Guest guest Posted March 27, 2006 Report Share Posted March 27, 2006 In a message dated 3/27/2006 8:20:54 AM Pacific Standard Time, illusyn writes: > > Nisargadatta , epston wrote: > > > >In a message dated 3/27/2006 12:49:59 AM Pacific Standard Time, > >illusyn writes: > > > >>If I feel " annoyed with " someone, then is that about them > >>or about me? It's about me. It is not about them. So what > >>is for me to deal with? It is for me to recognized that my > >>annoyance is *my issue*, and that to deal with it means to > >>see it as such. Really, if all of that transpires in an open, > >>undistorted way, then it simply evaporates. Once the cycle of > >>blaming is broken the circuit can no longer fuel itself. > >> > >>Bill > > > > L.E: How does this apply when someone is about to shoot and kill you? Is > this situation only about you, and not them. Is the " annoyance 'your > issue?' > Is > the bullet moving toward you head, 'your issue?' What you say is true > but is > only one half of the problem which must include what is outside the > body even > as it is experienced inside the body. In ordinary life what is > exterior to > your body has its own life and must be dealt with, related to. > > Larry Epston > > ~~~~~~ > > Bill; Are you assuming that " you " are an entity separate from " the world " ? > L.E: No, but the bullet is coming and you better duck. > In the scenario you suggest, what is the function of annoyance? > Persumably if someone pulls a gun and treatens to shoot then there > would be a motive to prevent the person from carrying out such > an action. Where does annoyance figure in there? It seems to me > that effectiveness is not enhanced by annoyance; rather cool > detachment serves intelligent, creative action in such a scenario. L.E: I suppose you are saying annoyance is not useful in certain situations which is what I was saying. > As for a bullet moving toward one's head being an " issue " ... you > can't be serious. A) if it is so moving it is already too late. L.E: That's hard to say. There are reports of time slowing down for the bullet and speeding up for the victimn, but that's probably an exception. The victimn may still reflexively move without a ordinary thinking process and be missed by the bullet. > B) Bullets aren't " issues " . You are using the term " issue " in a > different way that I was using it. If you want to address what *I* > said then stick to the terms as I used them. L.E: I'm not sure how you are using the word. But if " annoyance is 'your issue' " maybe it's best to choose a different issue. > As I used the term, an " issue " is an internal annoyance, anger, > or other emotional reaction to a situation. Such " internal reactions " > do not serve, in my view. If *you* have an " internal emotional > reaction " then yes, it is *your* issue, and no one else's. L.E: In that sense, I agree with you, but you still had better duck, especially if it's a punch, fist or knife rather than a bullet. Larry Epston > > Bill > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 27, 2006 Report Share Posted March 27, 2006 [...] > Inside is outside. You are what you see, you are the bullit. > But I also had this reflection after having read Bills message, that > annoyance is not always only my issue. Sometimes annoyance can be an > issue in relationship, and in this case dealing with in only by > myself might not be sufficient. It´s sometimes necessary to > communicate about it with others. > > Len > That is Very True, Len! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.