Return to the Source

Posted by: harlan

Return to the Source - 06/05/06 11:45 AM

'Return to the source'.

What does it mean to/for you?
Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: Return to the Source - 06/05/06 11:26 PM

Life and Death.

'The Source' - I feel comfort with imagining it as nothingness.
Posted by: MattJ

Re: Return to the Source - 06/06/06 08:50 AM

I take that as a kind of "Empty your cup" phrase. The source of all knowledge is an open mind.
Posted by: Stormdragon

Re: Return to the Source - 06/06/06 03:22 PM

Well I'm personally not sure exactly but for me it means shuting out all my preconceived notions and emptying my mind or cup as has been said above and just reoganizing my beliefs and thoughts with what I'm certain of.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Return to the Source - 06/06/06 03:34 PM

To me it means a few things,

return to the original essence of something, perhaps for inspiration.

return to the roots of something for guidance, inspiration etc (for example, the original teacher)

death
Posted by: Stormdragon

Re: Return to the Source - 06/06/06 07:06 PM

Or to just get back on the right track in life or something when you've gotten of the right path.
Posted by: trevek

Re: Return to the Source - 06/07/06 03:38 AM

Interesting thought, in Indian puppetry traditions it is believed that puppets were sent by the gods to entertain humans. When a puppet reaches the end of its working life it is given a 'funeral' in a river where it is believed to float back to the gods, a 'return to source'.
Posted by: SpeedyGonzales

Re: Return to the Source - 06/07/06 05:37 AM

I take it as a half-truth/half-lie. There are definitely some things which are better when we were in the "beginner's mind". Especially physically and in MA.

But morally, I disagree. Kid's aren't taught to lie. They figure it out themselves. I'm sure everyone remembers an early day that they "decided" to lie realizing that a lie could prevent punishment. Kids are amazingly violent too.

And everyone has their own "natural" issue they struggle with. Basically, every soul has some vulnerability. That is where "changing the source" comes into play.
Posted by: SpeedyGonzales

Re: Return to the Source - 06/07/06 05:40 AM

Quote:

I take that as a kind of "Empty your cup" phrase. The source of all knowledge is an open mind.




just to kick in some "absurd Zen", if everyone's cup was empty, who would fill it? Why is there anything to fill the cup to begin with?

We all realize we can "empty our cup" but what was in our cups and how did it get there to start with? Did someone put stuff in our cups? And if so, where did he/she/it get the material to put in our cups? And so on and so on and so on.

Why is there something instead of nothing?

What is the source?
Posted by: harlan

Re: Return to the Source - 06/07/06 08:02 AM

I'm reminded of that hilarious movie, 'City Slickers', and Curly's 'one thing'.

'Ya gotta figure it out yourself.'

Quote:

What is the source?


Posted by: SpeedyGonzales

Re: Return to the Source - 06/07/06 07:17 PM

^ Yup. And even if someone told you who/what the source was, you probably wouldn't believe them or care until you discover it on your own.
Posted by: Stormdragon

Re: Return to the Source - 06/08/06 12:59 PM

Quote:

I take it as a half-truth/half-lie. There are definitely some things which are better when we were in the "beginner's mind". Especially physically and in MA.

But morally, I disagree. Kid's aren't taught to lie. They figure it out themselves. I'm sure everyone remembers an early day that they "decided" to lie realizing that a lie could prevent punishment. Kids are amazingly violent too.

And everyone has their own "natural" issue they struggle with. Basically, every soul has some vulnerability. That is where "changing the source" comes into play.




So does this mean that people are naturally flawed and "evil" for lack of a better word, and lean more towards selfishness, greed, and other bad traits, or is it a product of our culture?
Posted by: trevek

Re: Return to the Source - 06/08/06 04:05 PM

Yes they are, because what is good and bad is a moral code set by society.

Survival, getting the most food etc, are natural tendencies which society can teach us to supress or develop.

The thing is that people, like other animals, also have a natural endency to seek out company and be nice to each other too.
Posted by: Kosh

Re: Return to the Source - 06/08/06 05:21 PM

When people see things as beautiful,
ugliness is created.
When people see things as good,
evil is created.

Anyways, the meaning of returning to the source depends on the context. If I see just the words, "returning to the source", and there is no context, my meaning for it is perhaps more spiritual. For me it is returning to the beginning. Beginning of what? Everything. And/Or maybe realizing the source...

Harlan, did you have any specific context in mind?
Posted by: harlan

Re: Return to the Source - 06/08/06 08:22 PM

Nope. Just what it means to me...something to think about.

Quote:

Harlan, did you have any specific context in mind?


Posted by: Mr_Heretik

Re: Return to the Source - 06/08/06 11:01 PM

The Source?

The Matrix, duh..

Posted by: Stormdragon

Re: Return to the Source - 06/08/06 11:16 PM

So without the imprint and indoctrination of society we are clean slates that are not good or bad, but just, are?
Posted by: SpeedyGonzales

Re: Return to the Source - 06/09/06 12:08 AM

who ever said we are clean slates? Which one of us has not sinned? (I can already see someone saying ME sarcastically lol...)
Posted by: Kosh

Re: Return to the Source - 06/09/06 07:13 AM

When people see things as beautiful,
ugliness is created.
When people see things as good,
evil is created.

Sin is defined/created by society. Like Trevek said, what is good and bad is a moral code set by society. If no one judges, there is no good or bad.
Posted by: Stormdragon

Re: Return to the Source - 06/09/06 08:43 PM

So then, an extension of that is, why were laws and rules created or sent to us in the first place? And what about the laws of nature which allow our species and at htis poit, all other species to continue to survive?
Only kill other creatures or people in self defense or the defense of your family, innocent people, territory or food supplies, etc., or, in the case of animal life, for needed food.

3. Only take the amount of resources form the world that you actually need, never too much or too little; you may take more than you need only if everyone in your community has had their fair share and agree to allow you to have extra and if that extra is non-perishable.

4. Use everything you take from the world and nature. Never waste anything.

5. Allow all other creatures access to food supplies and needed physical resources. Never deny them of what they need, except when hunting them for needed food.

6. Everyone in the community has to do their share of work for the community. Everyone has a job or place within the community.

7. Never take anything that has been rightfully claimed by another person or animal.
Posted by: SpeedyGonzales

Re: Return to the Source - 06/10/06 01:34 AM

Quote:

Sin is defined/created by society. Like Trevek said, what is good and bad is a moral code set by society. If no one judges, there is no good or bad.




That's only if you're atheistic - then you say God defines what is sin, because the theistic definition of sin if "rebellion against God's will".

But the non-judgemental part is still valid, at least in most religions. Jesus said "Do not judge so that you will not be judged."
Posted by: Stormdragon

Re: Return to the Source - 06/10/06 02:36 AM

I think laws were given to us by God, but for practical reasons (That's if you believe in God I guess, let's not turn this into a theist vs. atheist thread htough, please). Look at any of the ten commandments for example, or any other laws of hte bible. They all have practical reasons.
However, I see what you're saying. Watch the movie "the God's must be crazy." It's all about that sort of thing.
Posted by: SpeedyGonzales

Re: Return to the Source - 06/10/06 04:43 AM

O I don't intend to turn this into a "God vs. Atheist" thing.

That's why when I spoke on them I spoke on them as seperate discussions, in a sense.

We have to keep this from being a "There is/isn't a God" thread and yet we can't leave the belief in God out of the equation and still keep this thread valid.

So I'll adress both (note the "theistic" and "atheistic" responses)

As for "The Gods Must be Crazy" I must have been too young when I watched it, I just remembered laughing at the kids hitting each other lol
Posted by: harlan

Re: Return to the Source - 06/10/06 09:52 AM

Let's keep the topic 'what return to the source' a little more on mutual ground. It isn't about focusing on an religion, and it gets that way...the thread will be closed.

Back on topic please.
Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Return to the Source - 06/10/06 09:02 PM

To get back to the original question, or "return to the source" , I would like to give you my experience.

I started out in Isshin Ryu karate and Judo in 1962. Since then, I've studied Shotokan, Shuri Ryu, TKD, jujutsu, Aikido, sword, Kyudo, Kong Soo Do, and back to Isshin Ryu.
Each art I studied, I tried to get "as close to the source" of the development of the art as I could.

I wouldn't study with "just anybody"... I purposefully sought out people who had studied with Shimabuku Sensei in Isshin Ryu, Nishiyama in Shotokan, Trias in Shuri Ryu, etc. to get "as close to the source" as existed in the style and could be visited here. In Aikido, my teachers were deshis with Tohei and ukes for Ueshiba Sensei.

When you say "return to the source" to me, it means that you get as close to the origination of the art as possible. Understanding karate from Shimabuku Sensei's and Nishiyama Sensei's perspectives, Aikido from Ueshiba and Tohei's perspectives, gives you a full grasp of what their arts were developed to do and accomplish.

My purpose in training with the people I've trained with and under, is to get that perspective... and while I've trained with many hundreds of others (if not thousands), I have kept my information base as close to the originators of the styles and arts as possible... which is probably why I have such an attitude about "junk" martial arts and "xtreme" junk MA.

Gaining the perspective of the founder of a martial art gives you a whole different picture of what constitutes "legitimate" technique and "junk" techniques... and it might surprise you to find out just how violent many of these "peaceful" arts were. While the "do" form of martial arts is a personal search for one's path, the "jitsu" form of the arts is the search for perfection of technique... and many of the old ones used brutality to mold character. Understanding that, you have a different perspective yourself...

Posted by: harlan

Re: Return to the Source - 07/21/06 01:46 PM

bump
Posted by: ButterflyPalm

Re: Return to the Source - 07/22/06 08:14 AM

When I was young,
I thought of changing the world,
But when I realised,
The world was not going to change,
I thought of changing my country;
But when I realised,
My country was not going to change,
I thought of changing my family;
But when I realised,
My family was not going to change,
I thought of changing my dog;
But when I realised,
My dog was not going to change,
I left them all alone.
Now on my death bed,
I realised that,
Perhaps if I had changed myself first?
Posted by: Christie

Re: Return to the Source - 08/17/06 01:22 PM

Quote:

'Return to the source'.

What does it mean to/for you?




aum.

"Would you know it if you saw it"
"Yes, no, I don't know .. what if I did see it and I didn't know it .. what if it was the chicken?"
Posted by: Christie

Re: Return to the Source - 08/17/06 01:25 PM

Quote:

So then, an extension of that is, why were laws and rules created or sent to us in the first place? And what about the laws of nature which allow our species and at htis poit, all other species to continue to survive?
Only kill other creatures or people in self defense or the defense of your family, innocent people, territory or food supplies, etc., or, in the case of animal life, for needed food.

3. Only take the amount of resources form the world that you actually need, never too much or too little; you may take more than you need only if everyone in your community has had their fair share and agree to allow you to have extra and if that extra is non-perishable.

4. Use everything you take from the world and nature. Never waste anything.

5. Allow all other creatures access to food supplies and needed physical resources. Never deny them of what they need, except when hunting them for needed food.

6. Everyone in the community has to do their share of work for the community. Everyone has a job or place within the community.

7. Never take anything that has been rightfully claimed by another person or animal.




The problem here lays in that people are lazy. This assumes that everyone will do their part, always. There will always be that one person who will get the ball rolling and think ... why does he get the same amount of milk I do? I'm the one that milks the cow.