|
Fighting and Enlightenment
It is generally accepted that any truly
Enlightened individual would be opposed to violence of any sort, such as is
demonstrated in the Bible with the teaching that one should ‘Turn the other
cheek’ to an attacker, offering them to hit you again on the other side. I
would like to have a look at this idea though, to see whether this would
always be the case – if all truly spiritual people would (or indeed
should) be pacifists, as is often suggested.
Personally, I was often in trouble at school as
a youngster for fighting, and at 16 years old was in the local rugby team,
seriously into weight-training, had trained (briefly) in a few martial arts
and had even tried boxing; I read books on fighting techniques and loved
martial arts films.
But at 17 years old I got into the
Self-Awareness and self questioning process and gave it all up; giving away
all my weights and my books and stopping playing rugby, as I no longer
wished to hurt anyone – or get hurt either for that matter.
Then, about two years ago, and due to very
high-blood pressure, I was advised to go back to exercising (which I did, in
the form of weight-training); and this led to my looking at the subject of
Self-Defence again. Since then, I have attended several classes of Aikido at
two different schools, and even tried a bit of Tai-Boxing. Hence, I wanted
to look at whether or not Enlightened people should be party to such
practices.
This led me first to remember the Samurai
warriors, who were proud and fearless, and, so it is said, were devoted to
the pursuit of Enlightenment. Likewise, the stories of the Ninja describe
Enlightened assassins with almost mythical powers.
More common examples of a connection between
Enlightenment and fighting include the Shaolin Monks and similar groups, who
use their physical training in martial-arts as a tool to progress their path
to Enlightenment; often performing amazing feats of endurance and
flexibility as they demonstrate their lethal fighting skills.
I am then reminded of the story in the Bhagavad
Gita, where Arjuna wants to give up fighting as he does not want to be party
to anyone getting killed. But Krishna explained to him strongly that as a
Warrior, and a King and leader of his people, it was his job and obligation
to do what he had to do and lead his people into battle; and as long as he
did so whilst in the correct frame of mind, there was nothing wrong with
doing what had to be done.
So, looking at the above we now have the whole
spectrum of possibilities, ranging from: being totally opposed to violence
in any form, no matter what the situation; to, accepting it as part of your
role as a human being, if that’s what you do, but nothing more; to, learning
a bit of self-defence in preparation for a potentially dangerous situation;
to, making the training an integral part of your spiritual path; to,
devoting one’s life to being the deadliest assassin that ever lived (let's
say).
Amazingly, all the above apparent contradictions
have one common thread. The one aspect that is constant throughout is the
directive that one should remain conscious and self-aware, or act in
devotion to the Being within (or however it is phrased in that teaching).
To me, the last point is the bottom line and is
the most vital point in everything; and is the one I repeat in all my talks
and teachings. ‘Do what you do, but practise being conscious and aware while
you do it’. The action is not the point, regardless of what it is, or what
people may think about it. While there are always consequences to anything
we do, the deepest of all consequences is the truth within, and that
determines the reality without anyway. You can only really be true to that.
Stick with it, and just do what you do and be conscious or aware while you
do it. :o)
|