Tolerance and Discrimination

 My method could be and needs to be better in many cases.

 i thought you were made of steel in terms of bantering back and forth in  discussions/debates of this sort. i am finding out that i am not and that it  hurts to realize that i might possibly have been mistaken in any particular  area. i believe that to really look at all this takes immense courage of which  i have not yet been able to muster enough (i am still learning). like i said  before i have learned a great deal in our interactions and discussions even  though it has not always felt pleasant for me. most of it is. that's ok  because if that's the worst i ever feel among friends that's ok and it is  towards i feel generally a worth while goal. anyway the blood and the  baseball bat analogy was interesting. could it be more like one person draws  blood and then the other draws blood back? and what a peculiar dance this  would be if it were the case. i guess it could be valuable in some sense. i  am not certain there is another way in the type of all encompassing type of  discussions we seem to engage in.

K
#####
This brings out the need to express two (seemingly contradictory)
principles:

TOLERANCE and DISCRIMINATION (true discernment)

If you think you can perceive where I am being inconsistent or where I am stuck, then the question becomes,:

"How to you help the other person get Un-Stuck?"

Does showing judgment (intolerance) help them?

Does telling them that they may "possibly" be suffering from some particular delusion help them?

If one is not thinking how they can help (or know, or understand) the other person, then (my hypothesis is that) they are coming from a desire level from Group 1 (coming from separation, and personal will).

What's the point of engaging if we are going to judge each other? (unless of course we've both coming from Group 1 desires)

If you think that I'm attached to my own particular "Scaffolding" then it's possible that I am, or I could just be using my scaffolding effectively to achieve that I WANT TO, and you just happen to not agree or like it.

That's ok, but to say that I'm attached (which carries a negative connotation) to my "means" (concepts) is also to attack my "ends", for the ends and the means are the same thing. So If I am attached to my concepts it would also mean that I am attached to my desires. My WANTS, WHAT I WANT.

Now, this is where the Ad-homenim aspect comes in.

When you (in effect) tell a person that their "desires" are wrong, (or when you try to MAKE them see your point, or when you try to FORCE any specific outcome) you are trying to impose your will (view of things) upon them, and thus Conflict is born.

Whether it be a confrontational refutation, or an Ad-Homenin argument, or the use of emotional blackmail, or the use of third-rail propaganda, all of these things represent an application of FORCE derived from one's personal will, and thus are hostile to any "Living Way" of relating, for they attempt to strip the veil from Isis by force. A type of attempted psychic rape, if you will.

(of course I also recognize that I sometimes do the same thing, but using "Reason" as my propulsive Will-Injecting mechanism, and thus I sometimes illicit a defensive response in the form of refutation/Ad-Homenin/emotion/third-rail type response)

Perhaps now one can see the value of never saying to another person "You're wrong" or "I disagree".

I try to take my own advice, but often fall short myself.

I wish to offer what I feel is a more effective approach to "helping to understand" the other.

Meditate on them when you're with them. (This is my "Living Way")

This means asking questions for the purpose of understanding. Then when we feel we understand we should seek to be understood, but only after we've made the effort to understand them first.

This is tantamount to meditating (on the subject/person) until we receive a revelation (from the Inner Teacher), and then acting on that revelation.

So when JC is coming on strong and you think he's getting too forceful, you might try Meditating on him. Then again you might also want to try a baseball bat, depending on what you desire.  :-)

jc
#####

at the level of insight and analyzing we  attempt to bring to bear on the situations/matters we discuss. i guess when  for instance i might sense a differing opinion than you or something that  needs to be taken a look at (or you sense such) we could indicate such, frame  what it is that we are objecting to or noticing and then give our takes on it  and be ok with disagreement if it is present and then move on and quite  naturally reflect upon it individually as we see fit. i assume that is what  goes on that is what i do. anyway if this prompts any comments from you they  are welcome.
 K

#####
Amen.

We should always make our presuppositions known, and seek to get to the bottom of things in terms of principles.

Where I fall short, or am inconsistent, please do me a kindness and let me know! (preferably in a non-forcing kind of way)

I shall endeavor to do the same.

To take this Mars energy and make it serve Venus is what this living way (and Meditation) is all about.

jc

#####

=====================================================

Tolerance is a dangerous feeling. When it shows up, examine it very  closely. There is most likely a judgmental quality to it: "You did wrong,  but I tolerate your wrongness." Noble me! Spiritual pride in performing  a spiritual act is likely to result, especially if you have to tell  someone of your tolerance. Repeated tolerance has a tendency to encourage  repeated wrongness. Excessive mercy, a  kick in the fanny may show intolerance of an act but no judgment of the  actor. Your call.  Anyway, the so called "wrongness" that we tolerate is  "rightness" in the lessons it teaches.  I am not saying that tolerance is a bad thing to express--just that it is  somewhat treacherous to the expresser. Puff not your pride with  tolerance. That's like being proud of your humility. Have a  laugh, you all.  N.J

=====

Tolerance is most often a poor substitute for Understanding.

Avoiding confrontation in the name of "tolerance" often just postpones understanding. To Understand something we must look at it, however unpleasant our ignorance tells us it is. Often we settle for (false) tolerance instead, in that we tolerate our prejudices and ignorance.

What tolerance SHOULD imply is that we place our uninformed prejudices (aversions and attractions) in abeyance long enough for us to get close to and actually Understand the thing we're having the problem with.

Tolerance means choosing Love (Understanding) Over Fear (the loss of comfort).

True Tolerance, therefore, requires STRENGTH and COURAGE.

JC
(tolerating my own faults, most of the time)