Both sides of the coin

[PaulH]

In the realm of morality, I side more with Anerlich's lucid posts. Evil is Evil. You don't harmonize evil; you fight it. Tail down I guess for the optimists among us.

Regards,
PH

[yuanfen]

The problematic nature of the concept of "harmony" advanced
by James and his supportive posters is also readily evident in
a "sifu" in my metro area,some months ago on this list/forum, challenging me to a fight (my place or yours) because in his judgement I "disturbed" his harmony. Shows the very subjective (even when interpersonal in a group) nature of the definition of harmony involved in the posts of James and his supporters.

I wouldnt hold Zen/Chan Buddhism responsible for it because
nowhere do I do know of Chan advocating violence based on a subjective concept. Original Chan rejects the the objective reliability of concepts by intellection.

Good wing chun hasa logic of it's own. One need not link it to Chan any more than to link Newtonian physics in a deterministic way to Christianity.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Andrew Nerlich is absolutely right about this...

There is an old saying that bears repeating:

Return Good for Good; but for Evil - return Justice.

At the Center of all religions, philosphies, and sciences (when esoterically understood) - there is a Core Truth shared by all of them.

That said...Joy just made reference to one such religion, Christianity, and I'll take this opportunity to quote from a book entitled MYSTIC CHRISTIANITY - as it bears directly on the conversation on this thread:

"Blessed are the meek; for they shall inherit the earth." (Matt.v:5.)

.....By these words Jesus sought to teach that those who had acquired the attitude of obedience to the Power of the Spirit Within them would become as Masters of the things of the earth. This message is frequently misunderstood by reason of the lack of perception of the Mystic meaning contained in the words.

The word "meek" does not mean that "I'm so meek and humble" attitude and expression of the hypocritical followers of form. Jesus never taught this - and never acted it. He was always the Master, and never sought to make of his followers cringing creatures and whining and sniveling supplicants. He asserted His Mastery in many ways and accepted the respect due him - as for instance when the vial of precious ointment was poured upon Him.

His use of the word, which has been poorly translated as "meek,'' was in the sense of a calm, dignified bearing toward the Power of the Spirit, and a reverent submission to its guidance - not a hypocritical and cowardly "meekness" toward other men. The assurance that such should "inherit the earth" means that they should become masters of things temporal - that is, that they should be able to rise above them - should become lords of the earth by reason of their "entering into the kingdom of heaven" within them......"

(P. 249). The book was written by Yogi Ramacharaka, and published by the Yogi Publication Society, originally printed in the United States in 1907.

[Phenix]

Victor,

Great point.

[duende]

Originally posted by yuanfen
The problematic nature of the concept of "harmony" advanced
by James and his supportive posters is also readily evident in
a "sifu" in my metro area,some months ago on this list/forum, challenging me to a fight (my place or yours) because in his judgement I "disturbed" his harmony. Shows the very subjective (even when interpersonal in a group) nature of the definition of harmony involved in the posts of James and his supporters.

Your mouth was obviously not in harmony with it's surroundings. Your ego was not in harmony with reality... need I say more... cause it appears you just want to sidetrack this thread.

Originally posted by yuanfen

I wouldnt hold Zen/Chan Buddhism responsible for it because
nowhere do I do know of Chan advocating violence based on a subjective concept. Original Chan rejects the the objective reliability of concepts by intellection.

Good wing chun hasa logic of it's own. One need not link it to Chan any more than to link Newtonian physics in a deterministic way to Christianity.

So tell me then... where does the logic for YOUR wooden dummy form come from??

[yuanfen]

Victor sez':
His use of the word, which has been poorly translated as "meek,'' was in the sense of a calm, dignified bearing toward the Power of the Spirit, and a reverent submission to its guidance - not a hypocritical and cowardly "meekness" toward other men.




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

Good point Victor.
That is another side- an important one.

joy

Joy

[Phenix]

Harmony, in chinese buddhism, it is said, to shine together in harmony. Meaning embrace chaos and everyone's light to shine together.

However, to embrace chaos doenst mean to give in on evil.

As in the chapter 25 of the Lotus sutra, the chapter of Boddhistava of compassionate, it says " those cursing and hexing, with the action which cause others harm, recite the Kwan Yin Boddhisatva's name, she will return those evil to the performers"

Now a days,

there is so called hamony, such as some of the chinese communist practices, yours is mine and mine is mine. You follow my harmony.

There also, the old chinese dynasty emperor harmony. If you dont harmony with me, you are not in harmony. Because those emperor think they were God's Son. so everyone has to listern to them and " harmony " with them. otherwise, one will be punished in the name of not harmony

Are these harmony? Sorry no.


I think harmony can be reached if one study the spiral dynamic and Maslow.
Expanding one's view and truely see other's view. Nothing is so rigid and there is lots of things about communication in others term and value in order to have mutual understanding are needed.

But, that doesnt mean one can accept the rober's view or Hittle's view in the name of harmony. those are evil.

There is well define meaning in chinese term or chan buddhism and we cannot re define things as we like. Thus, the confusians or buddhist in old china. always refer what they say to scripture. that is an act of following the defination.

For example, the method of Chan patriach Hsu Yun lecture Buddhism with Surangama sutra, that is his favorite,He used the definetion within the sutra to explain the sutra teaching.

It is new age era.
now a days, everything changes. everyone is free to define the term in thier own way. so, what is harmony?depend on what one's needs for manupulation. It often is not harmony but chaos because everyone want others to "harmony" with them instead of finding out what is what and live in balance and embracing.

I think lots of people doesnt understand harmony at all because they never raise up to the 4th chakra consciousness. If one stays in the survive, tribal, or power control conscious. There is no way for one to see what is harmony. this is because in thier mind, either you win or I win, you stay alive or me, you in control or me, there are all just duality thoughts. until they see someday oh it doesnt has to be going you or me way. there is the 3rd way, the 4th ways....infinity of ways to get what one wants and satisfied everyone too. Nothing will change until this realization.

And after this realization, one will not go back to the either you or me way. because that is struggling, suffering, all the time.

See, it is not about esoteric teaching, it is about open the heart, the crown with lotus of ten thousands pendals or unlimited boundary of thinking. Not to squese into one corner and thinking the whole world must follow. I am the center of universal.

Until then how can one see another side of coin? if one live in a must choose only one side, either this side or the otherside. Only,when one sees a coin has more then two side. ie, 4th chakra consciouness. then, one can accept the other side and all side of the coins.

[redtornado]

Hey, this is a good thing to bring up!! I have this prayer that we say .... God grant me the sereinty to accete the things I cannot change, The corage to change the things I can, And the wisdom to know the differance.

this is the serenity prayer..

Well thanks Jeff

[taltos]

It seems that we are collectively focused on the concept of "Good" vs. "Evil" here in our concept of the word "harmony." Perhaps we could actually move into a more productive discourse by attepting to look at the context of the word in another light.

I posted this earlier, but it seems that we were all too caught up in a pointless argument, so I'll rephrase. I'm interested in what anyone has to say, and I hope this allows us to move out of the realm of ethical and religious discussions, so Sandman doesn't have to step in and remind us that this is first and foremost a WC forum. Interesting, though, that it was not "James and his supportive posters" who brought time/space/energy/Chan into this discussion, or even lineage names, but others.

And just for clarification, my two posts (concerning one possible interpretation of a Kuen Kuit and the one I will paraphrase below) are simply my own interpretations, and I am left wondering if, since I am not expounding the same personal interpretations as others, I am included in the very same "problematic nature of the concept of "harmony" advanced
by James and his supportive posters"? Chadhuri Sifu, would you be kind enough to let me know, either through PM or post, if my definitions, as previously listed, fit into your statement above? It was simply too vague for me to be able to adequately understand, and I would not presume to put words into your mouth or put you into a vague and ill-suited general catagory. I would greatly appreciate your clarification as it relates to myself individually. Thank you in advance.

I would also like point out that, while you are certainly entitled to your opinion and interpretation of past events, they cannot be ascribed, in spirit or in practice, to that individual's students, teacher, etc. with any degree of validity. I have personally met students of yours that I found to be wonderfully pleasant and gracious individuals, as well as those who left a lot to be desired and I would have trouble justifying giving the time of day. And neither of those are used as judgements on you. Your actions are your actions, and any feelings I may have about you and your behavior stem from your actions alone, and not those of your seniors, juniors, teachers, and students. I would hope that we all understand and practice this, but it unfortunately seems not to be the case.

That said, here again is another way to view "harmony." Please let me know what you think.

We all have access to the dictionary entry (from a previous post), so I will only add that it is possible that the word is being used not in the sense of the root "harmoni" meaning "articulation" or "agreement," but in the sense of the root word "harmos" meaning "joint" or "joined."

Here's how I see the use of harmony in combat:

Harmony with one's self is (IMO) complete agreement in structure, intent, and energy.

Example: If I am stepping backwards in retreat while throwing a forward punch, I am not in harmony. There are conflicting directions and intents present.

Harmony with one's opponent is (IMO) cooperative structure, intent, OR energy.

Example: If you are stepping backwards in retreat, your energy is moving in that particular direction. If I step forward into the space you are vacating, I am directing my energy in the same direction as you. The result? You get more of what you were already doing, and I accomplish a goal (moving you backwards) without expending energy to "force" you to do it (I didn't push you backwards while you were stepping forwards, which would be direct conflict of energy).

It may be possible that the confusion in the definition is in applying a mental state of final result to the definition. That's not what I think of in the context of harmony. It could be seen not as agreement in final result, but as momentary agreement in energy vector.

Would I decide to be thrown to the ground? Probably not.

Would I decide to punch in a manner that would not allow contact? Probably not.

Would I throw a punch at an opponent? Surely.

If I was throwing a WC punch, would my elbow rise as I extended my fist away from my body? Yes.

If my opponent executed a tok sau or a gwat sau (in the specific context of coming from underneath my elbow and slapping it upwards), would they be cooperating with my already established upward elbow energetic? Yes.

I would consider the above example a moment in time when my opponent and I were in "harmony" in specific regards to the energy and direction of my elbow.

Please note that I only described ONE example so as to avoid any confusion or outside issues coming into play. There are certainly other definitions, as well as other examples.

I hope that helped clear things up.

-Levi

[yuanfen]

To answer Levi's query if I understand it clearly. In a previous post he said"Couldn't "Loi Lau Hoi Sung" be interpreted and seeking harmony?
After all, if they want to come in, you retain (allow them to come in). If they want to leave, you send away (allow them to leave).
Wouldn't using someone's momentum against them (i.e. cooperative energy) be combat in which the energies are in harmony (at least directionally)?
Just a thought...
Levi"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Levi
Context means much. In the context above I see no problem with
the usage of the term harmony being to represent appropriate use of energy- a smooth and effective response
without overusage of resources or energy. An operational meaning.... leaving the issues of morality unresolved.

My critique was at using the term generally in all contexts. Thus normatively if I were attacked I would not call my response as
operationally harmonious. I would use the term self defense.
Harmony may eventually result if we later go for a beer.Tsing Tao, Singha, Negra Modelo, Taj Mahal... but we would be going
for tea if only abominations like Coors or Bud were available.
But too much Tsing Tao may result in disharmony for the community and the participants.

Context brings out a fuller meaning of terms IMO.

Joy Chaudhuri

[JamesHFYofAZ]

Anerlich,

I find this insistence on treating a potential threat to one's life as something that you can make go away if you just refer to it with different, hifalutin, words to be rather disturbing

I said nothing of the emotional side, in that I would find it very disturbing that this attacker is out of control, not in reality, full of dis-harmony. I guess that it was not as vivid as it was in my mind, sorry about that, mate. I have noticed that you have a bit of animosity in your voicing opinion.

Philosophical and religious principles, with pure motivation, are good things to live by ... but Wing Chun and other fighting (OK combat, sorry but it's just another word) systems begin in situations where those principles no longer apply.

This sound like kung fu, and in kung fu, one chooses to fight or chooses to use there mind in relation to defence. If someone says one is a little bee itch would one fight? I would ask why?. He's are attacking me and thats unjustified, but the words are still empty, I feel no hostility, I just try to see the distortion of reality. (thanks to the Grasshopper)

Actually, I feel that my point of view is further along the path and closer to the truth than yours. In my teens and twenties I was a keen student of Zen and Buddhism, but with a bit more experience, and after some mistakes, I can see that these are just more concepts and labels you have to leave behind to see unadorned reality.

Change is good! Thanks for sharing.

Arrogant? Maybe, but read your own response to the other posters reference to what I posted. Then ask yourself who (else) is arrogant

In the eye of the beholder. Again it's a shame you take such an approach to these view/opinions/perceptions. If I sound arrogant in my word that have no voice than I am, but at this time I will say I am not trying to be, just clarifying info. although,You don't need to take it that way either! Just another side of the coin. But I can't expect you to be understanding of such a lower form as my self, Right! Since you know so much about Chan Philosophy and how it pertains to this thread, enlighten me, because all you have done is throw back what is give and replaced it with an angered approach. If you say no then you approach is closer to my understanding then we seem to agree on. I hope that made since!
Joy,

The problematic nature of the concept of "harmony" advanced by James and his supportive posters is also readily evident in a "sifu" in my metro area,some months ago on this list/forum, challenging me to a fight (my place or yours) because in his judgment I "disturbed" his harmony. Shows the very subjective (even when interpersonal in a group) nature of the definition of harmony involved in the posts of James and his supporters.

Stick to the Here and now, there is no need to try and dis credit anyone for any reason, even if you where the one provoking the situation as you are now! Keep you problems to your self and stick to the topic, if you don't like the topic, get out of the thread, if you don't want to do either then expect someone to say something. As for the Sifu that spoke to you and what I am speaking of is relevant to this how? That would make you the attacker. (Children, you can't take them any where!) Are you sure Your not the mouth boxer.
Victor, alway good to here your POV. Although not being a Christian or Buddhist, I see your view. I am more of a philosopher of life through understandings. It's hard to understand when the ones point fingers are not sharing but accusing. Just another look!

[taltos]

Thanks for your reply to my earlier thread.

Could you be so kind as to address the issues I raised just a few posts ago? I will rephrase and number the specific questions so as to avoid any confusion:

You made use of the general phrase "James and his supportive posters" in a previous post. I am James's Sihing, and thus a member of his Kung Fu Family. My previous posts were simply my own interpretations. Since I was not simply expounding the same personal interpretations as James, it would seem that I am not included in your vague generality. However, I would not presume to put words into your mouth or put you into a vague and ill-suited general catagory, so I would greatly appreciate your clarification as it relates to myself individually. Thus:

1. Am I included in your perceived "problematic nature of the concept of "harmony" advanced by James and his supportive posters"?

2. Why or Why Not?

As I also stated earlier, you are certainly entitled to your opinion and interpretation of past events and interactions with one particular person, but it seems contradictory to ascribe them, in spirit or in practice, to the students, teachers, etc. of that person with any degree of validity. I have personally met students of yours that I found to be wonderfully pleasant and gracious individuals, as well as those who left a lot to be desired and I would have trouble justifying giving the time of day (in the forms of a student some of my brothers and sisters and I used to practice with periodically while we were students at ASU, and a student of yours who grabbed my shirt and tried to fight me as I exited the restroom at last year's WC Friendship Picnic because of the issues between his Sifu and mine, just before you and the rest of your students left the event). Neither of those are used as judgements on you. Your actions are your actions, and any feelings I may have about you and your behavior stem from your actions alone, and not those of your seniors, juniors, teachers, and students. I would hope that we all understand and practice this, but it unfortunately seems not to be the case.

A while back, a trio of your students visited the kwoon I study in. I and a kung fu brother of mine recognized them, but my Sifu did not. At least two of them have been exposed to the Biu Ji Form (since they appear on your website playing the form), yet they decided to lie directly to my Sifu's face and claim absolutely no prior WC experience. My Sifu took the time to give them the same explaination he would give any non-experienced interested party that walks through the door, and they left. Would it be appropriate for me, and the participants on this forum, to assume that since students of yours had decided to ignore common courtesy and engage in simple, direct deception, that you also participate in those activities? I would say "no." I would say it would be more appropriate to judge you on your actions and words, and not on those of your students.

So:

3. Do you feel it is appropriate to judge a student by their Sifu?

4. Do you feel it is appropriate to judge a Sifu by their students?

I usually try my best to play by the rules. When I am involved in a conversation with someone, I usually let them dictate the intensity and depth pf the interation. Since you decided that it was appropriate and acceptible to not allow sleeping dogs to lie by dragging the past back into the here and now to use as some sort of commentary (I am still unsure of the point you were trying to make), it is certainly appropriate and acceptible for me to bring up these past events as well (even though you had already stated publicly that you do not keep track of your students as to what they do in their free time).

5. What exactly was the point you were trying to make by bringing up past events, events which have been settled and forgotten a long time ago by most of the parties involved?

Thank you in advance for your answers. I am sure they will go a long way towards clearing up the confusion that I (and perhaps others) have concerning your most recent posts.

If you do not feel that it is appropriate to share your answers publicly, I can certainly respect that. Feel free to PM me if that is the case.

-Levi

[Gangsterfist]

okay seriously bust out the thunderdome and we can settle this

Two men enter (or women so I am being PC here) and one man leaves....

[canglong]

originally posted by yuanfen
Context brings out a fuller meaning of terms IMO.

have you ever mentioned this to hendrik.

[Phenix]

Originally posted by canglong
have you ever mentioned this to hendrik.

Which one? phenix, or jiglypuffs, or latios or pikachu?

jiglypuffs, jiglypuffs, ....... , sleep sweet, sleep sweet...... enter the non dual...sleep sleep...