David Dunn
16th June 2005, 20:42
Gassho,
time for a new discussion. Adrian said on the "Kaiso has failed" thread:
I do have a few issues with the way WSKO acts in a group-like, hierarchical fashion. This is a possible area of our failure to implement Kaiso's goal. But that's for a separate post.
Paul said later:
My understanding of Kaiso's philosophy is that it is both a personal and a group ideal. The ideal is that you develop your own positive attributes so that you can both better your own position in life and have a positive influence on your society as a whole.
Obviously the relevant discussion is what Anders has in his signature "nakaba wa jiko no shiawase wo, nakaba wa hito no shiawase wo", which is "think half for your own happiness and half for other people's." Kaiso's is of course the middle way. As I've read it today, here is what he says:
Regarding the issue of selfishness versus selflessness, ego assertion versus egoless existence, individualism versus conformity, substantial evidence point to the improtance of both preserving and developing one's unique idenity as well as nurtuing the vital bond which exists among individuals. Men are not self-existent, but mutually depend upon one another not only for survival and insurance of other basic needs, but also for fulfilment and betterment. This fact of functional togetherness is clearly evidenced by the existence of the family as a universal institution, a truly organic unit in which individual, because of biological needs, must depend on a symbiotic relation in order to survive and lead a meaningful existence. This inderdependent nature asks that certain restraints be placed on individual freedom, whereas certain attitudes and habits such as honesty, tolerance, impartiality and unselfishness are cultivated to insure (sic) good human relations. This is vital, for free indulgence of one's ego would only lead to endless friction and chaos, the consequences of which would be disastrous.
Although Man's very nature calls for clsoe association with other men, this by no means implies that the individual should forfeit his identity or always conform with the group. Multiplicities and divergences have proven themselves to be valuable as they present new and stimulating potentialities and alternatives and require critical examination of their worth and truth. The individuality of the individual must thus be preserved; self-reliant, secure, critical, responsible individuals must be fostered.Each indicidual must be allowed to be himself as the universe is an interaction of unique elements.
Doshin So, What is Shorinji Kempo?
Years ago, Rob Villiers explained this to me, in what I think is a perceptive way. The 'half for yourself' bit was the important bit for the original audience of Kaiso's day - the postwar generation of Japanese youngsters, in the aftermath of individuals completely subsuming their own ideas to the institutions of the state. The 'half for others' bit is important in present Europe and America, where individualism is a dominant idea.
It didn't used to be of course. Our grandparents were quite happy in a group dynamic. Most were members of something - church, trade union, political party, WI etc. My grandfather is nearly 90, and does church stuff every day. My missus asked me if he's devoted to God, and I realised that maybe he is, but really he's devoted to the church, and to his family. This kind of thing used to be laudable, considered self-disciplined and restrained. Why isn't it any more?
time for a new discussion. Adrian said on the "Kaiso has failed" thread:
I do have a few issues with the way WSKO acts in a group-like, hierarchical fashion. This is a possible area of our failure to implement Kaiso's goal. But that's for a separate post.
Paul said later:
My understanding of Kaiso's philosophy is that it is both a personal and a group ideal. The ideal is that you develop your own positive attributes so that you can both better your own position in life and have a positive influence on your society as a whole.
Obviously the relevant discussion is what Anders has in his signature "nakaba wa jiko no shiawase wo, nakaba wa hito no shiawase wo", which is "think half for your own happiness and half for other people's." Kaiso's is of course the middle way. As I've read it today, here is what he says:
Regarding the issue of selfishness versus selflessness, ego assertion versus egoless existence, individualism versus conformity, substantial evidence point to the improtance of both preserving and developing one's unique idenity as well as nurtuing the vital bond which exists among individuals. Men are not self-existent, but mutually depend upon one another not only for survival and insurance of other basic needs, but also for fulfilment and betterment. This fact of functional togetherness is clearly evidenced by the existence of the family as a universal institution, a truly organic unit in which individual, because of biological needs, must depend on a symbiotic relation in order to survive and lead a meaningful existence. This inderdependent nature asks that certain restraints be placed on individual freedom, whereas certain attitudes and habits such as honesty, tolerance, impartiality and unselfishness are cultivated to insure (sic) good human relations. This is vital, for free indulgence of one's ego would only lead to endless friction and chaos, the consequences of which would be disastrous.
Although Man's very nature calls for clsoe association with other men, this by no means implies that the individual should forfeit his identity or always conform with the group. Multiplicities and divergences have proven themselves to be valuable as they present new and stimulating potentialities and alternatives and require critical examination of their worth and truth. The individuality of the individual must thus be preserved; self-reliant, secure, critical, responsible individuals must be fostered.Each indicidual must be allowed to be himself as the universe is an interaction of unique elements.
Doshin So, What is Shorinji Kempo?
Years ago, Rob Villiers explained this to me, in what I think is a perceptive way. The 'half for yourself' bit was the important bit for the original audience of Kaiso's day - the postwar generation of Japanese youngsters, in the aftermath of individuals completely subsuming their own ideas to the institutions of the state. The 'half for others' bit is important in present Europe and America, where individualism is a dominant idea.
It didn't used to be of course. Our grandparents were quite happy in a group dynamic. Most were members of something - church, trade union, political party, WI etc. My grandfather is nearly 90, and does church stuff every day. My missus asked me if he's devoted to God, and I realised that maybe he is, but really he's devoted to the church, and to his family. This kind of thing used to be laudable, considered self-disciplined and restrained. Why isn't it any more?