Guest guest Posted April 17, 2006 Report Share Posted April 17, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 4/16/2006 7:09:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Mon, 17 Apr 2006 01:19:59 -0000 > " billrishel " <illusyn > Judgement and Open Dialog (((Re: Acceptance ./Len > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > L: What does " don't you think " mean? ... At this > > > point, communication ends, I think. > > > ~~~ > > > L. has a point. > > > > > > The question is not a open question (a true inquiry) > > > but a rhetorical question, i.e. a statement in > > > disguise. And like rhetorical questions in general, > > > there is a summary curtness about it. It does not > > > openly engage the other party, but rather cuts off, > > > brings to an end, and with a tone of dismissal, > > > effectively expressing judgement of the other. > > > > > > That being said, it is *very difficult* to cultivate > > > open, nonjudgemental dialog. Apparently the difficulty > > > lies in the prevalence of judgemental thinking in the > > > first place. If there are labels of the other being > > > formed in the mind (and with each label all the > > > corresponding baggage) then those attitudes will > > > sooner or later evidence themselves in the interchange. > > > > > > So if judgemental language is showing up in a dialog > > > the root of discord is always going to be deeper than > > > the words appearing on the surface. > > > > > > If there is discord arising from judgement, to place > > > the blame on the other party is always astray from the > > > real root. For to place blame is in itself to make > > > judgement, so in the very impulse to so place blame is > > > evidence to oneself that the spirit of discord already > > > lies within oneself. > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > And placing blame is what you´re doing, now. > > I´wasn´t asking you a question, but explaining why I don´t see a > > possibility to communicate with you as long as you don´t question > > your image system. So, unless you have something relevant to say, > > which shows some interest in challenging your beliefs, there will be > > no communication betwen us. It´s as simple as that. > > > > Len > > > > No, I wasn't placing blame. What I said is true and > stands on its own. I wasn't applying what I said to > any particular person, including " Len " . > > And there are those " you " statements again. > > Not interest in what you are selling, sir! > > It is very simple, and I do hope you get the message > this time. > > Bill > > > > > How disingenuous to judge someone's words and then deny responsibility by > claiming it to be a general comment. Bobs angry rants are admirable in > comparison. Yes, I'm also surprised he chose this strategy. If I was him I'd probably simply claimed not being the owner of what I wrote, this way it doesn't matter at all what I say, which saves me the trouble of saving my face if what I write appears to be disingenious. 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.