I think it means "If you want peace, prepare for war"... I guess it kind of makes sense if you believe that war and peace are codependent, which I think they are.. maybe..
That's actually a militaristic justification for arms production and escalation. Non-violence is based on the opposite - ahimsa - eliminating the violence within first - it does not forbid violence in extremis, just encourages you to take primary responsibility. Folk who 'believe' in violence will always put the cause of violence outside themselves - 'blame culture'... Taoism encourages 'no blame' It's way more complex than this btw... War and Peace are only co-dependent from a 'war' mentality ie peace is viewed as a lull or space between wars (during which you continue to prepeare for the next one, thus causing and creating 'the next one' ) From a non-violent viewpoint (mine) Peace is a state in its own right (war is the aberration) that can only be created from within individuals own lives by taking responsibility for ourselves and learning to communicate on an equal basis (ie have dialogue) with our fellow human beings instead of arguing with and threatening them into accepting our 'right' point of view - the modern rhetoric about 'international democracy' and using that as a justification for breaching international conventions on warfare are a classic example of 'war' thinking imho You couldn't make up the stuff that's happened in recent years... "We're bringing you democracy guys - whoops, now you got a civil war, sorry bout that - hey why do you hate us so much? We made you free enough to kill each other in sectarian warfare an all...Oh okay so we said we were an army of liberation and not occupation but I guess when we invaded you it looked kinda different huh? etc etc etc" Time to change guys - it starts with you and me, governments just screw it up
A well argued point Taiji Bufferfly. I agree we are in a 1984 scenario where "war is peace" and "democracy is occupation". However, while your viewpoint may appear an ideal solution, I believe can lead to more violence in itself. Your system works perfectly as long as everyone else in the universe agrees with it and lives by it but as long a someone isn't playing along it all falls apart. Let's take tibet, they were a isolationist country and more or less non-militaristic and because there was a militaristic nation next door they left open the door to invasion and now there is no tibet. I think a healthy society should have a mix. Some who abhor war under any circumstance and will always preach words of reason but we also need the warriors to ensure that there is a place where people are free to express their ideas of peace. Either extreme is unhealthy. You could argue that in tai chi terms you are out of balance and you do not acknowledge dark and light sides of yourself. Do you think by totally denying all violence and only embracing peace are you not breaking the yin/yang relationship?
That all depends on how far you are willing to construe the whole Yin/Yang idea. You could say that I am not in balance as I don't have a vagina as well as a penis thus are not following the laws of Yin and Yang in a male/female sense. Hard and soft, light and dark; they are relative. Your idea of hard may, and obviously does, differ from other peoples. I am sure the Taoists would side with you on remaining true to your nature, but then how of Tao is Tai Chi?
So the thing to do is to just borrow one now and again... Peace is earned, it's not a natural state. We have to recognise the violence within ourselves and others and learn to overcome it. Aggressive, frightened people will aim their violence where they think they can 'satisfy' their needs. A human doesn't need to become an animal to defeat it, he can use his intelligence and strategy to negate violence and cause the least harm possible. The main difference is that our job is peacekeeper, not aggressor, that takes considerable training. As an absolute last resort we may have to take life to keep the peace, but there are usually many possibilities before that time comes. We earn our peace with considerably more training than the animal fighter, but we can live in peace, they just live from one adrenaline 'fix' to another.
Problem is that I am not Tom Jones, the most Yang person in the world ever. That guy must have got soo much Yin over the years...
It isn't a system - it's an individual attitude. Systems always encourage wars rather than discouraging them ime. There is no way that being non-violent can lead to more violence in itself - unless we're denying logic at this point. Again a system-led decision, free individuals would probably never have chosen this imo. The PRC (and all old-school communist dictatorships for that matter) are intrinsicly expansionist by nature (as are capitalist democracies in many cases also). There are also historical issues between Tibet and China that were being acted out - past wars between the two, also as a religiously ruled country on the doorstep of a country who's doctrine had become 'religion is poison' they never stood a chance. Imperialism and genocide are the logical result of continuous 'war thinking' which is an extension of a 'violence is reality' mentality imho Please explain a 'healthy mix' of violence and non-violence!!! I'd rather be opposed and suppressed by the society I live in than 'tolerated' tbh It is possible to train as a warrior with a doctrine of non-violent behaviour at your core. Our current western 'warrior training' methods require desensitizing and dehumanising people into animalistic killing machines ime/o You could - IF - you had either not read a word I'd posted, didn't understand Taiji philosophy and methodology or just simply didn't know what you were talking about... No, because it's not what I said :bang: - yin and yang are nothing to do with "violence or peace" represented as a dualistic dichotomy. There is no "yin or yang" only the relationship of Yin and yang - this is a common and destructive misunderstanding of the Taiji (yin and yang) - it's always a question of balance and whether the direction of the yin/yang process is creative and harmonious or destructive and discordant imho - understanding that is a requirement for truly understanding Taiji as a martial art imo otherwise it just degenerates into any old boxing system... :Angel:
I know we have drifted far off topic but it is an interesting discussion at least. Taiji, you say this is an individual choice. Which I completely respect, but how how far does the philosophy reach in you daily life. Are you vegan? Do you on wear clothes that are produced by not exploiting workers or use leather products? Do you not buy from a supermarket? Do you not use environmentally damaging forms of transport especially air travel? Do you not use any oil products produced outside of the UK and US. I think you see where I'm coming from. You may profess non-violence on one hand but are you any less guilty of supporting violence when someone else is doing the violence for you? P.S. I was wondering where these free people are? I have never met a truely free person in my life.
Yes a great philosophy, along the lines of why grow for tomorrow, I have food for today. It's funny we spend our lives lambasting our governments for lack of forethought but stick on a saffron robe and it becomes wisdom of ages.
Listen up PB, yes fine we live in a world where there will be chaos and there will be order. This goes on within and without. All well and good: everything is as it should be - and just get on and do what you have to do. Do your best - simple as. And while you are at it take this advice: A particular train of thought persisted in, be it left or right, up or down, cannot fail to produce its results in character and circumstances. A person cannot directly choose their circumstances but surely they can choose their thoughts, and so shape their circumstances.
who cares ? Is it my mess?? not my job to clean up mess. its a big playground. free - you are as free as your mind is. Trapped yourself have you. Go cry somewhere else please.
Sadly untrue. Totally passivity in the face of certain kinds of aggression just encourages the aggressor to go further. Unless you think WWII could've been prevented by everybody just engaging in reasoned discussion with Hitler.
This is the one of the worst lies anyone has ever said and where I fundamentally disagree with eastern philosophy. In western culture freedom of the body and freedom of the mind were never separated. If you take freedom of the mind as the only true freedom then you don't need to ban slavery because you can say their mind is free I only own the body. Look at the period in history these philosophies were developed. If they went around preaching freedom of the body and mind the chinese emperors would wiped them out. It is the same with the non-violence stance. Every authoritarian society will encourage a non-violent philosophy because it stops people from revolting and changing the system. Look at the Labour government in the UK. They now want to ban swords because criminals use them. They banned guns but criminals still use them. What next? Ban martial arts because criminals can use them. This is why I have choosen to say, ok I will live mostly within the law, but I will use violence to defend those I care for and ideals I stand for. I marched peacefully with millions other people in UK to try to stop this idiotic war. It did nothing and now we have chaos in Iraq. Our non-violence allowed our country to kill thousands.
So you think if you rampaged violently, we wouldn't have gone into Iraq? Or would we have gone into Iraq anyway, but had another guy in prison at 400 quid a day? (assuming you are old enough to go to prison which, judging by the weakness of your argument, I doubt)
Martial enough for me thanks. I've tested my capabilities in training plenty, but don't tend to get involved in fights outside of training. That said, I found myself in the middle of a bar brawl this weekend - I managed to split up a few fights and deal with a guy who decided to have a go at me, all without being hit or doing anything to injure anyone else. I'm counting that a successful test of my taiji I don't consider myself a 'tai chi fighter'. I practise taiji as a martial art, and can fight if I need to, but I certainly wouldn't call myself a fighter.
We were and still are a 'war-thinking' nation therefore non-violence is not an option that is currently open to us - however as I said before: non-violence and pacifism are not the same (it helps if you read posts before responding emotionally ime). Our entire civilization is currently based on 'war-like thinking' (it's also connected to patriarchy btw but that really is a different discussion) - but change has to start somewhere. I repeat my earlier questions to you, plus another one: Do you create the world? Are you shaping your experiences or are they shaping you? Do you like the world the way it is? Are you prepared to accept stuff you object to (ie violence) ? If you say 'yes' - now that is the definition of passivity and pacifism imho 'Non-violence' is an active way of life not a simple standpoint or political view, perhaps you could read up on Ghandi's ideas and come back to me... Back to colouring in... No offence but - You live how you want to. That's perhaps the only genuine 'fact' anyone's written in this entire thread so far imho... :Angel:
Who said anything about rampage? You are making the assumption that those who use violence are uncontrolled and disorganised. Since you are wiser than me liokault, prove your reasoning ability. Argue a method of stopping Nazi germany non-violently. Chamberlain tried and let the people of Poland pay the price. What price would you pay?
