Kanos examples of Seiryoku Zenyo or Jita Kyoei for everyday life

Anatol wrote:If you see "seiryoku zenyo" as a foundamental priciple of nature, it only describes, "what is" foundamental in nature (descriptive). What is foundamental in nature isn't automatically good for ethics. In nature there is the survival of the fittest, but that would be no foundamental principle for ethics, because ethics ask, what is good and righteous for individuals and for society (normativ). To go from "what is" (descriptive) to "what should be" (ethically) is a false conclusion - often done and known as naturalistic fallacy.

Anatol,
thanks for that clarification. I think, I now understand the type of distinction you made between "fundamental" and "universal". Of course, you're right. Initially, I was thinking you were using the two expressions rather synonym. My fault.

Anatol wrote:For sure it wouldn't rule out Human Rights. But if you see "jita kyoei" as a foundamental, universal ethical principle, on which you can build society (like Kano does, as I understand the Kano quotes above from noboru), there would be no Human Rights, because Human rights first and foundamental on rights of individuals only because the are human beeings. They have no duties for selfperfection, be part of perfection of society and so on.

Agreed, yes, we (or most of us, at least) fortunately live in a society were (our) human rights are acknowledged and granted, just because we are human beings, and agreed, that rights come without obligations or duties like self-perfection or trying to be part of the perfection of society. But then, some of us start to practice  jūdō, and while it is clear, that most will not know it at that moment, I think that after some time, they should know and accept those "new obligations", as, obviously, they seem to be parts of this "jūdō". It's still a decision of one's own free will, in compliance with the human rights, to engage in an activity with such goals, or not. If one does, that still doesn't deprive him of his fundamental human rights, it just imposes certain voluntary adopted duties to him.

Anatol wrote:If these ideals stay private and not become law, then there is no problem at all and they may be helpful in daily life.

They aren't "laws". They are ideals of something, chosen voluntarily. If somebody hates to sing, he's free to do so, and will not have to sing, in our society. However, if he chooses to join a choir, chances are, that to sing will be mandatory there, even for him. Therefore, I think he should either sing, or better leave that chorus again.

By the way, in an earlier posting you wrote, as an answer to one of wdax's comments:

Anatol wrote:For myself I prefer a society which is build on Individuality, Freedom, Human Rights, principle of legal certainty, democracy and no obligation of perfection in any sense. Kanos view lacks individual rights and freedom and has a strong affinity to see the individual as a part of society with lots of duties.  Peace and harmony and mutual prosperity are also possible in a dictatorship whereas freedom and human rights and tolerance never can lead to repression and most times they lead to a human society and to welfare.

While I also prefer to live in a free society that accepts the human rights of myself and everybody else, in the meantime I think that our society has developed to a point, where a little bit more of "we" again, instead of always only "me, me, me" could absolutely be a positive thing. Not legally enforced, of course.

Anatol wrote:You mustn't be shocked. Thats a very old discussion between Humanists and Liberals and dates back even to antic China between Confucianists and Daoists.

I didn't use the "shocked-smiley" because of that discussion, but because of my obviously poor understanding and use of English, and my also obvious lack of being able to express my thoughts clear enough in that language, in a way suitable to the principle of Sei-ryoku Zen’yō. But, you may rest assured, that, according with what I wrote earlier and you didn't read, I can live with it - sufficiently comfortable, that is.

Jihef wrote:

wdax wrote:This needs a little correction, but you already are on the way.

"Zen" 善  means "good" or "for good purpose". Seiryoku-zenyo clearly is a moral principle: To use one´s physical and mental power with maximum efficiency to do good things". Please remember that it is shortened form seiryoku-kaizen-katsuyo. But there is no definition of what is good or not, so jita-kyo´ei was added. "Good is, what leads to mutual welfare - physical, moral and mental".

Where is the "LIKE" button in this forum, again ?

It's the + / - mark at the top right of the post text block.

Source: http://judoinfo.com/seiryoku2.htm

The meaning of Seiryoku Zenyo was clarified even more. According to Kodokan Judo research, the Kodokan Bunkakai (Kodokan Culture Association) was established [in 1922] with the purpose of serving society through practice of the principles of Seiryoku Zenyo, the nature of which is found in the following pledge:

PLEDGE

This association idealizes the achievement of all man's purposes in accordance with the best application of seiryoku. Based on this doctrine, this association:
1, is determined to develop each and every body into robust health, to refine one's knowledge, and morals, and to become an effective part of society;
2, with regards to the nation, will respect national unity, esteem history, and be diligent at improving what is necessary for the prosperity of the nation;
3, with regards to society, will effect thorough harmony through mutual help and mutual compromise with individuals and with groups;
4, with regards to the world in general, will remove itself from racial prejudice and strive just as equally to elevate culture, and seek the prosperity of mankind.

ESSENTIAL POINTS
1, the best application of seiroku-zenyo lies in one's self-realization,
2, one's self-realization is attained through the help of others' self-realization,
3, self-realization is the basis of human prosperity.

These points are published in more sources - for example in the books too
- Jigoro Kano and the Kodokan - An Innovative Response To Modernisation - from Kodokan Judo Institute and Alex Bennent from kendo-world.com
- Judo Memoirs of Jigoro Kano, Brian N. Watson, - there are chapters 76, 77 about Kodokan Bunkakai

Source: http://judoinfo.com/seiryoku2.htm

(4) The Way of Seiryoku Zenyo Jita Kyoei

Professor Kano stated in the kunwa (discourse on teachings) of the kagamibiraki ceremony, (the first day of Judo practice) at Kodokan in January of the 11th year of Showa (1936): "The fundamental meaning of Judo is the most practical application of seiryoku. With virtue as the purpose, it is the most effective application of seiryoku. Virtue aids in the continued development of group life and anything that hampers this is bad. In this meaning loyalty and faith are virtues. The continued development of group life and social life is attained by sojo sojo (mutual help and mutual compromise) and jita kyoei. Therefore, this is also a virtue and is the fundamental meaning of Judo".

I found there the interesting text of recollection of Shuichi Nagaoka (10th dan) about the application of Seiryoku Zen'yo. It is not directly Kano's example but is from one Kano's student from Kodokan early times ( info about him: http://www.judo-ch.jp/english/legend/nagaoka/ )

Source: http://judoinfo.com/seiryoku2.htm

(2) Seiryoku Zenyo: Theory of Application

The principles of technique of Kodokan Judo are "kuzushi (unbalancing the opponent), tsukuri (movement and positions to prepare to throw the opponent), and kake (throwing)". These are explained as the principles of Seiryoku Zenyo today; however, in the early period of Judo the principles were explained mainly by such terms as "Gentleness turns away the sturdy", "the unity of gentleness and strength", and other phrases. What provided the pioneering role of "Judo", namely "Seiryoku Zenyo" were Professor Kano's ideas which were set forth in the 43rd year of Meiji (1910). This is also substantiated by the recollection of Shuichi Nagaoka (10th dan) of what was already being taught to Professor Kano's disciples in the 30th year of Meiji (1897).

What is the Application of Seiryoku Zenyo:

1. To Be a Person of Value
As a human being, one must set his/her goal in life and discipline his/her naturally endowed abilities. Moreover, since people "are not something that can exist apart from society" and since the fortune of today is a result of the past, everyone should develop his/her given abilities. If one contributes to society, the personality traits-even if there is a difference in achievements-can develop.

2. Determination-Judgement-Effort
To become a person of value one should make it a purpose to believe in one's best, one should judge the steps to achieve this purpose, and once this has been done one should gather all his/her strength and work hard.

3. Seiryoku Zenyo--Application
The momentum of determination, judgment, and effort comes from one's own strength. All the phenomena of the universe function on strength. In comparison of similar living beings those with much seiryoku will have a more magnificent life.

Therefore, everyone must strive to nurture seiryoku. To achieve this one must be moderate in eating and drinking, exercising, sleeping, etc. However, on the other hand, training in the spiritual aspects of life must not be neglected. It is also important how this Seiryoku is utilized. This utilization is important not only for one's own problems, but also for society and the nation.

Here is quote  about Seiryoku Zen'yo and calm spirit. I copied it from web http://www.usja-judo.org/philosophy-of-judo/, but the original source is from book Mind Over Muscle-Writings from the Founder of Judo” by Jigoro Kano and compiled by Naoki Murata

“
JUDO AND STUDY OF ITS APPLICATION

The study of the application of judo ultimately led to the teaching of seiryoku zenyo, which is the principle behind competing in earnest.  I have demonstrated in these pages that this principle can be applied to everyday life. With regard to our daily activities and social interaction, the teaching of seiryoku zenyo means bringing about maximum results through the use of every sort of energy. For this reason, human faults like anger, for example, violate this principle. Becoming angry consumes mental energy. How does anger benefit you or anyone else? The results of anger are invariably a depletion of mental energy and being looked down on or disliked by others. By following the principle of seiryoku zenyo, people will not be able to get angry.
Being disappointed or troubled by failures or setbacks, or harboring grievances are also ways in which mental energy is consumed. Arguments, fights -all these things are violations of seiryoku zenyo. Those who practice judo must take great care to follow this teaching.  No matter what the situation, there is only one path that people must follow- in every case, the only course is to consider what is the right thing to do and proceed in that direction.
I have coined a phrase that I regularly say to people:  jinsei no koro wa tada itsu aru nomi (There is only one path in life).  Conducting oneself in accord with this principle on a daily basis is vitally important.
Though human beings may reach the pinnacle of success, there is only one path down which to proceed.  That is to say, because complacency gives rise to the causes of failure, you must always consider things carefully until you find the most appropriate course of action and proceed that way.  Even when you fail, there is only one path down which to proceed. Even if once you fail and lose heart, if you regain your courage and find your way along the highest path, circumstances will gradually improve. Because they find their own paths, those who practice judo and follow the principle of seiryoku zenyo always have a calm spirit, enjoy life, and are enterprising. The most advanced human mental life can only be achieved when people thoroughly absorb this principle.”

Original source:
Excerpt from “Mind Over Muscle-Writings from the Founder of Judo” by Jigoro Kano and compiled by Naoki Murata, published by Kodansha International, page 84-86

Hi Mr. Reinberger

Thanks for your answer. I do agree. If two principles (or rules etc) are foundamental for a association, movement, club etc. you can not seperate them and if you do you can leave (and found an own on etc.). But as I understood Kano the two principles of Judo are not only for Judokas and conributing to society - they are expanded to foundamental and universal principles of ethics and society. But in my view society should not be build on "Jita Kyoei", because it lacks freedom and individuality. Further danger in an ethics of virtues (and not rules) is, that you can prefer and expand the virtues as you like and mutual benefit and welfare is only one of them: courage, prudence, temperence, justice (Plato), the golden mean (Aristotle), Faith, Hope, Love (Christanity), Loving Kindness, Compassion, Altruistic Joy, Equanimity (Buddhism) or Rectitude (義,gi), Courage (勇,yuu), Benevolence (仁,jin), Respect (礼,rei), Honesty (誠,sei), Honor (誉,yo), Loyalty (忠,chuu) in Bushido - which by the way are all confucian virtues (and so and so on). Which virtues should we choose? Some, all, for what reason? Are they general virtues and ideals or do they have their flaws in practice and social living? Can you demand virtues from individuals? To society its much better to have rules and laws based on individual rights - not on prefered virtues and ideals.

I see Judo as an art and way applying the principle "seiryoku zenyo" and "ju" to everday life wether its ergonomy, sports, arts, business, conflicts, where to us energy and where not and not to waste energy for useless or superficial things or aims, to act fluently, have a calm and clear mind/spirit. The principle "Jita Kyoei" I see as a reminder to support and help each other and share when practicing in Dojo. In Dojo where I practiced/practice the Judoka were/are  friendly, helping each other, sharing their knowledge, had joy to learn together. I think they all practice "jita kyoei" well.



.

Anatol,

thank you very much for that discussion. I think, we were able to arrive at a considerable high level of agreement. Higher than I, for one, had expected.

Thanks again, and let's await further texts and, perhaps, evaluations or opinions, regarding the matter at hand.

Kano shihan wrote*:

「善とは、社会生活の存続発展に適う行いであり、これを妨げるものは悪である。社会生活を存続発展せしめるためには、相助相譲・自他共栄がその根本原理というべきで、これに精力善用の原理が加わって、初めて在来の伝統的な道徳が合理的に説明できる」

http://www42.tok2.com/home/hirajuu/kanoujyuudo.html

My poor translation:
Regarding 善 zen (goodness, virtue), it is bad/evil/wrong to interfere with the continual development of societal activity.

In order to handle (i.e., to perform) continual development of societal activity, it ought to be said that the basic principle is 相助相譲・自他共栄 (そうじょそうじょう)sōjo sōjō (互いに助け、互に譲る to assist mutually, to concede / defer mutually) ・ jita kyōei　(mutual prosperity); adding the principle of 精力善用 seiryoku zen'yō (most efficient use of energy), one can first logically explain existing, traditional morality.

* While there is no citation for the above, which is from a secondary source I can't be bothered to find in my library, the Kodokan website explores this a bit at http://www.kodokan.org/j_shihan/seiryokuzenyo.html in which they cite Ózei magazine, no.1 1922.

Lance Gatling
Tokyo

Anatol wrote:Hi NBK

I'm not sure exactly what is 'wrong'.

From what I read the Laozi does _predate_ the SanLue, but nevertheless in old jujutsu texts their source for 柔 yawara, or jū, if even cited, is the Sānlüè, not the Laozi.

Thats possible because the "San Lue" is one of the Seven Military Classics (wujingqishu) which were canonized 11th century A.C. in the Song Dynasty. Japan was (is) heavily influenced by chinese culture especially Confucianism. Confucianism spread to Japan and in Confucianism you had to study the Confucian Classics - and not the Daoist like Laozi and Zhuangzi. Both the "Wen" (bureaucrats) and the "Wu" (warriors) had to study all confucian books, the "Wu" especially the Seven Miltary Classics. But they were concentrated on Confucianism or Neoconfucianism, which tries to blend Daoism and Buddhism with  Confucianism (the three teachings are one - san jiao yi) - others say Neoconfucianism tried to occupy or absorb D and B. From there comes the confusion, because people, who didnt read the daoist classics thought, that "the flexible und weak overcomes the hard and strong" is part of confucian texts and the Ju Jutsu text refered the principle of "ju" = rou to a military treatise in confucian context. But it's very clear that the "San Lue" quotes from Laozi and is a text which is influenced by HuangLao Daoism.

I don't know how the SanLue strategy of flexibility 「柔能制剛、弱能制強」　entered Japanese lore while the same, or similar term in the more widely studied Laozi was overlooked, but that seems to be the case.

There are even more quotes from the Laozi to explain the idea of "ju" and "wu you" (without substance/form) and also in a broader context and explanation.

Laozi 43

What is of all things most yielding
Can overwhelm that which is of all things most hard.
Being substanceless it can enter even where is no space;
That is how I know the value of action that is actionless.


Laozi 76

When he is born, man is soft and weak;
In death he becomes stiff and hard.
The ten thousand creatures and all plants
And trees while they are alive are supple and soft,
But when and dead they become brittle and dry.
Truly, what is stiff and hard is a “companion of death”;
What is soft and weak is a “companion of life”.
Therefore “the weapon that is too hard will be broken,
The tree that has the hardest wood will be cut down”.
Truly, the hard and mighty are cast down;
The soft and weak set on high.


Laozi 78

Nothing under heaven is softer or more yielding than water;
But when it attacks things hard and resistant there is not one of them that can prevail.
For they can find no way of altering it.

That the yielding conquers the resistant
And the soft conquers the hard is a fact known by all men,
Yet utilized by none



There is really nothing special or original in the San Lue, it blends Daoist Thought with Confucian, some part are Legalist and some Sunzi.

http://ctext.org/three-strategies

Isn't it better to learn from the masters (original) then from the pupils IF the masters are also available? The over way around would be like you learn about confucianism from the Three Character Classic (San Zi Jing) - which is for children - not from the Analects of Confucius (Lun Yu).  


P.S.: Even if they knew the original lines are from the Laozi - which I doubt - there is a further reason not to quote the Laozi. The Laozi is full of criticism of confucianism and this to its core. Daoist thinkers like Laozi discard (and sometimes ridicule - like Zhuangzi) the central ideas of confucianism like benevolence (ren), righteousness (yi), proper rite (li), knowledge (zhi) and learning (xue) and filial piety (xiao).
.

I could have phrased the question better but you've answered it well. Thank you.

Certainly educated Japanese studied the Confucian classics, the Five Classics and the Four Book, the interpretations were, from well before the Meiji era, primarily (almost exclusively?) neo-Confucian of one variety or another. In fact, heresy from the Tokugawa bakufu (military government) approved 朱子学 Shu Shi gaku (Shu Shi learning, named after the Chinese neo-Confucian philosopher) neo-Confucianism could land you in a ton of problems, as it became more than a philosophy; it actually became the underpinning of Tokugawa civil and commercial law, the legal basis of the regime's legitimacy.

Daoism is not at all apparent in Japanese history, but I guess some cross references are embedded in some ancient documents. But your point is well taken - you'd hardly expect broad study of text very critical of Confucianism in Japan.

As far as study of the original sources (c.f. your comment in bold above, my emphasis), my primary interest is in to what extent the principle of flexibility actually affected jujutsu schools and Kano shihan or their writings, so there's not much incentive for me to go beyond the Three Strategies.

Hi NBK

As far as study of the original sources (c.f. your comment in bold above, my emphasis), my primary interest is in to what extent the principle of flexibility actually affected jujutsu schools and Kano shihan or their writings, so there's not much incentive for me to go beyond the Three Strategies.

The Three Strategies is only a very short work (about 3800 zi) and it is as I said a mixture of Confucian thought, Legalist, Daoist and Yin/Yang and even Mohist. Yin/Yang is not daoist in origin, there are thoughts of the Yi Jing (classic of changes) and general chinese cosmology and correspondence.

The part "ju" (rou) is completly daoist and I think its worth to study the origin, which is the Laozi. Why? Because "ju" can not be understood without "dao" (universal principle) and "de" (virtue), and the San Lue gives only an abbreviation of "ju".

If you want to understand to what extend the principle of flexibility/yielding/weak affected the jujutsu schools, in my point of view you have to search for the origin and full meaning of "ju" in Laozi Daoism, because sometimes the pupils (jujutsu) of pupils (san lue) catch the master (Laozi) via practice and learning. I would skip the san lue and go back to the source, with a much broader and deeper view of "ju".

.

Thank you, Anatol.  

I would not have thought there was much reason to look beyond the Three Strategies of Huang Shigong to original Lao Tzu material, but then today I read a source quoting Saigó Shiró as he described júdó and the nature of budó versus bugei, and júdó's role in budó.  

In an extended explanation, he was quoted as saying that it is difficult to describe it (júdó) well, and invoked Lao Tzu and his  mysteries and sayings to do so, saying it (júdó)
... has no form
... has no voice (literally, but means 'has no sound')
... has no smell
... and in truth is a miraculous, unfathomable mystery.  
In fact, the manner in which Saigó describes it (júdó) makes me wonder if he is not intentionally blurring the line between the way of yawara (柔道　júdó) and the Way (道　michi, the Tao). He does at least so as a rhetorical mechanism.  

Also Saigó notes that in training the body and mind, despite a hundred hardships and ten thousand sorrows, heaven and earth and a unified (trained? integrated mind/body?) body combine to create a man of noble character 聖人君子, a brave, wise man.  

These are classic Taoist ('it has no form') and Confucian ('wise man', 'sage') terms.  There's more but I don't have time to translate it.  And to me, there's no single apparent reference to  Buddhism in multiple pages of Saigó holding forth.  

Lance Gatling

PS - From the Tao Te Ching (The Way and Its Power)
http://www.acmuller.net/con-dao/daodejing.html

道可道、非常道。名可名、非常名無名天地之始有名萬物之母。故常無欲以觀其妙、常有欲以觀其徵。此兩者同出而異名。同謂之玄。玄之又玄、衆妙之門。

The Way that can be followed is not the eternal Way.
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.
The nameless is the origin of heaven and earth
While naming is the origin of the myriad things.
Therefore, always desireless, you see the mystery
Ever desiring, you see the manifestations.
These two are the same—
When they appear they are named differently.

This sameness is the mystery,
Mystery within mystery;

The door to all marvels.

視之不見、名日夷。聽之不間、名日希。縛之不得、名曰微。此三者不可致詰。故混而爲一。其上不皦、其下不昧。繩繩不可名、復歸於無物。是謂無狀之狀、無物 之象。是謂惚恍。迎之不見其首、隨之不見其後。執古之道、以御今之有。能知古始、是謂道紀。

Look for it, it cannot be seen.
It is called the distant.
Listen for it, it cannot be heard.
It is called the rare.
Reach for it, it cannot be gotten.
It is called the subtle.
These three ultimately cannot be fathomed.
Therefore they join to become one.

Its top is not bright;
Its bottom is not dark;
Existing continuously, it cannot be named and it returns to no-thingness.

Thus, it is called the formless form,
The image of no-thing.
This is called the most obscure.

Go to meet it, you cannot see its face.
Follow it, you cannot see its back.

By holding to the ancient Way
You can manage present existence
And know the primordial beginning.

This is called the very beginning thread of the Way.

大象無形
The great form has no shape.

道隱無名
The Way is hidden and nameless.

Hi NBK

NBK wrote:  Also Saigó notes that in training the body and mind, despite a hundred hardships and ten thousand sorrows, heaven and earth and a unified (trained? integrated mind/body?) body combine to create a man of noble character 聖人君子, a brave, wise man.  

These are classic Taoist ('it has no form') and Confucian ('wise man', 'sage') terms.

The "sage" or "saint" (sheng ren 聖人) is not an exclusively Confucian term. Instead Kongzi used more often "noble man" or "superior man" (junzi 君子). The "Sheng Ren" in Confucianism is more like a natural born moral and wise genius, the "junzi" a noble man, who learned a lot and  is selfcultivated to a very high (confucian) standard. Laozi adresses the Daodejing to the "sage" or "saint" and this term is used about 35 times. Laozi says, that the "saint" or "sage" is like the Dao, acts like the Dao, reigns like the Dao. Zhuangzi uses the term "true man" (zhen ren 真人), sometimes also "zhi ren" (perfect man) or "shen ren" (spiritual man). Zhuangzi 1: "Therefore it is said, 'The perfect man has no self; the spirit-like man has no merit; the holy man no name (fame)" (至人無己，神人無功，聖人無名). Zhuangzi gives a long example, what it is to be like a "True Man" (zhen ren) in Chapter 6 of the Zhuangzi: http://ctext.org/zhuangzi/great-and-most-honoured-master.

"Heaven and Earth" are the most basic cosmology descriptions for "Yang" and "Yin" and they are really not specific daoist. Its common chinese  concept of cosmology and correspondence and it is not in a way of "esoteric", as we in the west would think about. At the opposite its a scientific try of the old chinese, to explain the world of phenomen in a scientific way and not via gods and ghosts or in an anemistic way. Blended with the Book of Changes (Yi Jing), the Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) with the ideas of Jing (life essence) and Qi (Life Breath) and Shen (spirit) and with the concept of the Five Phases (wu xing 五行), thats the "classic view of the old chinese, how nature works".

So if "heaven and earth" (yang/yin, the cosmos) and the body (in chinese "body" = shen = 身 and person as a whole can be the same) is unified (beyond yin and yang in a state of balance) you will be a wise and noble man.


Laozi 7:

天長地久。天地所以能長且久者，以其不自生，故能長生。是以聖人後其身而身先；外其身而身存。非以其無私耶？故能成其私

Heaven is long-enduring and earth continues long. The reason why heaven and earth are able to endure and continue thus long is because they do not live of, or for, themselves. This is how they are able to continue and endure. Therefore the sage puts his own person last, and yet it is found in the foremost place; he treats his person as if it were foreign to him, and yet that person is preserved. Is it not because he has no personal and private ends, that therefore such ends are realised?

(translation by Legge)


I don't want to rewrite Judo in a daoist context, but only want to give some ideas of classical chinese thought, which spread to Japan as Confucianism, Daoism, Yin/Yang School, Military School and Chan/Zen Buddhism (which, as I said, is heavely influenced by Zhuangzi Daoism as ideas of spontaneity, naturalness, nature in general, simplicity and not naming = wu ming, bu shi fei = not to distinguish in this and that and "no heart-mind" = wu xin).

.

Anatol wrote:Hi NBK

NBK wrote:  Also Saigó notes that in training the body and mind, despite a hundred hardships and ten thousand sorrows, heaven and earth and a unified (trained? integrated mind/body?) body combine to create a man of noble character 聖人君子, a brave, wise man.  

These are classic Taoist ('it has no form') and Confucian ('wise man', 'sage') terms.

The "sage" or "saint" (sheng ren 聖人) is not an exclusively Confucian term. Instead Kongzi used more often "noble man" or "superior man" (junzi 君子). The "Sheng Ren" in Confucianism is more like a natural born moral and wise genius, the "junzi" a noble man, who learned a lot and  is selfcultivated to a very high (confucian) standard. Laozi adresses the Daodejing to the "sage" or "saint" and this term is used about 35 times. ......

"Heaven and Earth" are the most basic cosmology descriptions for "Yang" and "Yin" and they are really not specific daoist. Its common chinese  concept of cosmology and correspondence and it is not in a way of "esoteric", as we in the west would think about. At the opposite its a scientific try of the old chinese, to explain the world of phenomen in a scientific way and not via gods and ghosts or in an anemistic way. ....
So if "heaven and earth" (yang/yin, the cosmos) and the body (in chinese "body" = shen = 身 and person as a whole can be the same) is unified (beyond yin and yang in a state of balance) you will be a wise and noble man.
....
I don't want to rewrite Judo in a daoist context, but only want to give some ideas of classical chinese thought, which spread to Japan as Confucianism, Daoism, Yin/Yang School, Military School and Chan/Zen Buddhism (which, as I said, is heavely influenced by Zhuangzi Daoism as ideas of spontaneity, naturalness, nature in general, simplicity and not naming = wu ming, bu shi fei = not to distinguish in this and that and "no heart-mind" = wu xin).

.

(above edited down by NBK)
Exactly - there are many non-exclusive concepts in the whole warp and weave, used across a succession of schools of thought, as one builds on another, earlier tradition.    

I read an interesting analysis of Japanese neo-Confucian, which points out that there was so much modification of it to fit into Japanese thought, and vice versus, so that in the end it became something new, and unique to Japan.  So there are very few pure trains of thought to be found, I think, as so many different influences came into and dropped out of vogue.

But, then again, Kanó shihan wrote this:

'Júdó is the 大道 Great Way (CH: Da Dào) of the cosmos that can put all things to practical use; (things like) budó and bujutsu are merely one of the applications of that Great Way.' (i.e., júdó)

Note that Kanó shihan places júdó above budó and bujutsu, not vice versus, which is misunderstood.  

from http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Dao
天道 Tian Dào (sky or natural Dào—usually translated religiously as "heaven's Dào")
大道 Da Dào(Great dao—the actual course of all history—everything that has happened or will happen) and
人道 Ren Dào (human dao, the normative orders constructed by human (social) practices).
(Note: Chinese Pinyin pronunciations above)

Lance Gatling

Hi NBK

Dao (jap. do) is a core concept of chinese thinking.

As you showed above, there are three common concepts of Dao as Tian Dao, Da Dao, Ren Dao.  The first one is also the oldest, which arised in early Zhou Dynasty - ruler and heaven should be one (the mandate of heaven, tian ming). Third one is confucian, because in Confucianism Dao is "the right way of man and society" and the right way is benevolence, morality, proper behavior, rightousness, filial piety, loyality and practicing throgh learning and selfperfection and so on. Dao in Confucianism is not a cosmic concept. Second one arised (historically) last in daoist thinking, where Dao is the origin of all being, which nurtures, protects and covers the ten thousend things (wan wu).  

But "Dao" has some developement in meanings, which should not be understand as changing the meanings but as expansion. The oldest is "way" and "walking" and "guiding", later it has a moral and social-political component and meaning as "the right way" and with daoist thought Dao becomes the universal principle. Additionally "Dao" can be read as "method" and "saying".

I read an interesting analysis of Japanese neo-Confucian, which points out that there was so much modification of it to fit into Japanese thought, and vice versus, so that in the end it became something new, and unique to Japan.  So there are very few pure trains of thought to be found, I think, as so many different influences came into and dropped out of vogue.

Thats true but the "new" is ecclectic and syncretist. There are also no original new thoughts in chinese philosophy after 200 A.C (only buddhism, which isn't chinese thinking). The reason maybe was, that the two mainstreams of chinese thinking  - Confucianism and Daoism - both have high respect for the Sages and Saints (Confucianism) and for the Old Times (Daoism), where the whole world was in proper order and harmony and there is nothing more left to say  what Confucius and Laozi (and Zhuangzi) taught about "Dao" und "De" (virtue). We only have to understand, what they said and practice.

Kano speaks (in a big frame) of "Dao" in a daoistic meaning (Da Dao) but also in a "confucian way" as learning and selfperfection (Ren Dao) and last but not least Judo as Method (dao), to practice the way (dao) und understanding the ultimate principle (Dao). Going back to "seiryoko zenyo" and "jita kyo-ei", the first is daoistic (how nature/cosmos works and if you practice in "the way it works"  you have best use of mind/energy) and the second confucian (in which way a person should develop and how people and society should live together) and they are not different but complementary and interfuse each other.


.

NBK wrote:...
Exactly - there are many non-exclusive concepts in the whole warp and weave, used across a succession of schools of thought, as one builds on another, earlier tradition.    

I read an interesting analysis of Japanese neo-Confucian, which points out that there was so much modification of it to fit into Japanese thought, and vice versus, so that in the end it became something new, and unique to Japan.  So there are very few pure trains of thought to be found, I think, as so many different influences came into and dropped out of vogue.
...

Lance and Anatol,

that's also something I alluded to in an earlier post in this thread, albeit in a more general form. Nevertheless, I think, it raises a question:

While to address the original ideas, thinkings, etc. of the matters discussed here, undoubtedly is very interesting and educational, does it really meet the requirements for evaluating something, that emerged in Japan?

If talking about Nihon-den Kōdōkan Jūdō, or about what Kanō-shihan may have thought or meant wouldn't it be necessary to evaluate the different concepts and ideas in a sense that conforms to their perception, adoption and development in Japan, during his time, regardless of possible reductions, mutations, or even flaws? Actually, in case that some ideas would have been incorporated into the Japanese culture with an utterly wrong understanding, aren't odds in favour of them having been included into a certain Japanese system like Jūdō in exactly that, the Japanese comprehension of them, nevertheless?

Could therefore, to look at the original, even lead in a wrong direction sometimes, if varieties from original Chinese interpretations actually exist in Japan? What do you think?

Reinberger wrote:

NBK wrote:...
Exactly - there are many non-exclusive concepts in the whole warp and weave, used across a succession of schools of thought, as one builds on another, earlier tradition.    

I read an interesting analysis of Japanese neo-Confucian, which points out that there was so much modification of it to fit into Japanese thought, and vice versus, so that in the end it became something new, and unique to Japan.  So there are very few pure trains of thought to be found, I think, as so many different influences came into and dropped out of vogue.
...

Lance and Anatol,

that's also something I alluded to in an earlier post in this thread, albeit in a more general form. Nevertheless, I think, it raises a question:

While to address the original ideas, thinkings, etc. of the matters discussed here, undoubtedly is very interesting and educational, does it really meet the requirements for evaluating something, that emerged in Japan?

If talking about Nihon-den Kōdōkan Jūdō, or about what Kanō-shihan may have thought or meant wouldn't it be necessary to evaluate the different concepts and ideas in a sense that conforms to their perception, adoption and development in Japan, during his time, regardless of possible reductions, mutations, or even flaws? Actually, in case that some ideas would have been incorporated into the Japanese culture with an utterly wrong understanding, aren't odds in favour of them having been included into a certain Japanese system like Jūdō in exactly that, the Japanese comprehension of them, nevertheless?

Could therefore, to look at the original, even lead in a wrong direction sometimes, if varieties from original Chinese interpretations actually exist in Japan? What do you think?

Reinberger,

Thank you.  That was my point earlier when I wondered if there was any reason to read beyond the Three Strategies.  Anatol is pointing out source documents, but you rightly question their application to Japanese martial arts philosophies hundreds of years and another culture away.

William Scott Wilson has translated a number of different Japanese philosophic texts.  Reading the introduction of
The Demon's Sermon on the Martial Arts
By Issai Chozanshi, translated by William Scott Wilson
particularly from pg xxi on, could be helpful.  
The Demon's Sermons on the Martial Arts - Wm Scott Wilson

Note the Confucian and Taoist references, then the addition at the later concepts using the words of a Japanese Zen priest to enlighten them.  That may be confusing to some but simply reflects the Taoist influences on the development of Zen.  While many modern Western observers are likely to 'discern' Zen precepts everywhere in martial arts, I think it is more correct to consider the Taoist and Confucian ideals.  (I had a very interesting dinner with the author of 'Moving Zen', a book on karate that describes the training of a young man in karate and his exposure to the Zen thoughts of one of his instructors.  I did not have the heart to tell him that instructor was an outlier, certainly not mainstream.)  

In reading the above link, look at the section on 自然　(JA: shizen, CH: ji ran) naturalness or spontaneity in particular.  While modern júdó books do not stress it at all, Kanó shihan and júdó authors of the 1920's and 1930's would devote entire chapters to the importance of and development of 自然体 - shizentai the natural body position, the basis of all júdó stances.  The words of those chapters make it very clear (to me, anyhow...) that the intent is to prepare the basis for and to cultivate 為無為　(JA: i'mui CH: wei mu wei), action without action, natural / effortless action, action without conscious thought, action taken without preconception, action taken in proper response to outside stimulus and the environment.  I think it can be seen in Kanó shihan's posture and teaching, too:   


And that concept, usually shortened to 無為, is seen by some to be one of the concepts that are key distinctions between certain  neo-Confucian schools of thought.   There are extensive commentaries devoted to dissecting this simple pair.

So, rather than seeing Zen or Buddhism in the Japanese martial arts, I think it more correct to look at the underlying Confucian and Taoist concepts, concepts largely served up and informed by classic Japanese education in the Confucian fundamental texts, the Four Books and Five Classics (四書五經 JA: Shishogokyó CH: Sìshū wǔjīng), which Kanó shihan studied from childhood.   So I am not saying there aren't Taoist influences but believe they largely are conveyed via Confucian texts.   Zen developed near a thousand years later, with different texts and terms, but heavily influenced by Taoism.

As my friend Ellis Amdur might point out, it's Hidden in Plain Sight, the title of his marvelous book, which is due out soon in a new edition.  Hidden in Plain Sight - Ellis Amdur

How does júdó practice start and end?

In 正座 seiza, a word modified from the original term 静座, also pronounced seiza, the neo-Confucian seated quiet sitting 'meditation'.

More later,
Lance Gatling

Hi Mr. Reinberger

Reinberger wrote:[ that's also something I alluded to in an earlier post in this thread, albeit in a more general form. Nevertheless, I think, it raises a question:

While to address the original ideas, thinkings, etc. of the matters discussed here, undoubtedly is very interesting and educational, does it really meet the requirements for evaluating something, that emerged in Japan?

I think so, because Japan is deeply influenced by chinese culture and philosophy. Look at architecture, clothing, chinese characters, literature, confucianism in dayly life, chan/zen buddhism, painting, aesthetics, cosmology, tea ceremony, gardening, go (the game) and so on. Judo is based on tradition, it doesn't emerge out of nowhere.

If talking about Nihon-den Kōdōkan Jūdō, or about what Kanō-shihan may have thought or meant wouldn't it be necessary to evaluate the different concepts and ideas in a sense that conforms to their perception, adoption and development in Japan, during his time, regardless of possible reductions, mutations, or even flaws? Actually, in case that some ideas would have been incorporated into the Japanese culture with an utterly wrong understanding, aren't odds in favour of them having been included into a certain Japanese system like Jūdō in exactly that, the Japanese comprehension of them, nevertheless?

Thats true - but I am no Judo or Budo historian. Confucianism isn't understand in a wrong way in Japan and as NBK said, Kano had an education, where he had to study the confucian classics, chinese characters, kalligraphy, arts of china. Neo Confucianism (better Song Confucianism) isn't different to classic confucianism. It only widens confucianism with cosmology, giving "Li" an expanded meaning (Li Xue) and with the search of "Inner Nature" a more personal turn in selfcultivation (Xin Xue). Second branch is, where the confucian "quiet sitting" is coming from.

Could therefore, to look at the original, even lead in a wrong direction sometimes, if varieties from original Chinese interpretations actually exist in Japan? What do you think?

If you only look at the roots, there must be many wrong interpretations, because you have to look at the context. But as I said, the concepts and teachings of Confucianism and Zen Buddhism didn't really change a lot from their origins. Daoism underwent the biggest changes, because daoism doesnt have strict teaching or tradition nor practice. There are a lot of different sects, also mixed up with confucianism and buddhism and a lot of chinese cosmology, tcm, correlation thinking, magic writing, seals, talismans, rites and ceremonies and so on.

If you look at the original thoughts of Daoism

Ziran = naturalness, spontaneity
Ju = soft, weak, flexible, yielding (as described in the Laozi)
Pu = Simplicity
wu wei = effortless action, natural action
qing jing shen = clear and calm spirit
xu xin = empty heart-mind


I see "sei ryoku zen yo".


But maybe its me, wearing a "Dao lense" ...

Hi Anatol (if I may say so, as it would sound odd to me, to call you "Mr. Anatol" unless it's your surname. Please call me Robert, as well),

now you have me at a loss, exactly with a question, I regard as crucial for the matter in hand. I'm no Jūdō or Budō historian as well, other than an amateur, that is.

I think there's no doubt, that Kanō had an education, that included those Chinese cultural influences you talked about. However, that doesn't  seem to explain how they were  absorbed by him, in his culture. Reading the same texts, doesn't always lead to the same conclusions, interpretations, or applications. The world was - and still is - full of examples of very different interpretations of the same religions, philosophies, ideologies, ... . Look at the various comprehensions and applications of 'socialism', for example. Or look at religions. In Christianity, there are even sects, that provide their own translations of the Bible, to better meet their special criteria, not to mention Islam, that seems to gave/give room for very high cultural achievements and unbelievable primitive barbarism as well.

Regarding China and Japan, one aspect, that seems to be tangent to a "martial art", are the different esteem, that "warriors" were held in, in the two different cultures. In that regard, obviously, Japan developed a significantly different society, irrespective of  the Chinese cultural influences.

Now Lance, especially regarding Confucianism (or Neo Confucianism alias Song Confucianism, as you say), indicates

"... so much modification of it to fit into Japanese thought, and vice versus, so that in the end it became something new, and unique to Japan.",

while you declare

"... the concepts and teachings of Confucianism and Zen Buddhism didn't really change a lot from their origins."

I, for sure, can't say. But I would regard it rather typical, if Japan would've made something very unique out of it, as it happened with so many things in so many respects.

Nevertheless, Anatol, I appreciate the insights you give into Chinese religions/philosophies. I think I've already learned a thing or two, during our conversation here.

Lance,

returning form noboru's homeland yesterday evening (was in Břeclav with the family, over the day), I read your posting and something from the link, you provided. I think, I will have to reread it, perhaps several times, and than resume a contemplation, I already undertook for considerable time now, without coming to a decision: how to look at the values of 'naturalness', having regard to concepts like 'civilisation' and 'humanity'.

Reinberger wrote:Hi Anatol (if I may say so, as it would sound odd to me, to call you "Mr. Anatol" unless it's your surname. Please call me Robert, as well),

now you have me at a loss, exactly with a question, I regard as crucial for the matter in hand. I'm no Jūdō or Budō historian as well, other than an amateur, that is.

I think there's no doubt, that Kanō had an education, that included those Chinese cultural influences you talked about. However, that doesn't  seem to explain how they were  absorbed by him, in his culture. Reading the same texts, doesn't always lead to the same conclusions, interpretations, or applications. The world was - and still is - full of examples of very different interpretations of the same religions, philosophies, ideologies, ... . Look at the various comprehensions and applications of 'socialism', for example. Or look at religions. In Christianity, there are even sects, that provide their own translations of the Bible, to better meet their special criteria, not to mention Islam, that seems to gave/give room for very high cultural achievements and unbelievable primitive barbarism as well.

Regarding China and Japan, one aspect, that seems to be tangent to a "martial art", are the different esteem, that "warriors" were held in, in the two different cultures. In that regard, obviously, Japan developed a significantly different society, irrespective of  the Chinese cultural influences.

Now Lance, especially regarding Confucianism (or Neo Confucianism alias Song Confucianism, as you say), indicates

"... so much modification of it to fit into Japanese thought, and vice versus, so that in the end it became something new, and unique to Japan.",

while you declare

"... the concepts and teachings of Confucianism and Zen Buddhism didn't really change a lot from their origins."

I, for sure, can't say. But I would regard it rather typical, if Japan would've made something very unique out of it, as it happened with so many things in so many respects.

Nevertheless, Anatol, I appreciate the insights you give into Chinese religions/philosophies. I think I've already learned a thing or two, during our conversation here.

Hi.

My aside was regarding what appears to be a relatively new interpretation of Japanese neo-Confucianism.

I think you will find Anatol's posts addressing more classic concepts. I wouldn't think to mix them up.

I research Japanese martial arts history, and this exploration is more or less an aside, as I don't think that anyone*, particularly Kanó shihan, sat down and developed a martial art around Chinese classical philosophy of any flavor. But, clearly he and others close to him cite certain philosophic concepts, and the majority stem from the sources we're addressing. The problem is that they apparently stem from a number of traditions, but I think that's more of our problem (in that we want to understand it in a clear category - is it A? or B?) rather than their problem.

As an example, CK has noted several times that Kanó shihan mentions water many times (IIRC he wrote 'obsession' a couple of times). That is a classic Taoist element associated with 無為 mui (CH: wu wei), the 'effortless action'. Of course, water is important to many philosophies (witness Baptist Christianity, Catholicism, etc.) but this again fits exactly into the flow of Taoism / Confucianism.

But most folks don't understand what happened to Japanese Buddhism in the Meiji era. It was under extensive duress from the government and often many of the people, and changed considerably as a result.

Lance Gatling

* the possible exception might be Shorinji Kempō, established by Doshin Sō, born Michiomi Nakano. He actually wanted to teach religious philosophy to young people but had a hard time attracting them. He developed the martial art as a method of interesting youth in coming to his lectures, and it built into the art of today. But mostly the art existed before his philosophy, which of course is used to illuminate the art.

NBK wrote:... But most folks don't understand what happened to Japanese Buddhism in the Meiji era.  It was under extensive duress from the government and often many of the people, and changed considerably as a result.  

Lance Gatling

* the possible exception might be Shorinji Kempō, established by Doshin Sō, born Michiomi Nakano.  He actually wanted to teach religious philosophy to young people but had a hard time attracting them.  He developed the martial art as a method of interesting youth in coming to his lectures, and it built into the art of today.  But mostly the art existed before his philosophy, which of course is used to illuminate the art.  

Lance,
that reminds me on three conversations I had with Harada sensei, the founder of our school/style. The first one took place in Austria, in the early 1990ies, when I still was a relatively fresh member of his school, already having nearly two decades of other Budō-training "under my belt". We talked about the motivations to teach MA's. As he said, his' was, to spread Buddhism.

The second happened a decade later, one evening in Ōsaka, when I said during a conversation, that no particular religion plays any significant role in my life, other than that influence of Christianity that is noticeable in the culture I'm living in, and the socialization I'd experienced there. He appeared utterly aghast, stating "My whole live is (about) religion". All the more, the decision he later made about succession(s) were rather surprising and unexpected.

The third also happened in Ōsaka, when, during a car ride, he talked about the changes that happened in regard to Buddhism in the Shitennōji, during the last century, leading "back" to what he called a "more original interpretation", called "Wa-Buddhism". Unfortunately I didn't have the opportunity to take notes then, something that would've been absolutely necessary for me to remember the details of something as specific at that. But I digress.

Reinberger wrote:

NBK wrote:... But most folks don't understand what happened to Japanese Buddhism in the Meiji era.  It was under extensive duress from the government and often many of the people, and changed considerably as a result.  

Lance Gatling

* the possible exception might be Shorinji Kempō, established by Doshin Sō, born Michiomi Nakano.  He actually wanted to teach religious philosophy to young people but had a hard time attracting them.  He developed the martial art as a method of interesting youth in coming to his lectures, and it built into the art of today.  But mostly the art existed before his philosophy, which of course is used to illuminate the art.  

Lance,
that reminds me on three conversations I had with Harada sensei, the founder of our school/style. The first one took place in Austria, in the early 1990ies, when I still was a relatively fresh member of his school, already having nearly two decades of other Budō-training "under my belt". We talked about the motivations to teach MA's. As he said, his' was, to spread Buddhism.
......

The third also happened in Ōsaka, when, during a car ride, he talked about the changes that happened in regard to Buddhism in the Shitennōji, during the last century, leading "back" to what he called a "more original interpretation", called "Wa-Buddhism". Unfortunately I didn't have the opportunity to take notes then, something that would've been absolutely necessary for me to remember the details of something as specific at that. But I digress.

If you poke around, you can find references to the Buddhist revival in the Meiji era to become 'more Japanese' in response to the accusations that Buddhism was divorced from the people and insufficiently 'Japanese' and attuned to the times. This in particular, IIRC, applies to the exoteric populist sects (those with openly taught doctrines such as Nichiren, Jodo, etc.) but also to the esoteric (mikkyó, or 'secret teaching' sects such as Shingon and Tendai). Although you should ask them if possible, AFAIK Shitennoji's 'Wa-shu' is an offshoot of Tendai shu, a very old esoteric sect.

NBK wrote:... AFAIK Shitennoji's 'Wa-shu' is an offshoot of Tendai shu, a very old esoteric sect.  

Of course, as the Shitennōji is said to be the oldest Buddhist temple in Japan, founded, like Hōryūji, by Kamitsumiya no Umayado no Toyotomimi no Mikoto, and it's still a kakemono with Shōtoku Taishi, that is placed in a place of honour during Jigen ryū ceremonies, instead of a kamidana. It was also Shōtoku Taishi, who was addressed by Harada-sensei during his school's inaugural ceremony, at several name-givings, and at graduations or awardings of titles.



You might also have noticed the Kikubishi mon used in Jigen ryū. Harada-sensei had pointed out, that the kiku-part of this design alludes to the Imperial kamon. And isn't there a saying, that "Tendai is for the Imperial house, Shingon for the nobles, Zen is for the warriors, and  Jōdo for the people"? Of course I know, that the Zen-part may have been exaggerated.

Hi NBK

NBK wrote:
My aside was regarding what appears to be a relatively new interpretation of Japanese neo-Confucianism.

I think you will find Anatol's posts addressing more classic concepts. I wouldn't think to mix them up.  

I research Japanese martial arts history, and this exploration is more or less an aside,

I am looking at the origin and genuin concepts and ideas, where, when, from which thinkers/philosophers and schools they arise, are elaborated and shaped, what are the key principles and the core ideas and which develepement they take, in which directions they went, what and whom they influenced and when they got mixed, expanded, abbriavated, declined, renewed. As a Historian you have to look at the more concrete and evident (writings, scriptures, documents, letters ...)

as I don't think that anyone*, particularly Kanó shihan, sat down and developed a martial art around Chinese classical philosophy of any flavor.  But, clearly he and others close to him cite certain philosophic concepts, and the majority stem from the sources we're addressing.  The problem is that they apparently stem from a number of traditions, but I think that's more of our problem (in that we want to understand it in a clear category - is it A? or B?) rather than their problem.

We all do have a cultural and social background and its not really important, if you know all these influences, to think and act within. So even if Kano would have known nothing about Confucianism, his high respect and esteem of education and moral-social selfperfection to contribute to society is a core concept of confucianism.

As an example, CK has noted several times that Kanó shihan mentions water many times (IIRC he wrote 'obsession' a couple of times).  That is a classic Taoist element associated with 無為 mui  (CH: wu wei), the 'effortless action'.  Of course, water is important to many philosophies (witness Baptist Christianity, Catholicism, etc.) but this again fits exactly into the flow of Taoism / Confucianism.

"Water" in classical Daoism (Laozi) isn't associated with "wu wei"  (無為) but with "rou" (柔 = ju) and "ruo" (弱):

Laozi 78:

天下莫柔弱於水，而攻堅強者莫之能勝，其無以易之。弱之勝強，柔之勝剛，天下莫不知，莫能行。是以聖人云：受國之垢，是謂社稷主；受國不祥，是謂天下王。正言若反。

Nothing under heaven is softer or more yielding than water;
But when it attacks things hard and resistant there is not one of them that can prevail.
For they can find no way of altering it.

That the yielding conquers the resistant
And the soft conquers the hard is a fact known by all men,
Yet utilized by none.

(transl. by Waley)


Water is also associated with "shan" (善), which is the same "good, virtuous" as "zen" in "seiryoku zenyo"

Laozi 8

上善若水。水善利萬物而不爭，處衆人之所惡，故幾於道

The highest good is like that of water.
The goodness of is that it benefits the ten thousand creatures;
Yet itself does not scramble,
But is content with the places that all men disdain.
It is this makes water so near to the Way.

(transl. by Waley)



"Wu Wei" is associated with the Dao, because the Dao doesn't act with purpose and desires. The idea, that "Wu Wei" is associated with "water" and "flow" and so on, is a western thought, mostly introduced by Alan Watts (The Watercourse Way). "Wu Wei" in his original daoist context is associated with "De" (德 , highest virtue, http://ctext.org/dao-de-jing#n11629 ), acting like the Dao, which doesn't act, but nothing is left undone (dao chang wu wei er wu bu wei, 道常無為而無不為), because of naturalness (ziran 自然) and simplicity (pu 樸 , Laozi 37).


But as you see, "Water" in classical Laozi Daoism is associated with

"ju" (the same is in "Judo") and "zen" (the same as in seiryoku zenyo)


(only wanted to go back to the topic of the thread opener ...)





P.S.:  

Still Water in Zhuangzi Daoism is an example for the clear and calm spirit (qing jing shen 清 靜 神):

When water is still, its clearness shows the beard and eyebrows (of him who looks into it). It is a perfect Level, and the greatest artificer takes his rule from it. Such is the clearness of still water, and how much greater is that of the human Spirit! The still mind of the sage is the mirror of heaven and earth, the glass of all things. Vacancy, stillness, placidity, tastelessness, quietude, silence, and non-action - this is the Level of heaven and earth, and the perfection of the Dao and its characteristics.

http://ctext.org/zhuangzi/tian-dao


To connoisseur of culture, music and art:  http://www.silkqin.com/02qnpu/27sjts/sj03qjj.htm