie beide nachzuzeichnen? [Wittgenstein, 1933]
– Olaf 2006-01-26 22:46 UTC