From: chan@lpf.umd.edu (Stephen Chan)
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
Subject: Re: Well, well... (last)
Date: 9 Jan 93 04:20:40 GMT
Reply-To: sc1u@andrew.cmu.edu
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park


    This is my last reply in this thread - I'll take it offline to
sc1u@andrew.cmu.edu.

In article <1993Jan8.121745.7150@sei.cmu.edu> psc@sei.cmu.edu (Peter Capell) writes:
>For our viewing audience: Steve and I are friends.  Steve asked me privately
>if we could push hands when he comes to the 'Burgh.  The phrase above was a
>joke because Steve was arguing with me and I am just being pompous with him on
>purpose.  
>

    Yep, we're friends. I figure friends are allowed to disagree and argue.

>>>Not at all, I am a well educated and sexually deprived.
>
>Alas Steve, you are apparently too young to remember the Saturday Night Live

    Sheesh...of course I remember it, I'm not some fetal undergrad fer
chrissakes!
    I just found my actual situation ironically at odds with being an ignorant
slut. At best, I could be a well educated slut.

>My comment here was that Christianity (the west) has no analogous activity to
>eastern meditation to derive meaning.  It is an essential distinction.  It
>could not possibly "sound familiar" that people might spend hours meditating
>on a single Bible phrase for example, because it doesn't happen at all in the
>same way.  There is no analogous activity.

    But there *are* analogous activities. You just aren't aware of them. If
you do some research in Christian Mysticism, you will find that it exists, but
is more often based on a conception of God as immanent, and not transcendant
{which seems to be the case in Hindu mysticism}

>By all means, cite a bunch of eastern masters who advocate book learning as
>being essential to enlightment.  Further, document that this is the real
>character of eastern thinking on the subject of enlightenment.

    I'll be glad to provide more once I get back to Pgh, but for now I'll
provide just a little bit...
    Here's an extract from Masao Abe, contemporary Japanese Zen guy:
    "It is clear that Zen is not philosophy. It is beyond words and intellect
and is not, as in the case of philosophy, a study of of the processes
governing thought and conduct, nor a theory of principles or laws that
regulate people and the universe. For the realization of Zen, practice is
absolutely necessary. Nevertheless, Zen is neither a mere anti-intellectualism
nor is it an encouragement to animal-like spontaneity. Rather, it embraces a
profound philosophy. Although intellectual understanding cannot be a
substitute for Zen's awakening, practice without a proper and legitimate form
of intellectual understanding is often misleading. An intellectual
understanding without practice is is certainly powerless, but practice without
learning is apt to be blind. Therefore I would like to clarify as much as
possible the philosophy which Zen embraces." - Masao Abe, Zen and Western
Thought

    I have more, but this stuff really belongs on something like
alt.religion.eastern.

>Nope. At least not if you accept the premise that calmness is the first step
>to knowledge.  For an easterner, their are first principles--there is no
>enlightenment in the intellect itself is one of them.  There is no
>enlightenment without complete calm, is another.  

    Read up on Christian mysticism. I _don't_ practice Christian mysticism,
but I've investigated it and found that they say similar things - calm the
mind, clear away the sense of self, etc...

>You said it not me.  Westerners are in general to uncommitted, too weak, and
>too frivolous to take the real medicine, so they water it down.

    In My Not-at-all Humble Opinion, these criticisms can be levelled at any
wealthy, fast paced society. If you live in some crummy, dirt poor 3rd world
country, you don't have much of a choice except to take the real medicine. If
you live in a wealthy society, where each individual has lots of mobility,
freedom and opportunities, then not only has the "real medicine" lost much of
it's appeal, but many aspects of it may be just plain obsolete.
    I'm almost *POSITIVE* that in rural China/Taiwan, there are old masters
bemoaning the lack of commitment, weakness and frivolity of the younger
generation. Yet, they live in an eastern situation.
    It is not some peculiarly Western affliction, as you seem to believe, but
a "disease" which occurs because of increased wealth and opportunity. Given a
choice between being a shit-hauling farmer always at the mercy of the local
warlord, or being a free and independant master of combat, the choice seems
pretty clear - no matter how hard the training.
    But given the choice between being an unemployed master of combat, or
being a wealthy lawyer, or a wealthy doctor, or brilliant scientist, or a
crafty corporate executive, or a famous pro athelete, or a renowned artist,
the choice becomes MUCH harder. And if you make the choice to be a Greenoch
master, there's no urgency - after all, if the neighborhood gets rough, you
can always MOVE!!!!

    When the East is as materially well off as the West, I doubt that your
anti-Western sentiments will be very convincing. Religion and spirituality
has always been more popular among the poor - "blessed are the poor".


>Our way of life is destructive of others and itself.  

    Stop flagellating yourself for being a Westerner, round-eye. Once the
Asian folk take over the world, they'll take pleasure in oppressing your sorry
white asses.


>optimal representation of these sounds in english--you learn language by
>hearing it, not reading it.  The written word should reflect something as
>close to the english sound as possible however, and in no (f'ing) way
>does an "X" sound anything like a "sh" or a "q" sound like a "ch."  

    Ooooolala - what an entry! I have a clean Anglo-centric attack on you, big
guy.

    Just because the romanization is to the western alphabet DOESN'T mean that
it has to conform to English pronunciations of the sounds. What about Germans,
Spaniards, Frenchies, Italians and all those others???
    Pinyin is for representing Chinese to all users of the Roman alphabet, not
just for the ease and convenience of Americans.

>employed by the Chinese authors of posts on soc.culture.china, and you would
>make the mapping usable for reading where a representation such as "bei[4]"
>indicates not a phoneme, but a specific character's meaning.

    Nope. bei4 is just a specific sound - my [concise] Mandarin dictionary
gives no less than 10 characters which are read as bei4. To get the meaning,
you have to have the context, or the actual character.

>>	You obviously do have some consideration, otherwise you wouldn't go
>>through the effort of posting them.
>
>Well, it's true, I like the interplay.  But the value of the interplay which I
>ascribe to my views is another matter entirely.

    Well, we finally agree on something! I think these things are interesting 
too.

    Stephen

Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts