Showing posts with label Japan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Japan. Show all posts

Friday, October 17, 2025

🪷 The Four Wise Monkeys: How a Buddhist Lesson Became a Global Symbol

For most people today, the three monkeys — one covering its eyes, one its ears, one its mouth — are a quaint little meme, an emoji, or a tourist carving. “See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.” Simple, almost trite.

But behind that familiar pose lies an ancient Buddhist principle that once defined the boundaries of moral discipline, spiritual clarity, and even political wisdom.
And originally, there weren’t just three monkeys — there was a fourth.


🕉️ Where It All Began

In early Buddhist teaching, long before the carving at Nikkō, monks were taught to guard their senses — eyes, ears, tongue, and body — as gateways to the mind. One of the oldest written versions of this concept appears in Sanskrit:

“Na pāpakaṃ paśyet, na pāpakaṃ śṛṇuyāt, na pāpakaṃ bhāṣeta.”
Do not see what is evil, do not hear what is evil, do not speak what is evil.

These weren’t rules about ignorance. They were about awareness.
To “see no evil” meant not to invite darkness into your thoughts.
To “hear no evil” meant to avoid gossip and corrupt speech.
And to “speak no evil” meant mastering one’s own tongue — because in Buddhism, words themselves are actions, capable of wounding or healing.


🇨🇳 The Confucian Thread

As Buddhism spread through China, its moral focus interlaced with Confucian philosophy. In The Analects, Confucius advises:

“非礼勿视,非礼勿听,非礼勿言。”
Do not look at what is improper. Do not listen to what is improper. Do not speak what is improper.

This fusion of Buddhist self-discipline and Confucian decorum created a moral framework emphasizing restraint, balance, and inner harmony — a triad later visualized in Japan through a clever pun.


🇯🇵 From Words to Monkeys

When these teachings reached Japan in the 8th century through the Tendai school of Buddhism, the phrase was translated using the verb ending -zaru — meaning “not to do.”

But zaru sounds identical to saru, the Japanese word for monkey.
So, as Japanese artisans often did, they transformed a linguistic accident into art.

Thus were born:

  • Mizaru – “see not” 🙈

  • Kikazaru – “hear not” 🙉

  • Iwazaru – “speak not” 🙊

The three monkeys first appeared carved into the stable of Nikkō Tōshō-gū Shrine in the early 1600s. They were not jokes, nor mere decorations — but a moral parable carved in cedar.


🙈 The Forgotten Fourth: Shizaru

Later, a fourth monkey appeared: Shizaru, “do not do.”
Sometimes shown with arms crossed or hands covering its body, this figure completed the ethical circle — Right Action.
It symbolized restraint in behavior, in contrast to the first three, which dealt with perception, hearing, and speech.

Together they mapped perfectly to the Buddhist Threefold Purity:

  1. Pure in body

  2. Pure in speech

  3. Pure in mind

…and by adding Shizaru, they included purity in action as well.

MonkeyMeaningDomain
MizaruSee no evilPerception
KikazaruHear no evilAttention
IwazaruSpeak no evilSpeech
ShizaruDo no evilAction

This was not superstition; it was practical psychology long before the word existed — a system for protecting the mind by filtering what it absorbs and what it releases.


🌏 From Parable to Pop Culture

When Western travelers saw the carvings centuries later, they took the image literally — “see no evil” as “ignore what’s wrong.”
And so a symbol of moral awareness became, in translation, one of moral blindness.

In time, the three monkeys came to represent either:

  • Naïve avoidance (“don’t see what you don’t like”), or

  • Stoic wisdom (“guard your mind from corruption”).

The meaning depended entirely on who was holding the lens.

Even Gandhi later adopted the image — returning it to its original moral form — as a guide to truth and non-violence.
Today, the monkeys survive everywhere from carved wood to emojis, reminders of a spiritual idea reduced but never destroyed.


🧘‍♀️ What They Still Teach

At their heart, the monkeys are not hiding from the world.
They are disciplining perception — choosing which energies to let in, and which to send out.

Their message fits modern life more than ever:
In an age of endless screens, outrage, and noise, to “see no evil” might simply mean turning off the feed that poisons your peace.

Keep your senses clean, your speech kind, your actions measured —
and your mind will follow toward liberation.

That’s the wisdom carved in wood four centuries ago,
and still quietly waiting to be seen.


Cheers! Sláinte! Na zdravie!

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT


Monday, December 10, 2012

Our Next War


Where will our next war be? Now that Iraq is over and Afghanistan is wrapping up, we need to look at who to go kill next. Iran is an obvious contender for the Zionist war mongers among us. Those people, who were historically treated poorly and never given a chance or their own country to call their own, who are doing the same thing to Palestinians for whatever reasons, seem like the most promising next war. To stand with Israel and support them in their attacks on Iran, that is.

But the reality is probably less obvious. Considering China's change in leadership, their 500 year dominance of Japan, Japan's more modern overpowering of China earlier last century and their current status as a world power and world economy, the next war or "police" action" whatever you want to call it, could come over a dispute in the Senkaku Islands.

Traditionally these islands belonged to China. But so did Japan. Then when Japan took over China, they claimed and to this day have been in possession of, these islands. Now China is pushing for their historical possession of these islands and the Chinese and Japanese navies have been pretty contentious around these islands.

Our problem lies in our treaty with Japan. After the intensity of Japan in WWII, America wanted to cut Japan off at the knees and made an agreement to Japan to protect them if they ran into martial problems with another country in Asia. That meant we didn't have to be so concerned about Japan rebuilding their military force and once again take on their historically aggressive attitude and thus find ourselves in yet another conflict with them.

What we hadn't foreseen was their going up against the new strength and possible threat in Asia, China. If a conflict starts between these two countries and it is possible, we would have to go to the aide of Japan against the second most powerful nation in the world and to whom we owe a massive debt.

So first of all, who really should have possession of these island?

They say that possession is 9/10ths of the law. It is true that a current owner has greater claim over previous owners. But a bigger power can also take back or make a claim outright and simply occupy a place, thus having new, albeit possibly temporary ownership. Then it would take others to go in and reclaim that place through force, or agreement. Considering China's new economic and world situation, as well as their newly changed regime at this time and that new regime needing to assert their control, it is very possible they will find that they do want to push this issue to its ultimate conclusion so that they might reclaim ownership of the Senkaku islands.

Japan and China have had a long traditional opposition and neither has forgotten the last hundreds of years. Japan will not want to give up these islands. Partially because and both know this, there are some very wealthy oil reserves in this location and they both want them.

Here is my view. These islands belong to Japan. They are in possession of them. They have been in possession for many years and China has accepted that. So the possession issue in my mind is settled. China argues that they had historically had possession of these islands, which is also true, but what does that matter, really? I had historical possession of my car years ago, but I sold it, thereby accepting that I no longer owned it. Can I now go back with threat of force and reclaim it because I had historical possession of it? No.

Also, China had tried to take over Tibet for hundreds of years until a decisive battle settled who was sovereign:

"In 821 China-Tibet Peace Treaty: "Tibetans shall be happy in Tibet and Chinese shall be happy in China". The peace treaty was an acknowledgement of stalemate between the two countries after 200 years of Sino-Tibetan conflict. The treaty stated that the Chinese recognized Tibetans as equals and Tibet as a separate state with its own inviolable territory. The treaty was engraved on a stone pillar in front of the Jokhang temple in Lhasa."

1910-12 A Qing army led by General Zhao Erfeng invades and occupies Tibet, causing the Dalai Lama and Tibetan government officials to flee.

1918 Tibetan army, led by British-trained officers, defeats Chinese army. Tibet and China sign a peace treaty; China refuses to ratify treaty.

So, if China's argument on the Senkaku Islands is to be accepted, then they need to move out of Tibet. If their claim on Tibet is true and valid, they do not get the Senkaku Islands back.

We therefore are obligated to follow through to defend Japan's claims on the islands and the wealth therein, against China no matter what the consequences. China, if Tibet is any kind of example, will most likely not back down without some kind of remunerative benefit, either by way of taking possession of the islands, or in some other way.

A conflict in those seas is highly possible and could potentially be our next war, in or around these islands. If we allow Israel to drag us into another Middle Eastern morass of killing with Iran, we might once again find ourselves in conflict with two different countries, only on very different parts of the globe.

This won't be the same thing as Bush Jr. getting us into an Iraq war over a reason that didn't exist. This will be a war required by law, unless we can help them to find another way to resolve it. Perhaps they can share the islands? This isn't really acceptable as Japan's legal possession at this time in my mind is indisputable. But the reality of a military the size of China's brings along with it, an entirely different kind of reality. Not to mention our financial debt to them, where they could also potentially use it against us if we angered them enough, although that could easily backfire on them and they know it.

The world is not at peace yet and we need to get on that as soon as possible. Once people get used to peace, they get pretty unpleasant when forced back into war. But as long as we maintain any kind of a semblance of being at war, the possibility of starting a new war is always a more easy possibility.

We need to start paying more attention to what is important. Peace, climate change, our economy, (that is, paying for what we want and not charging it for future administrations to worry about), and forging a truly peaceful world into being.