Problems with dirtbags

Howard Wallace said:
I encountered a Tibetan demon in my youth. It was after I had spent some time wandering in Nepal, seeing the paintings of fearsome demons in village temples back in the hills, staying in a monastery for a while. It a short time after I left Nepal, in a little hill station in the highlands of Sri Lanka, that I encountered the demon. He was just as in the Tibetan pictures, large and black and fearsome, and he was holding me down so I couldn't move just as I was awaking from sleep. For some reason, perhaps from being so recently steeped in the philosophy/psychology of the Tibetan Buddhists, I told the demon “You are a construct of my mind.” Not cooperating, he said in a deep voice “No, I’m not, ” and continued to hold me down. I once again made the assertion that he was my construct, and this time he gradually began to dissolve and fade away, and I could get up. Western psychologists call this a hypnopompic experience. It is a well known phenomena, involving hallucinations and paralysis upon transitioning out of the sleep state. For me, it was a lesson on mental constructs.
Click to expand...

The last time I was researching that issue, a hypnopompic state combined with sleep-paralysis was thought to be the origin of incubi or succubae. In a different culture, being ridden by the Night-Mare. The shape of the being is determined by cultural expectations. Tibetan or Shamanistic demons would fit very well.

Howard Wallace said:
My interpretation of the demons of Tibet is not unique. While many unsophisticated Tibetan Buddhist farmers and laborers may see the demons as real and exterior to themselves, most lamas and monks who have spent years contemplating the workings of the mind understand the demons as mental constructs. One book that points this out quite clearly is the Bardo Thodol, or as we know it the Tibetan Book of the Dead. This book is often read over a corpse, and contains instructions for the departing spirit to navigate the bardo realms between rebirths. The bardo is also a convenient place to step off the wheel of life altogether, and choose not to be reborn. While this book is read out loud over a corpse in the hills of Nepal and Tibet, it is interesting to consider that the unsophisticated peasants who may be listening are getting a dose of rather sophisticated psychology/philosophy from an often very learned lama in the process.

The contents of the book detail the sometimes awesome, often frightening, experiences that the soul will encounter in the bardo realm. Always the key to escaping the fear and releasing onself from the bonds of life and death is the realization that the scary light, or demon, or whatever is a construct of mind. Once that realization is obtained, the soul is free to step off the wheel if it wishes. If not, it is inextricably drawn by its own desires to another womb for another lifetime of lessons.
Click to expand...

As I understand the Bardo states, once you are fully dis-incarnated, you encounter the Clear Light of the Void. Those who can bear the experience are free to step off the Wheel. That’s easier said than done.

In that Clear Light you have no defenses. Old attachments and aversions-both sources of dukkha-crowd to the fore. Old demons flood into awareness. Everything you have spent your life denying becomes inescapable. Small wonder that most flee the Void. They end up in Bardo realms that are no picnic. But they are easier to bear than the revelations of the Clear Light.
 
Last edited:
Howard Wallace said:
My old Aikido sensei used to tell me, "When you throw someone you must throw them on the path of the universe." Sometimes I wonder if he was close to the answer.
Click to expand...

Shavru said:
hmmm wouldn't that translate very closely to "Let God sort them out?"
Click to expand...

Not close at all, Shavru.

Ueshiba designed Aikido to minimize killing. If someone attacks you and you don’t stop him, you end up dead. If you defend yourself with lethal force, he ends up dead. Neither are desirable. Far better, if you have the skill, is to stop the attacker without hurting him. That is not so easy, so... Hurting him without killing him is inferior, but still better than killing him. Dealing death should be a last resort.

This is a far cry from Arnaud Amalric at Béziers.

At no point does Buddhism advocate illusions or wishful thinking. Mindfulness means experiencing what is around you. And what is within you. Bare attention allows you to recognize your demons, as demons, when they arise in consciousness. The more you compassionately accept your demons, without letting them hijack your motivations, the more your experience reality. Then, if the situation is dangerous, you deal with it. If that requires violence, so be it. It should be your choice, which lets you use minimum necessary force.

Only when your mind has been hijacked by demons can you bear to say, “Kill them all. God will recognize his own.” Welcome back, Abbot Amalric.
 
It is only prejudicial when you hate someone without knowing why.
It is heightened awareness when the one that you hate is hated because he wants you to die.

So rise up instead and strike him down first.
Show him no mercy but see that he comes out the worst.
 
Shavru said:
...So in a sense we all make decisions based on very little factual evidence. So we make determinations based on historic information that certain areas of town have had higher risk or specific types of people have higher risk because of historic information we remember reading in the paper. Yes, that information may totally be unrelated to the existing situation, but we have to make snap decisions based on known information so I tend to err on the side of caution. Is it right? probably not. Does it cause me to interact with people differently than if I knew that particular individual? Yes. But I see no other alternative except to completely ignore all the actual danger that does exist out there. Could anyone truly reach the perfection of PU while living in the common world? I doubt it, people in protected groups such as monks can't even do it as expoused by the concept of warrior monks like Shaolin or Templer Knights I would point out that even enlightened people feel the need of martial defense. Does that mean to stop striving. No. Does striving for it mean to completely ignore actual danger, well again I point out the Shaolin but say it is for each individual to decide.
As to the employ of the dirtbag construct. I agree, it has it's downside. However, I have not yet seen how to do away with it without increasing the danger.
Click to expand...

Jens Schuetz said:
It all comes down to probabilities.
...
Click to expand...

Inferential statistics are powerful tools. We evolved to use them, in a slightly different form than the actuaries of today use their formal mathematics.

I see even (pseudo) mathematicians in the world today misusing and manipulating statistics, not to point towards truth or even maximize certain probabilities, but to sway opinions in a desired direction or to encourage counterproductive activities.

Just as the mathematics can be misused, it appears our biological analogues to modern statistics can have downsides. What is the appropriate balance?

We can probably agree that the hypothetical individual who saw a video of police misconduct and then proceeded to execute officers in a coffee shop went too far. So where is the line and what guidelines are useful for any one of us who may be incrementally approaching it?

Raymond1000 said:
Ueshiba designed Aikido to minimize killing. If someone attacks you and you don’t stop him, you end up dead. If you defend yourself with lethal force, he ends up dead. Neither are desirable. Far better, if you have the skill, is to stop the attacker without hurting him. That is not so easy, so... Hurting him without killing him is inferior, but still better than killing him. Dealing death should be a last resort.
Click to expand...

Thanks Ray. My interpretation of my sensei's words was along the lines of what you stated, but from a slightly different angle. Instead of staying low on a continuum of force, it seemed the intent was to guide the other individual on a path that was ultimately helpful for his/her own evolution. Such guidance might be perceived as a bit unpleasant by the person receiving it. In a worldview with multiple incarnations the guidance might even be lethal. Certainly, the way I interpreted the message, one could take a mistaken path very similar to a cruel, paternalistic, delusional medieval abbot.

Key elements seemed to be benevolent intent, and wisdom. Achieving those keys is a difficult challenge.
 
Last edited:
Yes, In a previous thread I mentioned that Aikido is not my path. I am a firm and satisfied Kendoka with some kata from Kenjutsu adapted in. While I can appreciate Morihei Ueshiba's philosophy intellectually, I am much too aggressive minded for Aikido to be natural for me in practice. I am afraid that if I was so untrue to my own nature that the delusional medieval abbot would be a good model of me in fact, always fighting with my own demons so that it blinded me to the world outside of myself.

Howard, "Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics" ?!? yes, statistics can be assembled to support any given theory should the person choose to do so. In fact most surveys lead people to answer certain ways thereby confirming the survey writers bias. It takes a lot of effort to write a truly balanced and unbiased survey. I have attempted it and know it is VERY hard to do.

As for benevolent intent to someone trying to cause me or mine harm. I readily admit that I am not that evolved. I continue to try to get there, but I have serious doubts that I will make it in this life cycle.
 
Hmmm. Great thread. I'll refrain from getting into heavy philosophy and mathematics, or even metaphysics, and keep it short for now while this all percolates in my head. Maybe I'll talk it over with the demons in there and see what they think. :)

I'll just leave you with some things a kindred spirit advised, that fit my demeanor:

"Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet."

And:

"I come in peace. I didn’t bring artillery. But I’m pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you f*ck with me, I’ll kill you all."
 
Howard Wallace said:
Thanks Ray. My interpretation of my sensei's words was along the lines of what you stated, but from a slightly different angle. Instead of staying low on a continuum of force, it seemed the intent was to guide the other individual on a path that was ultimately helpful for his/her own evolution. Such guidance might be perceived as a bit unpleasant by the person receiving it. In a worldview with multiple incarnations the guidance might even be lethal. Certainly, the way I interpreted the message, one could take a mistaken path very similar to a cruel, paternalistic, delusional medieval abbot.

Key elements seemed to be benevolent intent, and wisdom. Achieving those keys is a difficult challenge.
Click to expand...

Howard,

There is certainly more to Aikido than employing minimum necessary force. I wrote as I did because I was addressing Shavru’s interpretation of the art.

How do you employ such a philosophy in the real world?

Years ago I read a story by an American who was studying Aikido in Japan.

One day he was riding a train. A large unkempt man entered the car. He was angry. He was drunk. He yelled and bullied. He punched the train wall. He threatened individual passengers.

Our Hero stood up. The satiation was made for Aikido. He knew he could receive the bully’s first attack and subdue him.

At the same time a little old man stood up and yelled, “Hey! You!”

The drunk stared at the old man. “What?”

“Have you been drinking? I hope you’ve been drinking plum wine. I love plum wine. I used to drink plum wine with my wife. She was a wonderful wife. We used to have so much fun. We’d shut away the world and laugh and drink plum wine and make love.”

By now the bully is standing flat footed, trying to follow the story.

The old man continued. “She’s dead now and I really miss her. But I like to drink plum wine and remember her. Do you love your wife? I hope you have a nice wife. Do you drink plum wine together?”

Mr. Aggressive approached slowly. “I don’t have a wife, she died. I’ve lost my job. I have no family. My friends reject me. I’m mean to everybody, I’m drunk all the time. I’m so ashamed.” And he broke into tears.

Our Hero realized there had been no need for his amateur efforts when there was a master riding the train.

I would suggest that the old man threw the young dirtbag on the path of the universe.
 
Last edited:
That was a very good story.
Thing to remember with Aikido, or any art using joint lock/joint manipulation throws:
It's only a throw if the recipient knows to follow. Otherwise it's just a pop followed by shrieking...
 
That's a fine story Raymond. I think now days we call that Verbal Judo and based on your story it works well.
 
An old man in Germany tried to calm down some kids who were playing loud music and harassing other passengers. He ended up being beaten to death.
Verbal Judo might work on the guys who are not evil to begin with but the ones which are actually dangerous might become even more aggressive.
Or the old man was simply not advanced enough in verbal Judo and only had an orange belt and hadn't heard of plum wine yet. :(
 
this is where guns would change the situation , verbal judo fails, gun always provides an answer.(in the case of old man being savaged for trying to talk to some young jerks-- wish old man was armed)
 
I was not going to post on this thread, as my own philosophy differs some, and im linguistically challenged to a point, but Demon or Dirtbag if you are attempting to harm me or my family, as far as im concerned it would be "two to the body and one to the head" period!!! I have seen my share of Dirtbags in my 25 years of Police service and when you have to look in someones eyes before you have to make a split second decision, it can change a person real quick. It comes down to you or them, Im going home I can tell you that much.
 
+1 and a big ditto for bawanna. I had to look up linguistically, guess I'm more challenged than you are.

I will always try the plum wine approach when / if there's time but when things don't seem to be heading for a harmonious outcome, it's all to the face in my book. I mean body then face, well no I really mean all to the face. I don't be hatin, I just be living and going home.
 
We are headed into potentially emotional territory, where we all need to exercise great care. This kind of valuable discussion could easily be shut down if too many people become offended. I will be particularly careful in what I write next.

We are all borne into this world naked. Later in life some of us don uniforms for a time. Then each of us die and return to the earth. Our situations are all quite similar.

The tone of modern police work has changed from the historic "protect and serve" to an emphasis on "if anyone is going home alive today it will be me."

I'll provide a link to a recent CBS news item with dashcam video of an officer shooting a 70 year old man. There's lots of room for debate on whose fault the shooting was, and I'm sure the lawyers and judges will be providing some sort of official answer. Note, however, the impact on the officer himself as he comes to realize his initial interpretation of the situation was wrong.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/video-shows-south-carolina-deputy-crying-after-shooting-70-year-old-man/
 
Howard Sir,
It is not emotional territory for me, I will refrain from posting further, But you are correct in saying that modern Police work has changed, however we still protect and serve, but going home is pretty important as well. The scope of our work has changed ten fold, I can remember when growing up, if we had an issue with someone and it got physical we used our hands to settle it, now a days they pull guns and just shoot, that has to be taken into consideration. I was not Law Enforcement in SC, I was up north in a metro city in NJ, but I did see it on the news. Would I lay my life down for an innocent person, well yes that was my job, but the post is Demons and Dirtbags which is completely different, in dealing with that sort you have to change to the mindset that no matter what happens, im going home (combat mindset comes in here). Unfortunately that ebb and flow of emotion takes a toll on the body over the years. This is a great thread, please don't close it as all opinions are just that... opinions.
 
I too shall refrain from getting caught up in emotion and hope that we're all mature enough here not to be offended by common sense defense beliefs. I do find myself more and more emotional about more and more general things in life. No doubt low testerone level due to high mileage. Just the other night I found myself nearly in tears before I even knew Old Yeller was sick.

I'll be good, really I will. While this thread is on a higher plane than I, I do enjoy reading it so please carry on without interruption on my part.
 
killing is so inherent in the nature of living, its hard to see any escape from both its necessity and misapplication.
 
Pugs, your contributions are highly valued. Please don't refrain from participating based on anything I wrote.

My concerns are not based on any of the posts here so far, which have been very insightful. We've just seen polarization on topics of policing before here on bladeforums, and need to be careful.

I will not be shutting this thread. Since I've been participating so much I am hardly impartial, and I have the luxury of relying on the rest of the moderation team to make a more impartial judgement if things start to go south.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top