samurai class

It is theoretically possible, though, that the class could be restored, either through a legal
decision, or through a collective revolt by samurai descendents. I'm trying to think of an
historical illustration of this... Can't. Does anyone else know of a restoration of a class through
revolt or law? In The Three Musketeers, this happens with the Musketeers. But that's fiction,
and the Musketeers weren't a "class" (though there might be some parallels). Lookin' for a real
historical example...

Here's a different idea...
In India, the law has abolished the caste system. However, in real everyday life, the caste
system is just as real as it was before the laws. The law only serves its purpose if people obey
it, or if it is enforced. So it is theoretically possible, also, that descendents of samurai could
claim to be samurai, and if accepted by the general public, they would for all intents and
purposes BE samurai, though legally the class has been abolished. Of course, what a samurai
today would do or be is ... well... difficult to imagine. Maybe they would carry two guns instead
of two swords, LOL, and collectively comprise the Japanese police force.

Theoretically, suppose that history had happened this way: Upon the abolishment of the
samurai class, the samurai still lived as samurai, and the public still regarded them as
samurai. The government still gave them their stipend, too. (Governments often act in an
inconsistent manner like this.) Now, if history had happened this way, would that group of
people still be samurai, even though legally the class was abolished?

I think they would.

This has some parallel to the idea of common-law marriages. If a man and woman "shack up"
for an extended period of time, and live as man and wife, even though they have never
exchanged vows or rings... they are for all intents and purposes man and wife. That was
common practice or "common-law"... the government eventually recognized this and would
after said elapse of time pronounce them legally man and wife (so the government could get
additional taxes out of them).

Anyway, the man and wife were really man and wife BEFORE the government acknowledged
them to be so. It isn't a piece of paper that makes one man and wife. It's the lifestyle. Many
cultures don't have "pieces of paper" from the government to confirm or legitimize the marriage.
Public practice or public acceptance takes presidence over legal action.

So what if someone today claimed to be a samurai? If general public acceptance, apart from
law, would in all practicality make one a samurai (like commonlaw marriage or the Indian caste
system), how much of the public would it take to justify that claim? What's the critical mass
required for acceptance? Certainly not 100 percent, because even in the samurai's heyday,
there were people who didn't agree with the class system as it was. Maybe 51%? A simple
majority? Who decides what the percentage would be?

All this to say, "NO!" Samurai DON'T exist today... but theoretically, it's possible.

> Konnichi wa, tomodachi
> This is going to seem as if I am against samurai, which I am not. I am
> rather intrigued by them, in their day. Follow me on this for a moment
> if you will...
>
> When Slavery was abolished in the United States, there were people who
> still thought slavery was a good idea, and people who didn't. After
> the abolishment of slavery, for the most part, former slave owners
> rarely went about saying they were members of a class that proudly
> owned other human beings and had the right to life or death over them.
> The law didn't allow that any more, and for the most part, and the
> general populace would not stand for that. The abolishment was drilled
> into the public psyche, as was the concept that slave owners were not
> needed in a changed society, and that all races and classes should be
> free and theoretically equal. Owning slaves was made not-noble.
>
> Samurai had an equal right of life or death over those of lesser
> class, held all of the benefits of the current society, and when
> Samurai were abolished, the general psyche of the public thought they
> were as un-needed as slave owners were in the U.S.
>
> So I suppose one could say they were still slave owners if they were
> the descendants of slave owners...but the public would not look kindly
> on that, nor would I suspect the public would look kindly on Samurai.
>
> There were good samurai, and the parts of samurai life that were noble
> should be celebrated but lets not forget it was a package deal. - just
> like there were, I suppose, some good slave owners, but the society
> evolved around them.
>
>
> Just other thoughts...
> Christopher
> (who celebrates the good parts of samurai life, but is aware there are
> bad ones...)
>
> > So theoretically the descendants of the samurai class could
> therefore still consider themselves to be samurai, although not with a
> legal foundation, with the laws enacted during the Meiji Restoration
> being formulated by the winners, if not nessarily/hypothetically those
> in the 'right' ??
> > Just a thought
> > M.Lorimer
> >
>
>
> ---
> Samurai Archives: http://www.samurai-archives.com
> Samurai Archives store: http://www.cafeshops.com/samuraiarchives
> ---
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/samuraihistory/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> samuraihistory-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

If you consider royalty to be a class, then the restoration of the monarchy in Spain after the death of Franco could be an example.

Bob Burke


In a message dated 2/2/2004 12:19:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, golfmandan@... writes:

>It is theoretically possible, though, that the class could be restored, either through a legal
>decision, or through a collective revolt by samurai descendents. I'm trying to think of an
>historical illustration of this... Can't. Does anyone else know of a restoration of a class through
>revolt or law? In The Three Musketeers, this happens with the Musketeers. But that's fiction,
>and the Musketeers weren't a "class" (though there might be some parallels). Lookin' for a real
>historical example...
>
>Here's a different idea...
>In India, the law has abolished the caste system. However, in real everyday life, the caste
>system is just as real as it was before the laws. The law only serves its purpose if people obey
>it, or if it is enforced. So it is theoretically possible, also, that descendents of samurai could
>claim to be samurai, and if accepted by the general public, they would for all intents and
>purposes BE samurai, though legally the class has been abolished. Of course, what a samurai
>today would do or be is ... well... difficult to imagine. Maybe they would carry two guns instead
>of two swords, LOL, and collectively comprise the Japanese police force.
>
>Theoretically, suppose that history had happened this way: Upon the abolishment of the
>samurai class, the samurai still lived as samurai, and the public still regarded them as
>samurai. The government still gave them their stipend, too. (Governments often act in an
>inconsistent manner like this.) Now, if history had happened this way, would that group of
>people still be samurai, even though legally the class was abolished?
>
>I think they would.
>
>This has some parallel to the idea of common-law marriages. If a man and woman "shack up"
>for an extended period of time, and live as man and wife, even though they have never
>exchanged vows or rings... they are for all intents and purposes man and wife. That was
>common practice or "common-law"... the government eventually recognized this and would
>after said elapse of time pronounce them legally man and wife (so the government could get
>additional taxes out of them).
>
>Anyway, the man and wife were really man and wife BEFORE the government acknowledged
>them to be so. It isn't a piece of paper that makes one man and wife. It's the lifestyle. Many
>cultures don't have "pieces of paper" from the government to confirm or legitimize the marriage.
>Public practice or public acceptance takes presidence over legal action.
>
>So what if someone today claimed to be a samurai? If general public acceptance, apart from
>law, would in all practicality make one a samurai (like commonlaw marriage or the Indian caste
>system), how much of the public would it take to justify that claim? What's the critical mass
>required for acceptance? Certainly not 100 percent, because even in the samurai's heyday,
>there were people who didn't agree with the class system as it was. Maybe 51%? A simple
>majority? Who decides what the percentage would be?
>
>All this to say, "NO!" Samurai DON'T exist today... but theoretically, it's possible.
>
>
>> Konnichi wa, tomodachi
>> This is going to seem as if I am against samurai, which I am not. I am
>> rather intrigued by them, in their day. Follow me on this for a moment
>> if you will...
>>
>> When Slavery was abolished in the United States, there were people who
>> still thought slavery was a good idea, and people who didn't. After
>> the abolishment of slavery, for the most part, former slave owners
>> rarely went about saying they were members of a class that proudly
>> owned other human beings and had the right to life or death over them.
>> The law didn't allow that any more, and for the most part, and the
>> general populace would not stand for that. The abolishment was drilled
>> into the public psyche, as was the concept that slave owners were not
>> needed in a changed society, and that all races and classes should be
>> free and theoretically equal. Owning slaves was made not-noble.
>>
>> Samurai had an equal right of life or death over those of lesser
>> class, held all of the benefits of the current society, and when
>> Samurai were abolished, the general psyche of the public thought they
>> were as un-needed as slave owners were in the U.S.
>>
>> So I suppose one could say they were still slave owners if they were
>> the descendants of slave owners...but the public would not look kindly
>> on that, nor would I suspect the public would look kindly on Samurai.
>>
>> There were good samurai, and the parts of samurai life that were noble
>> should be celebrated but lets not forget it was a package deal. - just
>> like there were, I suppose, some good slave owners, but the society
>> evolved around them.
>>
>>
>> Just other thoughts...
>> Christopher
>> (who celebrates the good parts of samurai life, but is aware there are
>> bad ones...)
>>
>> > So theoretically the descendants of the samurai class could
>> therefore still consider themselves to be samurai, although not with a
>> legal foundation, with the laws enacted during the Meiji Restoration
>> being formulated by the winners, if not nessarily/hypothetically those
>> in the 'right' ??
>> > Just a thought
>> > M.Lorimer
>> >
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Samurai Archives: http://www.samurai-archives.com
>> Samurai Archives store: http://www.cafeshops.com/samuraiarchives
>> ---
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>>  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/samuraihistory/
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>>  samuraihistory-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>>
>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>>  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>
>>
>
>---
>Samurai Archives: http://www.samurai-archives.com
>Samurai Archives store: http://www.cafeshops.com/samuraiarchives
>---
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/samuraihistory/
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> samuraihistory-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

burker1@... wrote:

> If you consider royalty to be a class, then the restoration of the monarchy in Spain after the death of Franco could be an example.
>
> Bob Burke

I also thought of that example but what happened in Spain wasn't exactly
the restoration of a Monarchy but instead of a Constitutional Monarchy
(I think this is the term). This means that although the King is the
chief of state and there are noble titles there is no social class
system and the country is ruled by a government (much like in many other
Constitutional Monarchies throughout Europe).

And although there are noble titles that doesn't also mean that there is
a Noble class. For example, here in Portugal we have a Republic and
obviously there is no noble class or anything like that. However, there
are still people that use their noble titles. So, as in th Indian cast
example, the fact that there is no social class doesn't prevent people
from acting as if there was one.

--- golfmandan@... wrote:

>
> So what if someone today claimed to be a samurai? If
> general public acceptance, apart from
> law, would in all practicality make one a samurai
> (like commonlaw marriage or the Indian caste
> system), how much of the public would it take to
> justify that claim? What's the critical mass
> required for acceptance? Certainly not 100 percent,
> because even in the samurai's heyday,
> there were people who didn't agree with the class
> system as it was. Maybe 51%? A simple
> majority? Who decides what the percentage would be?
>

But as previously stated, anyone who made the claim
would be looked at as if they had a certain appendage
protruding from their forehead instead of their fly.
You make a wonderful semantical argument that has no
basis in reality.

> All this to say, "NO!" Samurai DON'T exist today...
> but theoretically, it's possible.

It's possible for me to be named King of Prussia, too,
but I doubt it will happen anytime soon. (I did go to
King of Prussia Mall near Philly, though, about a
month ago.)

Nate


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/

Thank you for the considered answer. I appreciate that the re-establishment of the samurai as a functioning class is next to impossible, but it was just a thought to try and stimulate a debate, if a little semantic.
However, upon your point about the restoration of a class, an example springs to mind, the restoration of the aristocracy along with Louis XVIII, in France after the allied monarchies had removed the Bonapartists from government in 1814. Not a good role model though as they returned even more pompous and existed only until the Revolution in 1830.
M.Lorimer


an@... wrote:
It is theoretically possible, though, that the class could be restored, either through a legal
decision, or through a collective revolt by samurai descendents. I'm trying to think of an
historical illustration of this... Can't. Does anyone else know of a restoration of a class through
revolt or law? In The Three Musketeers, this happens with the Musketeers. But that's fiction,
and the Musketeers weren't a "class" (though there might be some parallels). Lookin' for a real
historical example...

Here's a different idea...
In India, the law has abolished the caste system. However, in real everyday life, the caste
system is just as real as it was before the laws. The law only serves its purpose if people obey
it, or if it is enforced. So it is theoretically possible, also, that descendents of samurai could
claim to be samurai, and if accepted by the general public, they would for all intents and
purposes BE samurai, though legally the class has been abolished. Of course, what a samurai
today would do or be is ... well... difficult to imagine. Maybe they would carry two guns instead
of two swords, LOL, and collectively comprise the Japanese police force.

Theoretically, suppose that history had happened this way: Upon the abolishment of the
samurai class, the samurai still lived as samurai, and the public still regarded them as
samurai. The government still gave them their stipend, too. (Governments often act in an
inconsistent manner like this.) Now, if history had happened this way, would that group of
people still be samurai, even though legally the class was abolished?

I think they would.

This has some parallel to the idea of common-law marriages. If a man and woman "shack up"
for an extended period of time, and live as man and wife, even though they have never
exchanged vows or rings... they are for all intents and purposes man and wife. That was
common practice or "common-law"... the government eventually recognized this and would
after said elapse of time pronounce them legally man and wife (so the government could get
additional taxes out of them).

Anyway, the man and wife were really man and wife BEFORE the government acknowledged
them to be so. It isn't a piece of paper that makes one man and wife. It's the lifestyle. Many
cultures don't have "pieces of paper" from the government to confirm or legitimize the marriage.
Public practice or public acceptance takes presidence over legal action.

So what if someone today claimed to be a samurai? If general public acceptance, apart from
law, would in all practicality make one a samurai (like commonlaw marriage or the Indian caste
system), how much of the public would it take to justify that claim? What's the critical mass
required for acceptance? Certainly not 100 percent, because even in the samurai's heyday,
there were people who didn't agree with the class system as it was. Maybe 51%? A simple
majority? Who decides what the percentage would be?

All this to say, "NO!" Samurai DON'T exist today... but theoretically, it's possible.

> Konnichi wa, tomodachi
> This is going to seem as if I am against samurai, which I am not. I am
> rather intrigued by them, in their day. Follow me on this for a moment
> if you will...
>
> When Slavery was abolished in the United States, there were people who
> still thought slavery was a good idea, and people who didn't. After
> the abolishment of slavery, for the most part, former slave owners
> rarely went about saying they were members of a class that proudly
> owned other human beings and had the right to life or death over them.
> The law didn't allow that any more, and for the most part, and the
> general populace would not stand for that. The abolishment was drilled
> into the public psyche, as was the concept that slave owners were not
> needed in a changed society, and that all races and classes should be
> free and theoretically equal. Owning slaves was made not-noble.
>
> Samurai had an equal right of life or death over those of lesser
> class, held all of the benefits of the current society, and when
> Samurai were abolished, the general psyche of the public thought they
> were as un-needed as slave owners were in the U.S.
>
> So I suppose one could say they were still slave owners if they were
> the descendants of slave owners...but the public would not look kindly
> on that, nor would I suspect the public would look kindly on Samurai.
>
> There were good samurai, and the parts of samurai life that were noble
> should be celebrated but lets not forget it was a package deal. - just
> like there were, I suppose, some good slave owners, but the society
> evolved around them.
>
>
> Just other thoughts...
> Christopher
> (who celebrates the good parts of samurai life, but is aware there are
> bad ones...)
>
> > So theoretically the descendants of the samurai class could
> therefore still consider themselves to be samurai, although not with a
> legal foundation, with the laws enacted during the Meiji Restoration
> being formulated by the winners, if not nessarily/hypothetically those
> in the 'right' ??
> > Just a thought
> > M.Lorimer
> >
>
>
> ---
> Samurai Archives: http://www.samurai-archives.com
> Samurai Archives store: http://www.cafeshops.com/samuraiarchives
> ---
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/samuraihistory/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> samuraihistory-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

---
Samurai Archives: http://www.samurai-archives.com
Samurai Archives store: http://www.cafeshops.com/samuraiarchives
---



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/samuraihistory/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
samuraihistory-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
BT Yahoo! Broadband - Free modem offer, sign up online today and save £80

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Feb 2, 2004, at 7:19 AM, golfmandan@... wrote:

> It is theoretically possible, though, that the class could be
> restored, either through a legal
> decision, or through a collective revolt by samurai descendents. I'm
> trying to think of an
> historical illustration of this... Can't. Does anyone else know of a
> restoration of a class through
> revolt or law? In The Three Musketeers, this happens with the
> Musketeers. But that's fiction,
> and the Musketeers weren't a "class" (though there might be some
> parallels). Lookin' for a real
> historical example...
>
> Here's a different idea...
> In India, the law has abolished the caste system. However, in real
> everyday life, the caste
> system is just as real as it was before the laws. The law only serves
> its purpose if people obey
> it, or if it is enforced. So it is theoretically possible, also, that
> descendents of samurai could
> claim to be samurai, and if accepted by the general public, they would
> for all intents and
> purposes BE samurai, though legally the class has been abolished. Of
> course, what a samurai
> today would do or be is ... well... difficult to imagine. Maybe they
> would carry two guns instead
> of two swords, LOL, and collectively comprise the Japanese police
> force.
>
> Theoretically, suppose that history had happened this way: Upon the
> abolishment of the
> samurai class, the samurai still lived as samurai, and the public
> still regarded them as
> samurai. The government still gave them their stipend, too.
> (Governments often act in an
> inconsistent manner like this.) Now, if history had happened this way,
> would that group of
> people still be samurai, even though legally the class was abolished?
>
> I think they would.
>
> This has some parallel to the idea of common-law marriages. If a man
> and woman "shack up"
> for an extended period of time, and live as man and wife, even though
> they have never
> exchanged vows or rings... they are for all intents and purposes man
> and wife. That was
> common practice or "common-law"... the government eventually
> recognized this and would
> after said elapse of time pronounce them legally man and wife (so the
> government could get
> additional taxes out of them).
>
> Anyway, the man and wife were really man and wife BEFORE the
> government acknowledged
> them to be so. It isn't a piece of paper that makes one man and wife.
> It's the lifestyle. Many
> cultures don't have "pieces of paper" from the government to confirm
> or legitimize the marriage.
> Public practice or public acceptance takes presidence over legal
> action.
>
> So what if someone today claimed to be a samurai? If general public
> acceptance, apart from
> law, would in all practicality make one a samurai (like commonlaw
> marriage or the Indian caste
> system), how much of the public would it take to justify that claim?
> What's the critical mass
> required for acceptance? Certainly not 100 percent, because even in
> the samurai's heyday,
> there were people who didn't agree with the class system as it was.
> Maybe 51%? A simple
> majority? Who decides what the percentage would be?
>
> All this to say, "NO!" Samurai DON'T exist today... but theoretically,
> it's possible.

Honestly, I do not understand the meaning of the whole discussion.
Theoretically, you can speculate, but it makes no sense at all.

Modern Japan is a democracy, and classes have nothing to do with it.
There is no way the government is going to pay a salary to samurai
descendants, no way people could go around the country carrying
weapons, and once again I remind you that to be a samurai means to
***SERVE*** a lord.
So, who will they serve? Shogun Koizumi?

Moreover, the comparison with India does not hold up. India is a 75%
rural country, a pseudo-democracy, and a country where the great
majority of people are Hindu: classes are defined by religion.

Thus, unlike in Japan, Indian society is still structured on a vertical
axis, especially at the village level. Japan has vertical relationships
in schools, companies, etc. but NOT in its constitution. The vertical
relationships in Japan are of a microcosmic nature, and do not permeate
society as a whole.

Finally, Hindu homogeneity is generally not yet mollified by Western
influences and got rid of Buddhism.

These are the reasons why Hindu ideology can still continue. (And of
course -as usual- there are economic reasons as well.)

And talking about economy, being the second wealthiest country in the
world, having schools, hospitals, Panasonics and Toyotas, do you think
the Japanese would care a bit about restoring a medieval social class?

Guys: give up.
Let's stop confounding history with reactionary science fiction.

cepo


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- Cesare Polenghi <cepo@...> wrote:

> Guys: give up.
> Let's stop confounding history with reactionary
> science fiction.
>
> cepo

The scene that comes to mind is the scene in Kagemusha
where Nobunaga isheading out of his castle, listening
to a report about the Tokugawa, and up on the ramparts
are Jesuits intoning a prayer...Nobunaga turns, and
delivers a thunderous "O-mein!" (Amen).

Cepo, OMEIN!!!

Nate

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/

I'm with cepo and Nate. We can argue and theorize all day long.
Much of the discussion is purely semantic and unfortunately, not
based on reality. The argument is not unlike the falling tree
riddle. A wise man once said, "I was walking through the forrest and
a tree fell in front of me. I didn't hear a thing." That wise man
was Stephen Wright.

P.S. When is criterion going to release Kagemusha on DVD. The wait
is driving me NUTS!!!

Brandon
--- In samuraihistory@yahoogroups.com, Nate Ledbetter <
ltdomer98@y...> wrote:

>
> --- Cesare Polenghi wrote:
> > Guys: give up.
> > Let's stop confounding history with reactionary
> > science fiction.
> >
> > cepo
>
> The scene that comes to mind is the scene in Kagemusha
> where Nobunaga isheading out of his castle, listening
> to a report about the Tokugawa, and up on the ramparts
> are Jesuits intoning a prayer...Nobunaga turns, and
> delivers a thunderous "O-mein!" (Amen).
>
> Cepo, OMEIN!!!
>
> Nate
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
> http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/

Hi.
Confining the subject to purely academic sides, I do
find all your arguments on 'this Samurai death
certificate' quite entertaining.

We started to observe that we have political
scientists and lawyers on this listserv who impose
their tools of analysis on this trivial topic and yet
regenerate it into something interesting. Of course,
this is true only when we secure a certain level of
leniency from serious historians and Japanese studies
scholars on their standard of rigor on the historical
research as a science.

I think that this new trend would benefit all of us as
long as we do not bog ourselves with frivolous mocking
and offenses.(personal, racial, and cultural)
As someone told probabily about two month ago, I came
to this group to 'LEARN' from experts. In that sense,
don't you think that it would be a good idea not to
bring up this 'death' subject for the time being for
all of us?

ps. I liked an argument using the concept of English
common law(whoever wrote this) and Cesare's
counter-argument.




Sincerely,





Changsub Lee


--- Cesare Polenghi <cepo@...> wrote:

> On Feb 2, 2004, at 7:19 AM, golfmandan@...
> wrote:
>
> > It is theoretically possible, though, that the
> class could be
> > restored, either through a legal
> > decision, or through a collective revolt by
> samurai descendents. I'm
> > trying to think of an
> > historical illustration of this... Can't. Does
> anyone else know of a
> > restoration of a class through
> > revolt or law? In The Three Musketeers, this
> happens with the
> > Musketeers. But that's fiction,
> > and the Musketeers weren't a "class" (though there
> might be some
> > parallels). Lookin' for a real
> > historical example...
> >
> > Here's a different idea...
> > In India, the law has abolished the caste system.
> However, in real
> > everyday life, the caste
> > system is just as real as it was before the laws.
> The law only serves
> > its purpose if people obey
> > it, or if it is enforced. So it is theoretically
> possible, also, that
> > descendents of samurai could
> > claim to be samurai, and if accepted by the
> general public, they would
> > for all intents and
> > purposes BE samurai, though legally the class has
> been abolished. Of
> > course, what a samurai
> > today would do or be is ... well... difficult to
> imagine. Maybe they
> > would carry two guns instead
> > of two swords, LOL, and collectively comprise the
> Japanese police
> > force.
> >
> > Theoretically, suppose that history had happened
> this way: Upon the
> > abolishment of the
> > samurai class, the samurai still lived as samurai,
> and the public
> > still regarded them as
> > samurai. The government still gave them their
> stipend, too.
> > (Governments often act in an
> > inconsistent manner like this.) Now, if history
> had happened this way,
> > would that group of
> > people still be samurai, even though legally the
> class was abolished?
> >
> > I think they would.
> >
> > This has some parallel to the idea of common-law
> marriages. If a man
> > and woman "shack up"
> > for an extended period of time, and live as man
> and wife, even though
> > they have never
> > exchanged vows or rings... they are for all
> intents and purposes man
> > and wife. That was
> > common practice or "common-law"... the government
> eventually
> > recognized this and would
> > after said elapse of time pronounce them legally
> man and wife (so the
> > government could get
> > additional taxes out of them).
> >
> > Anyway, the man and wife were really man and wife
> BEFORE the
> > government acknowledged
> > them to be so. It isn't a piece of paper that
> makes one man and wife.
> > It's the lifestyle. Many
> > cultures don't have "pieces of paper" from the
> government to confirm
> > or legitimize the marriage.
> > Public practice or public acceptance takes
> presidence over legal
> > action.
> >
> > So what if someone today claimed to be a samurai?
> If general public
> > acceptance, apart from
> > law, would in all practicality make one a samurai
> (like commonlaw
> > marriage or the Indian caste
> > system), how much of the public would it take to
> justify that claim?
> > What's the critical mass
> > required for acceptance? Certainly not 100
> percent, because even in
> > the samurai's heyday,
> > there were people who didn't agree with the class
> system as it was.
> > Maybe 51%? A simple
> > majority? Who decides what the percentage would
> be?
> >
> > All this to say, "NO!" Samurai DON'T exist
> today... but theoretically,
> > it's possible.
>
> Honestly, I do not understand the meaning of the
> whole discussion.
> Theoretically, you can speculate, but it makes no
> sense at all.
>
> Modern Japan is a democracy, and classes have
> nothing to do with it.
> There is no way the government is going to pay a
> salary to samurai
> descendants, no way people could go around the
> country carrying
> weapons, and once again I remind you that to be a
> samurai means to
> ***SERVE*** a lord.
> So, who will they serve? Shogun Koizumi?
>
> Moreover, the comparison with India does not hold
> up. India is a 75%
> rural country, a pseudo-democracy, and a country
> where the great
> majority of people are Hindu: classes are defined by
> religion.
>
> Thus, unlike in Japan, Indian society is still
> structured on a vertical
> axis, especially at the village level. Japan has
> vertical relationships
> in schools, companies, etc. but NOT in its
> constitution. The vertical
> relationships in Japan are of a microcosmic nature,
> and do not permeate
> society as a whole.
>
> Finally, Hindu homogeneity is generally not yet
> mollified by Western
> influences and got rid of Buddhism.
>
> These are the reasons why Hindu ideology can still
> continue. (And of
> course -as usual- there are economic reasons as
> well.)
>
> And talking about economy, being the second
> wealthiest country in the
> world, having schools, hospitals, Panasonics and
> Toyotas, do you think
> the Japanese would care a bit about restoring a
> medieval social class?
>
> Guys: give up.
> Let's stop confounding history with reactionary
> science fiction.
>
> cepo
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/

"Guys; Give up"?? I fully appreciate that the issue of the re-institution of the samurai, or their continued functioning presence within modern Japanese society is impossible, even irrational, and the argument is based upon using a great deal of "what ifs", but is that a reason for those who have contributed to be told to "give up"??
I have enjoyed this forum for over 2 years now, both for the history and culture I have learned, aswell as the pushing-and-pulling between various peoples opinions. There has also been a whole series debates on whether certain authors' books are just rehashes, organizing trips to Kyoto, want-to-be samurai, and sometimes even just plain old simple abuse. Most has been enjoyable, some not so. Not everyone can be interested in the same topics or conversations (however hypothetical), so I don't feel certain members should simply try to put a block on what other another member, or members, wish to talk about.
Let the tirades commence.
M.Lorimer

Cesare Polenghi <cepo@...> wrote:

On Feb 2, 2004, at 7:19 AM, golfmandan@... wrote:

> It is theoretically possible, though, that the class could be
> restored, either through a legal
> decision, or through a collective revolt by samurai descendents. I'm
> trying to think of an
> historical illustration of this... Can't. Does anyone else know of a
> restoration of a class through
> revolt or law? In The Three Musketeers, this happens with the
> Musketeers. But that's fiction,
> and the Musketeers weren't a "class" (though there might be some
> parallels). Lookin' for a real
> historical example...
>
> Here's a different idea...
> In India, the law has abolished the caste system. However, in real
> everyday life, the caste
> system is just as real as it was before the laws. The law only serves
> its purpose if people obey
> it, or if it is enforced. So it is theoretically possible, also, that
> descendents of samurai could
> claim to be samurai, and if accepted by the general public, they would
> for all intents and
> purposes BE samurai, though legally the class has been abolished. Of
> course, what a samurai
> today would do or be is ... well... difficult to imagine. Maybe they
> would carry two guns instead
> of two swords, LOL, and collectively comprise the Japanese police
> force.
>
> Theoretically, suppose that history had happened this way: Upon the
> abolishment of the
> samurai class, the samurai still lived as samurai, and the public
> still regarded them as
> samurai. The government still gave them their stipend, too.
> (Governments often act in an
> inconsistent manner like this.) Now, if history had happened this way,
> would that group of
> people still be samurai, even though legally the class was abolished?
>
> I think they would.
>
> This has some parallel to the idea of common-law marriages. If a man
> and woman "shack up"
> for an extended period of time, and live as man and wife, even though
> they have never
> exchanged vows or rings... they are for all intents and purposes man
> and wife. That was
> common practice or "common-law"... the government eventually
> recognized this and would
> after said elapse of time pronounce them legally man and wife (so the
> government could get
> additional taxes out of them).
>
> Anyway, the man and wife were really man and wife BEFORE the
> government acknowledged
> them to be so. It isn't a piece of paper that makes one man and wife.
> It's the lifestyle. Many
> cultures don't have "pieces of paper" from the government to confirm
> or legitimize the marriage.
> Public practice or public acceptance takes presidence over legal
> action.
>
> So what if someone today claimed to be a samurai? If general public
> acceptance, apart from
> law, would in all practicality make one a samurai (like commonlaw
> marriage or the Indian caste
> system), how much of the public would it take to justify that claim?
> What's the critical mass
> required for acceptance? Certainly not 100 percent, because even in
> the samurai's heyday,
> there were people who didn't agree with the class system as it was.
> Maybe 51%? A simple
> majority? Who decides what the percentage would be?
>
> All this to say, "NO!" Samurai DON'T exist today... but theoretically,
> it's possible.

Honestly, I do not understand the meaning of the whole discussion.
Theoretically, you can speculate, but it makes no sense at all.

Modern Japan is a democracy, and classes have nothing to do with it.
There is no way the government is going to pay a salary to samurai
descendants, no way people could go around the country carrying
weapons, and once again I remind you that to be a samurai means to
***SERVE*** a lord.
So, who will they serve? Shogun Koizumi?

Moreover, the comparison with India does not hold up. India is a 75%
rural country, a pseudo-democracy, and a country where the great
majority of people are Hindu: classes are defined by religion.

Thus, unlike in Japan, Indian society is still structured on a vertical
axis, especially at the village level. Japan has vertical relationships
in schools, companies, etc. but NOT in its constitution. The vertical
relationships in Japan are of a microcosmic nature, and do not permeate
society as a whole.

Finally, Hindu homogeneity is generally not yet mollified by Western
influences and got rid of Buddhism.

These are the reasons why Hindu ideology can still continue. (And of
course -as usual- there are economic reasons as well.)

And talking about economy, being the second wealthiest country in the
world, having schools, hospitals, Panasonics and Toyotas, do you think
the Japanese would care a bit about restoring a medieval social class?

Guys: give up.
Let's stop confounding history with reactionary science fiction.

cepo


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



---
Samurai Archives: http://www.samurai-archives.com
Samurai Archives store: http://www.cafeshops.com/samuraiarchives
---



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/samuraihistory/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
samuraihistory-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
BT Yahoo! Broadband - Free modem offer, sign up online today and save £80

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- Michael Lorimer <mijalo_jp@...> wrote:

> "Guys; Give up"?? I fully appreciate that the issue
> of the re-institution of the samurai, or their
> continued functioning presence within modern
> Japanese society is impossible, even irrational, and
> the argument is based upon using a great deal of
> "what ifs", but is that a reason for those who have
> contributed to be told to "give up"??

YES, IT IS!!!! You want a tirade, I'll give you
one--and it's not necessarily directed at YOU, per se,
but come on--do YOU ENJOY PUTTING UP WITH IDIOTS? I
sure don't. Everyone has a right to their thoughts, no
matter how stupid they may be. That doesn't mean they
are welcome to inflict them on us TIME AND AGAIN. If
you've been here for several years, you know darn well
this comes up over and over. It's FRICKING
RIDICULOUS!!!! I'm not going to encourage someone to
be stupid--I'm going to tell them like it is. YOU
CANNOT BECOME A SAMURAI. SAMURAI NO LONGER EXIST.
SAMURAI IS NOT A "STATE OF MIND". It was a SOCIAL
CLASS THAT WAS LEGISLATED OUT OF EXISTENCE IN THE LATE
1800'S. END OF STORY!!!!

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/

Don't sugarcoat it. Tell us how you really feel. :)

Bob Burke


In a message dated 2/3/04 9:30:35 PM, ltdomer98@... writes:

<<
--- Michael Lorimer <mijalo_jp@...> wrote:

> "Guys; Give up"?? I fully appreciate that the issue
> of the re-institution of the samurai, or their
> continued functioning presence within modern
> Japanese society is impossible, even irrational, and
> the argument is based upon using a great deal of
> "what ifs", but is that a reason for those who have
> contributed to be told to "give up"??

YES, IT IS!!!! You want a tirade, I'll give you
one--and it's not necessarily directed at YOU, per se,
but come on--do YOU ENJOY PUTTING UP WITH IDIOTS? I
sure don't. Everyone has a right to their thoughts, no
matter how stupid they may be. That doesn't mean they
are welcome to inflict them on us TIME AND AGAIN. If
you've been here for several years, you know darn well
this comes up over and over. It's FRICKING
RIDICULOUS!!!! I'm not going to encourage someone to
be stupid--I'm going to tell them like it is. YOU
CANNOT BECOME A SAMURAI. SAMURAI NO LONGER EXIST.
SAMURAI IS NOT A "STATE OF MIND". It was a SOCIAL
CLASS THAT WAS LEGISLATED OUT OF EXISTENCE IN THE LATE
1800'S. END OF STORY!!!! >>

Dear Group:
I often have read discussions involving Buddihism as a
part of the Japanese culture.
With regard to the connection of the Japanese Buddhism
to that of India, South Asia, and Tibet, I want to
point out that they are significantly different.

The Japanese Buddism results from intellectual
interaction among Taoism, Confucianism and Buddhism
itself throughout centuries, the first two of which
did not really have much effect on India, South Asia,
and Tibet.
Through this interaction, primitive Taoism and
Confucianism was reborn as more subtle and complex
philosophy with rigorous logical structures in 5 and
12 centuries respectivly.As for the proper terminology
for the present Taoism and Confuncianism for the
Westerners, I personally think that words like
'Theoretical' Taoism and Confuciansim would suit.

This is one of reasons why I think that we need to
consider having a distinctly different cultural
classification covering Japan, China, and
Korea.(something like North Asia or North East Asia)
This may be one of fertile area of research for
Western scholars for the coming years. Thank you.





Sincerely,






Changsub Lee

--- Cesare Polenghi <cepo@...> wrote:

> Finally, Hindu homogeneity is generally not yet
> mollified by Western
> influences and got rid of Buddhism.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/

cepo and all

Just playin' the devil's advocate here. So many people here are saying it isn't even theoretically
possible, but actually, it is theoretically possible. Didn't say probable. Didn't say likely. Didn't
say I want it to happen or anything of the sort. Just that it was theoretically possible.

> On Feb 2, 2004, at 7:19 AM, golfmandan@... wrote:
>
> > It is theoretically possible, though, that the class could be
> > restored, either through a legal
> > decision, or through a collective revolt by samurai descendents. I'm
> > trying to think of an
> > historical illustration of this... Can't. Does anyone else know of a
> > restoration of a class through
> > revolt or law? In The Three Musketeers, this happens with the
> > Musketeers. But that's fiction,
> > and the Musketeers weren't a "class" (though there might be some
> > parallels). Lookin' for a real
> > historical example...
> >
> > Here's a different idea...
> > In India, the law has abolished the caste system. However, in real
> > everyday life, the caste
> > system is just as real as it was before the laws. The law only serves
> > its purpose if people obey
> > it, or if it is enforced. So it is theoretically possible, also, that
> > descendents of samurai could
> > claim to be samurai, and if accepted by the general public, they would
> > for all intents and
> > purposes BE samurai, though legally the class has been abolished. Of
> > course, what a samurai
> > today would do or be is ... well... difficult to imagine. Maybe they
> > would carry two guns instead
> > of two swords, LOL, and collectively comprise the Japanese police
> > force.
> >
> > Theoretically, suppose that history had happened this way: Upon the
> > abolishment of the
> > samurai class, the samurai still lived as samurai, and the public
> > still regarded them as
> > samurai. The government still gave them their stipend, too.
> > (Governments often act in an
> > inconsistent manner like this.) Now, if history had happened this way,
> > would that group of
> > people still be samurai, even though legally the class was abolished?
> >
> > I think they would.
> >
> > This has some parallel to the idea of common-law marriages. If a man
> > and woman "shack up"
> > for an extended period of time, and live as man and wife, even though
> > they have never
> > exchanged vows or rings... they are for all intents and purposes man
> > and wife. That was
> > common practice or "common-law"... the government eventually
> > recognized this and would
> > after said elapse of time pronounce them legally man and wife (so the
> > government could get
> > additional taxes out of them).
> >
> > Anyway, the man and wife were really man and wife BEFORE the
> > government acknowledged
> > them to be so. It isn't a piece of paper that makes one man and wife.
> > It's the lifestyle. Many
> > cultures don't have "pieces of paper" from the government to confirm
> > or legitimize the marriage.
> > Public practice or public acceptance takes presidence over legal
> > action.
> >
> > So what if someone today claimed to be a samurai? If general public
> > acceptance, apart from
> > law, would in all practicality make one a samurai (like commonlaw
> > marriage or the Indian caste
> > system), how much of the public would it take to justify that claim?
> > What's the critical mass
> > required for acceptance? Certainly not 100 percent, because even in
> > the samurai's heyday,
> > there were people who didn't agree with the class system as it was.
> > Maybe 51%? A simple
> > majority? Who decides what the percentage would be?
> >
> > All this to say, "NO!" Samurai DON'T exist today... but theoretically,
> > it's possible.
>
> Honestly, I do not understand the meaning of the whole discussion.
> Theoretically, you can speculate, but it makes no sense at all.
>
> Modern Japan is a democracy, and classes have nothing to do with it.
> There is no way the government is going to pay a salary to samurai
> descendants, no way people could go around the country carrying
> weapons, and once again I remind you that to be a samurai means to
> ***SERVE*** a lord.
> So, who will they serve? Shogun Koizumi?
>
> Moreover, the comparison with India does not hold up. India is a 75%
> rural country, a pseudo-democracy, and a country where the great
> majority of people are Hindu: classes are defined by religion.
>
> Thus, unlike in Japan, Indian society is still structured on a vertical
> axis, especially at the village level. Japan has vertical relationships
> in schools, companies, etc. but NOT in its constitution. The vertical
> relationships in Japan are of a microcosmic nature, and do not permeate
> society as a whole.
>
> Finally, Hindu homogeneity is generally not yet mollified by Western
> influences and got rid of Buddhism.
>
> These are the reasons why Hindu ideology can still continue. (And of
> course -as usual- there are economic reasons as well.)
>
> And talking about economy, being the second wealthiest country in the
> world, having schools, hospitals, Panasonics and Toyotas, do you think
> the Japanese would care a bit about restoring a medieval social class?
>
> Guys: give up.
> Let's stop confounding history with reactionary science fiction.
>
> cepo
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ---
> Samurai Archives: http://www.samurai-archives.com
> Samurai Archives store: http://www.cafeshops.com/samuraiarchives
> ---
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/samuraihistory/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> samuraihistory-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Are you nuts Mr Lee?
Where is your sources?
Had ye at LEAST studyed anything about japanese buddhism?

With the exception of the Nichiren Shoshu (Not Nichiren Shu), that I will
give no comments for politeness reasons...

Your information is incorrect, specially if ye take in an absolute degree.

Yes, taoism had an influence in japanese culture, but buddhism is another
case.

We can say at certain points that in popular sence, due to the Shinbutsu
Shugo historical phenomena, there was some syncretisms between buddhism and
shindo (way of the gods, the indigenous faith of japan, also know as
shintoism) like the Shichifukujin, in special the Daikokuten, that is a
translation of the sanskrit Mahâkala, a wrathful war deity, called to fight
evil spirits, grant victory against evil enemies, and to ensure prosperity
with an image of an shinto god of weathiness whose name is something like
"...onushin no kami" or something like that.

If you read the Shingon-shu founder Kubo Daishi Kûkai Great Treatise about
the three religions, including Buddhism, Taoism and Confucionism, you would
see his great knowledge about these three philosofical systems, but showing
Buddhism as supperior, so discouraging mixes and saladas.

He went to China, to receive the transmission of the Tantric Vajrayana
Buddhism from Hui-kwo, who received from Subhakarasimha, who have a direct
lineage to Nagarjuna himself.

The same happens with the Zen (chinese: Chaan Sanskrit: Dhyana) Shu
buddhism. They have a direct linneage of tranmission direct from
Boddhidharma who also transmitted the Bodhisattva Vajramukti that is the
root of the majority of several asiatic martial systems, including Karate
whose movements are based on the paterns of the Maha-Mandala that is the
embodyment of the three holy bodies of Dai-nichi Nyorai (Maha Vairocana
Tathagâta) and Shaka Nyorai (Shakyamuni Tathagâta).

study more before saying ignorant things about Japan.

I was a Mikkyo follower, including Shugendo, for several years in my past,
and even if no longer a buddhist, I still respect this way due to their
tolerance towards others religions, unlike certain ones that promoted a real
bloodshed in Europe, Japan, Brazil, etc...

Octavio Augusto Okimoto Alves de Carvalho
São Paulo - SP Brazil


Message: 10
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 02:58:59 -0800 (PST)
From: Lee Changsub <knorr31@...>
Subject: One minor point

Dear Group:
I often have read discussions involving Buddihism as a
part of the Japanese culture.
With regard to the connection of the Japanese Buddhism
to that of India, South Asia, and Tibet, I want to
point out that they are significantly different.

The Japanese Buddism results from intellectual
interaction among Taoism, Confucianism and Buddhism
itself throughout centuries, the first two of which
did not really have much effect on India, South Asia,
and Tibet.
Through this interaction, primitive Taoism and
Confucianism was reborn as more subtle and complex
philosophy with rigorous logical structures in 5 and
12 centuries respectivly.As for the proper terminology
for the present Taoism and Confuncianism for the
Westerners, I personally think that words like
'Theoretical' Taoism and Confuciansim would suit.

This is one of reasons why I think that we need to
consider having a distinctly different cultural
classification covering Japan, China, and
Korea.(something like North Asia or North East Asia)
This may be one of fertile area of research for
Western scholars for the coming years. Thank you.





Sincerely,






Changsub Lee

--- Cesare Polenghi <cepo@...> wrote:

> Finally, Hindu homogeneity is generally not yet
> mollified by Western
> influences and got rid of Buddhism.

If you want to argue with me, you have to provide a
source and refute it directly sentence by sentence.
Obviously, your writing exhibits your knowledge about
the Japanese Buddhism. But, as for your response, I do
not know where to start to touch if I am a surgeon to
operate on the patient.

To make things clearer, the framework I placed in the
distinction and the interaction among Taoism,
Confucianism, and Buddihism has been quite
conventional and been well known facts among scholars
in the continent.
It is just not known to the Western scholars because
most of sources were written for people who are
familiar with the Chinese literature. Let's consider
your case:

> Where is your sources?
> Had ye at LEAST studyed anything about japanese
> buddhism?

What is the meaning of the 'Japanese' Buddhism? Can we
talk about the Japanese Buddhism without linking to
China or India?
Yes, we can, but depending on the specificis of
analysis on the given topics, we leave out China or
India. So, given the scopes of studies, we can
formulate the wide, intermediate, and the short ranged
analytical scopes.
If we say that the studies of the Japanese Buddhism
including India and China are the wide-ranged studies,
we may say that studies leaving out India, but
including China are the intermediate ranged studies.
My argument becomes clearer if you superimpose this
intermediate scope on your mind, which probabiliy
requires the understanding of the 'theoretical' Taoism
and Confucianism in addition to the 'Japanese'
Buddhism.(Mere understaning or reading of primitive
Taosim and Confucianism books would not help as I
pointed out before)

> Yes, taoism had an influence in japanese culture,
> but buddhism is another
> case.

Can we discuss the Japanese culture without Buddhism?
Yes, we can. But, as I said, it depends on your scope
of analysis.

> Your information is incorrect, specially if ye take
> in an absolute degree.

I never draw my argument in an absolute degree.
However, I was absolute in my scope of observation.

> We can say at certain points that in popular sence,
> due to the Shinbutsu
> Shugo historical phenomena, there was some
> syncretisms between buddhism and
> shindo (way of the gods, the indigenous faith of
> japan, also know as
> shintoism)

True. But in the sense of short-ranged(not meant for
any negative sense) studies on 'Pure'(if any) Japanese
Buddihism. (I do not need to reiterate that it is the
relative judgement)

> If you read the Shingon-shu founder Kubo Daishi
> K�kai Great Treatise about
> the three religions, including Buddhism, Taoism and
> Confucionism, you would
> see his great knowledge about these three
> philosofical systems, but showing
> Buddhism as supperior, so discouraging mixes and
> saladas

Even on the continent(China and Korea), there were
'mixes and saladas'. But, it simply looked like it
when we did not make a rigid distinction between
Buddhism and 'Folk' Buddhism. Recall that many of
common people in the North Asis were illiterate
whereas the nobility class exhibited intelligence of
high complexity and rigor until the modernization
period.

Lastly, what is the meaning of these?

> Are you nuts Mr Lee?
> study more before saying ignorant things about
> Japan.

My current research area is on quantum mechanics and
it application to social sciences. I have been working
lately until last Friday night and opened your message
now.
Do you think that I should be 'nice' with you?

I remind you that I once told that if you had any
personal stuff with me, you'd better email me
directly.




c.s.


--- Me�al Mikit St�r-ljon Oddhinsson
<medhal8@...> wrote:

> Are you nuts Mr Lee?
> Where is your sources?
> Had ye at LEAST studyed anything about japanese
> buddhism?
>
> With the exception of the Nichiren Shoshu (Not
> Nichiren Shu), that I will
> give no comments for politeness reasons...
>
> Your information is incorrect, specially if ye take
> in an absolute degree.
>
> Yes, taoism had an influence in japanese culture,
> but buddhism is another
> case.
>
> We can say at certain points that in popular sence,
> due to the Shinbutsu
> Shugo historical phenomena, there was some
> syncretisms between buddhism and
> shindo (way of the gods, the indigenous faith of
> japan, also know as
> shintoism) like the Shichifukujin, in special the
> Daikokuten, that is a
> translation of the sanskrit Mah�kala, a wrathful war
> deity, called to fight
> evil spirits, grant victory against evil enemies,
> and to ensure prosperity
> with an image of an shinto god of weathiness whose
> name is something like
> "...onushin no kami" or something like that.
>
> If you read the Shingon-shu founder Kubo Daishi
> K�kai Great Treatise about
> the three religions, including Buddhism, Taoism and
> Confucionism, you would
> see his great knowledge about these three
> philosofical systems, but showing
> Buddhism as supperior, so discouraging mixes and
> saladas.
>
> He went to China, to receive the transmission of the
> Tantric Vajrayana
> Buddhism from Hui-kwo, who received from
> Subhakarasimha, who have a direct
> lineage to Nagarjuna himself.
>
> The same happens with the Zen (chinese: Chaan
> Sanskrit: Dhyana) Shu
> buddhism. They have a direct linneage of tranmission
> direct from
> Boddhidharma who also transmitted the Bodhisattva
> Vajramukti that is the
> root of the majority of several asiatic martial
> systems, including Karate
> whose movements are based on the paterns of the
> Maha-Mandala that is the
> embodyment of the three holy bodies of Dai-nichi
> Nyorai (Maha Vairocana
> Tathag�ta) and Shaka Nyorai (Shakyamuni Tathag�ta).
>
> study more before saying ignorant things about
> Japan.
>
> I was a Mikkyo follower, including Shugendo, for
> several years in my past,
> and even if no longer a buddhist, I still respect
> this way due to their
> tolerance towards others religions, unlike certain
> ones that promoted a real
> bloodshed in Europe, Japan, Brazil, etc...
>
> Octavio Augusto Okimoto Alves de Carvalho
> S�o Paulo - SP Brazil
>
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 02:58:59 -0800 (PST)
> From: Lee Changsub <knorr31@...>
> Subject: One minor point
>
> Dear Group:
> I often have read discussions involving Buddihism as
> a
> part of the Japanese culture.
> With regard to the connection of the Japanese
> Buddhism
> to that of India, South Asia, and Tibet, I want to
> point out that they are significantly different.
>
> The Japanese Buddism results from intellectual
> interaction among Taoism, Confucianism and Buddhism
> itself throughout centuries, the first two of which
> did not really have much effect on India, South
> Asia,
> and Tibet.
> Through this interaction, primitive Taoism and
> Confucianism was reborn as more subtle and complex
> philosophy with rigorous logical structures in 5 and
> 12 centuries respectivly.As for the proper
> terminology
> for the present Taoism and Confuncianism for the
> Westerners, I personally think that words like
> 'Theoretical' Taoism and Confuciansim would suit.
>
> This is one of reasons why I think that we need to
> consider having a distinctly different cultural
> classification covering Japan, China, and
> Korea.(something like North Asia or North East Asia)
> This may be one of fertile area of research for
> Western scholars for the coming years. Thank you.
>
>
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Changsub Lee
>
> --- Cesare Polenghi <cepo@...> wrote:
> > Finally, Hindu homogeneity is generally not yet
> > mollified by Western
> > influences and got rid of Buddhism.
>
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html

First a question: Has anyone read "Zen and the Way of the Sword: Arming the Samurai
Psyche" by Winston King? This group is pretty big on "no bushido before musashi" and I think
(from the reviews I've read) King assumes bushido was always a part of the Samurai lifestyle.

I haven't read much on the use of Zen in the Samurai class. Zen seems to be strangely
compatible in an opposites attract sort of way with Bushido, but what about before Bushido
was really around? Which, did Zen give birth to Bushido in some way? And what role did Zen
really play in the samurai's life? I just don't see the connection or compatibility between the
upper warrior class and Zen Buddhism. The principles and lifestyle just don't seem to mesh.

Anyway, In defense of Mr. Lee,

What he may have been getting at was the difference between Mahayana and Theravada
Buddhism. Mahayana is the more popular, less rigorous, and more syncretistic variety found
throughout SE Asia, whereas Theravada is the more "pure" version of Buddhism, which had a
stronger hold in Japan (Zen Buddhism being a subcategory of Theravada). Zen, as a
subcategory of Theravada, adds to the mix the idea of "immediate" enlightenment rather than
gradual enlightenment, through the use of meditation to bring about enlightening moments, or
epiphanies.

But where Lee says that Korean, Japanese, and Chinese Buddhism should all be in one
category, he's right as far as them all being Theravada, but he's wrong in that Japanese
Buddhism is pretty different from Chinese, at least in that Chinese Buddhism is more
syncretistic. Japanese Buddhism is generally regarded as being the version closest to the
original Buddhism.

Lee wrote:

>The Japanese Buddism results from intellectual
> interaction among Taoism, Confucianism and Buddhism
> itself throughout centuries, the first two of which
> did not really have much effect on India, South Asia,
> and Tibet.
> Through this interaction, primitive Taoism and
> Confucianism was reborn as more subtle and complex
> philosophy with rigorous logical structures in 5 and
> 12 centuries respectivly

I wouldn't say that Japanese Buddhism "results from" that interaction, but rather that the
presence of Taoism and Confucianism allowed for Buddhism to be accepted with greater ease.
Taoism and Confucianism are primarily atheistic, as is Theravada Buddhism. Both promote a
general morality, as does Buddhism. And Taoism, with its quizzical proverbs and mysterious
statements, parallels (a little bit) the practices of Zen teachers quizzing their students (strange
statements that don't really mean anything but might help you understand something else).
And Buddhism can easily be looked at as "The Way". But "parallels" is a different thing than
"results from." I think history would show that Japanese Buddhism - rather than being an
example of syncretism - is actually the closest to the original Buddhism of India. Mahayana
Buddhism is sometimes VERY syncretistic, and has little to do with what Siddartha Gautama
actually taught, and again, the Buddhism of Japan is different from that of China, even though
they're both technically Theravada.

For those who don't know the history: Buddhism started in India as kind of a reactionary
spinoff of Hinduism. It grew in popularity and Buddhist missionaries were sent out to Asia. As
Theravada Buddhism spread in Asia (and through China, into Japan) there was a resurgence of
Hinduism in India, and the Hindus killed or drove out all the Buddhists. In Japan, the Buddhism
stayed more or less in its pure form, but in the rest of Asia, it developed into a less rigorous
version (Mahayana) and mixed with the traditional religions. Though China is technically
theravada, it's still syncretistic, so more like the rest of asia than Japan.

> Are you nuts Mr Lee?
> Where is your sources?
> Had ye at LEAST studyed anything about japanese buddhism?
>
> With the exception of the Nichiren Shoshu (Not Nichiren Shu), that I will
> give no comments for politeness reasons...
>
> Your information is incorrect, specially if ye take in an absolute degree.
>
> Yes, taoism had an influence in japanese culture, but buddhism is another
> case.
>
> We can say at certain points that in popular sence, due to the Shinbutsu
> Shugo historical phenomena, there was some syncretisms between buddhism and
> shindo (way of the gods, the indigenous faith of japan, also know as
> shintoism) like the Shichifukujin, in special the Daikokuten, that is a
> translation of the sanskrit Mah�kala, a wrathful war deity, called to fight
> evil spirits, grant victory against evil enemies, and to ensure prosperity
> with an image of an shinto god of weathiness whose name is something like
> "...onushin no kami" or something like that.
>

> If you read the Shingon-shu founder Kubo Daishi K�kai Great Treatise about
> the three religions, including Buddhism, Taoism and Confucionism, you would
> see his great knowledge about these three philosofical systems, but showing
> Buddhism as supperior, so discouraging mixes and saladas.
>
> He went to China, to receive the transmission of the Tantric Vajrayana
> Buddhism from Hui-kwo, who received from Subhakarasimha, who have a direct
> lineage to Nagarjuna himself.
>
> The same happens with the Zen (chinese: Chaan Sanskrit: Dhyana) Shu
> buddhism. They have a direct linneage of tranmission direct from
> Boddhidharma who also transmitted the Bodhisattva Vajramukti that is the
> root of the majority of several asiatic martial systems, including Karate
> whose movements are based on the paterns of the Maha-Mandala that is the
> embodyment of the three holy bodies of Dai-nichi Nyorai (Maha Vairocana
> Tathag�ta) and Shaka Nyorai (Shakyamuni Tathag�ta).
>
> study more before saying ignorant things about Japan.
>

> I was a Mikkyo follower, including Shugendo, for several years in my past,
> and even if no longer a buddhist, I still respect this way due to their
> tolerance towards others religions, unlike certain ones that promoted a real
> bloodshed in Europe, Japan, Brazil, etc...
>
> Octavio Augusto Okimoto Alves de Carvalho
> S�o Paulo - SP Brazil
>
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 02:58:59 -0800 (PST)
> From: Lee Changsub <knorr31@...>
> Subject: One minor point
>
> Dear Group:
> I often have read discussions involving Buddihism as a
> part of the Japanese culture.
> With regard to the connection of the Japanese Buddhism
> to that of India, South Asia, and Tibet, I want to
> point out that they are significantly different.
>
> The Japanese Buddism results from intellectual
> interaction among Taoism, Confucianism and Buddhism
> itself throughout centuries, the first two of which
> did not really have much effect on India, South Asia,
> and Tibet.
> Through this interaction, primitive Taoism and

> Confucianism was reborn as more subtle and complex
> philosophy with rigorous logical structures in 5 and
> 12 centuries respectivly.As for the proper terminology
> for the present Taoism and Confuncianism for the
> Westerners, I personally think that words like
> 'Theoretical' Taoism and Confuciansim would suit.
>
> This is one of reasons why I think that we need to
> consider having a distinctly different cultural
> classification covering Japan, China, and
> Korea.(something like North Asia or North East Asia)
> This may be one of fertile area of research for
> Western scholars for the coming years. Thank you.
>
>
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Changsub Lee
>
> --- Cesare Polenghi <cepo@...> wrote:
> > Finally, Hindu homogeneity is generally not yet
> > mollified by Western
> > influences and got rid of Buddhism.
>
>
>
> ---
> Samurai Archives: http://www.samurai-archives.com
> Samurai Archives store: http://www.cafeshops.com/samuraiarchives
> ---

> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

Dear Group:
Hi, I admit that I was not very clear about...



Sincerely,




Changsub Lee


--- golfmandan@... wrote:

> But "parallels" is a different thing than
> "results from." I think history would show that
> Japanese Buddhism - rather than being an
> example of syncretism - is actually the closest to
> the original Buddhism of India.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html

Hi Golfman



Message: 20
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 02:40:52 +0000
From: golfmandan@...
Subject: Re: Re: One minor point

First a question: Has anyone read "Zen and the Way of the Sword: Arming the
Samurai
Psyche" by Winston King? This group is pretty big on "no bushido before
musashi" and I think
(from the reviews I've read) King assumes bushido was always a part of the
Samurai lifestyle.
------------------
OCT: Nope, I didn't read the book, but I think this statement is aceptable.
According to what I've studied, there was before Musashi, a type of non
written Samurai's Morality System.


I haven't read much on the use of Zen in the Samurai class. Zen seems to be
strangely
compatible in an opposites attract sort of way with Bushido, but what about
before Bushido
was really around? Which, did Zen give birth to Bushido in some way? And
what role did Zen
really play in the samurai's life? I just don't see the connection or
compatibility between the
upper warrior class and Zen Buddhism. The principles and lifestyle just
don't seem to mesh.
-------------------------
OCT: Don't know if it will help ya get the answer, but those symbols at the
Kessa (Sanskrit: Kassaya) of Soto Zen Shu is actually Crest of Arms of two
Samurai Families that I don't recall their names. However I believe any
Zenji Bishop (Sozu) can answer this to ya.



Anyway, In defense of Mr. Lee,
--------------
OCT: In defense? If I understand well, ye pointed a third way of thinking,
that I should agree in some points.


What he may have been getting at was the difference between Mahayana and
Theravada
Buddhism. Mahayana is the more popular, less rigorous, and more syncretistic
variety found
throughout SE Asia, whereas Theravada is the more "pure" version of
Buddhism, which had a
stronger hold in Japan (Zen Buddhism being a subcategory of Theravada). Zen,
as a
subcategory of Theravada, adds to the mix the idea of "immediate"
enlightenment rather than
gradual enlightenment, through the use of meditation to bring about
enlightening moments, or
epiphanies.
---------------------------
OCT: I think ye are not 100% accurate. Dhyana is not a theravada school,
however there is comments between the Dhyana (Zen, Chaan) school and
Theravadins that Dhyana is the most Theravada of the Mahayana Schools, and
ya must know that Vajrayana is a subdivision of the Mahayana as well, since
it both includes Mahayana Sutras and Treatises, the Classical (theravada)
Canon that is the Tripitaka (Three Vases) and their own vajrayana treatises,
sutras, shastras and saddhanas.




But where Lee says that Korean, Japanese, and Chinese Buddhism should all be
in one
category, he's right as far as them all being Theravada, but he's wrong in
that Japanese
Buddhism is pretty different from Chinese, at least in that Chinese Buddhism
is more
syncretistic. Japanese Buddhism is generally regarded as being the version
closest to the
original Buddhism.
---------------------
OCT: It depends to what school you refer. The Hokkekyo is totally Japanese
and much of its contends have a great range of diferences between it and
Original Buddhism in itself. Hokekkyo and Pure Land Teachings was the most
popular between the peasants and would be that what Mr. Lee called Japan's
Folk-Buddhism, However Zen Shu (all both two schools of Japan - Soto and
Hinzai if not mispelled the last one) and Vajrayana Schools (Shingon-Shu and
Tendai-Shu) was the popular ones between the dominant class like the
Samurais and those of the Imperial Court.
***
All of couse, worshipped Shinto Gods (specially the Imperial Family, Te
hee).




Lee wrote:

>The Japanese Buddism results from intellectual
> interaction among Taoism, Confucianism and Buddhism
> itself throughout centuries, the first two of which
> did not really have much effect on India, South Asia,
> and Tibet.
> Through this interaction, primitive Taoism and
> Confucianism was reborn as more subtle and complex
> philosophy with rigorous logical structures in 5 and
> 12 centuries respectivly

I wouldn't say that Japanese Buddhism "results from" that interaction, but
rather that the
presence of Taoism and Confucianism allowed for Buddhism to be accepted with
greater ease.
Taoism and Confucianism are primarily atheistic, as is Theravada Buddhism.
Both promote a
general morality, as does Buddhism. And Taoism, with its quizzical proverbs
and mysterious
statements, parallels (a little bit) the practices of Zen teachers quizzing
their students (strange
statements that don't really mean anything but might help you understand
something else).
-------------
OCT: Your thoughs have logic, but sorry. According to what I remember,
Buddhism does not entered due to the acceptance of Taoism and Confucianism
in Japan. But in an independent way. I unfortunatelly does not have anymore
the book of japanese history that taunt this to me, so I can't give ya the
accurate date and century, but a certain japanese emperor married a chinese
noble lady, and when she comes to Japan, she brough an image of Amithaba
Buddha, and some sutras. The image was destroyed by shinto peasants, who was
afraid that "this new religion would be forced down by the emperor's wife
and force them to forget their holy Gods" but in the end, buddhism never
entered in conflict with the native religion, but instead, it helped in the
preservation of shinto, since Japan was illiterate at that time, and all
Shinto Rites, myths and history was based on Oral Tradition. With the advent
of buddhism, and latter, the Kukai (Shingon-shu founder) interference, there
comes the hiragana and katakana, and the common folk was also learn how to
write and read. So, there comes from it, a form of shinto written liturgy.



And Buddhism can easily be looked at as "The Way". But "parallels" is a
different thing than
"results from." I think history would show that Japanese Buddhism - rather
than being an
example of syncretism - is actually the closest to the original Buddhism of
India. Mahayana
Buddhism is sometimes VERY syncretistic, and has little to do with what
Siddartha Gautama
actually taught, and again, the Buddhism of Japan is different from that of
China, even though
they're both technically Theravada.
------------------
OCT: Don't forget that even Shingon-shu and Tendai-shu comes from China,
although the tantric buddhism that was transmited to Kukai, was extinct.
Perhaps buddhism comes intact to China, and there remained so, until a very
latter influence that changed their ways. The reason why I disagree with
your statement about they be both theravada, I already explained. Also
remember that the most important Sutra of Zen Shu is Hannya Shingyo - Heart
Sutra (Prajña Pâramita Hrdaya Sutra)

For those who don't know the history: Buddhism started in India as kind of a
reactionary
spinoff of Hinduism. It grew in popularity and Buddhist missionaries were
sent out to Asia. As
Theravada Buddhism spread in Asia (and through China, into Japan) there was
a resurgence of
Hinduism in India, and the Hindus killed or drove out all the Buddhists. In
Japan, the Buddhism
stayed more or less in its pure form, but in the rest of Asia, it developed
into a less rigorous
version (Mahayana) and mixed with the traditional religions. Though China is
technically
theravada, it's still syncretistic, so more like the rest of asia than
Japan.
------------------------------------
OCT: The ressurgence of hinduism in India was totally pacific. Although it
was an threat to Buddhism in India, it was non violent and buddhism was
destroyed there through extreme syncretism, with hinduism assimilating some
of the buddhist vallues and Siddharta Gautama (Shakyamuni Buddha) as one of
those avatars that are manifestations of Vishnu. The real violent threat to
buddhism in India was two centuries latter, with the muslim invasion.

The sincretism in the Japanese case, is called as Shinbutsu Shugo, and is
fully studied at Sophia University at Japan.

And yes, buddhism, taoism and confucionism (as well, poetry, caligraphy,
etc) was subject of study in universities at Edo Jidai, and all of them
could be possible, be the seeds to form the non written Samurai morality,
even before Musashi, since those who went to those universities was the
noble aristocratic classes and those samurais.

I remember that when I was following Shugendo or Vajrayana, my former
masters would be very angry if I would be doing any kind of Salada, so just
remembering their angry faces was enough to be horrorified with what Mr.
Lee stated. And it had nothing to do with intolerance. One of them have an
christian son, but he always explained to his son that one way is one way
and another way is another way. One cannot follow two at the same time.

regards

Octavio Augusto Okimoto Alves de Carvalho
São Paulo - SP Brazil