Guest guest Posted April 17, 2006 Report Share Posted April 17, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > 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. > > > > Well, I had no idea who said, " Don't you think? " > So my comment was indeed general. > Also, if you look carefully at what I said, it > cuts both ways. It is saying that in the end > the responsibility comes back to oneself. So > *even if* someone makes a comment that > seems " judgemental " , then as I said: " the very > impulse to so place blame is evidence to oneself > that the spirit of discord already lies within > oneself. " > > Perhaps you can see from this that I was not > picking on any particular person at all, and > that my comments were indeed of general intent. > > And do you see the irony of *your* remark? > > What is the root of discord? > *Is* there a lot of name-calling, blame placing > on this list? > *Is there* significant discord on this list? > > What I am trying to say is that the moment > someone is categorized as good/bad, stupid/ > not-stupid etc. the seed of discord is already > sown. > > Focusing on others as a problem goes nowhere, > in my view. > > > Bill The interesting thing is that nobody was judging. So the judgement is in your head (if your head is yours, of course, I'm not sure?). 6 billions of people live in a dream world, like you do, it's a fact. There is no point in judging it, people do exactly what they want to do and it's not my ambition to try to do anything about it. I'm just stating this obvious fact. Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2006 Report Share Posted April 17, 2006 In a message dated 4/17/2006 11:02:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Nisargadatta writes: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:10:40 -0000 " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 Judgement and Open Dialog (((Re: Acceptance ./L 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 > > --- In 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 Well, somebody here already tried that approach, claiming that there is no sense of self doing the writing and that the words just get typed by themselves. I won't mention any names cause I can't be sure who it was, but yes, that form of denial is particularly useful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 17, 2006 Report Share Posted April 17, 2006 In a message dated 4/17/2006 11:02:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Nisargadatta writes: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:19:06 -0000 " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 Judgement and Open Dialog (((Re: Acceptance ./L Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > 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. > > > > Well, I had no idea who said, " Don't you think? " > So my comment was indeed general. > Also, if you look carefully at what I said, it > cuts both ways. It is saying that in the end > the responsibility comes back to oneself. So > *even if* someone makes a comment that > seems " judgemental " , then as I said: " the very > impulse to so place blame is evidence to oneself > that the spirit of discord already lies within > oneself. " > > Perhaps you can see from this that I was not > picking on any particular person at all, and > that my comments were indeed of general intent. > > And do you see the irony of *your* remark? > > What is the root of discord? > *Is* there a lot of name-calling, blame placing > on this list? > *Is there* significant discord on this list? > > What I am trying to say is that the moment > someone is categorized as good/bad, stupid/ > not-stupid etc. the seed of discord is already > sown. > > Focusing on others as a problem goes nowhere, > in my view. > > > Bill The interesting thing is that nobody was judging. So the judgement is in your head (if your head is yours, of course, I'm not sure?). 6 billions of people live in a dream world, like you do, it's a fact. There is no point in judging it, people do exactly what they want to do and it's not my ambition to try to do anything about it. I'm just stating this obvious fact. Len Folks believe that they can hide their judgment by saying they're just stating the facts, while what's actually happening is that they're stating their perception through the filter of judgment. (Not referring to the fact that there at 6 billion people perceiving, Len. Yes, that's 'objectively' true in that context.) What seems like a fact of one's unacceptable behavior isn't a fact at all, and others may perceive it quite differently. This difference in perception is to be expected. One could even suggest that all perspectives are unique by definition, since the collective 'we' are the experiential aspect of God, and experience doesn't need to be repeated. In any event, the problem is not that no two individuals can ever agree, the 'problem' is that it can rarely be accepted that this disagreement is okay. Larry is free to offer his perception that Len is a narcissist, and I'm free to offer my perspective that the reason he's becoming obsessed with this idea is that it's his own projection of his own narcissism. No value judgments need to be made in either case. All explorations are our own explorations since they come out of our unique perception. If this is accepted, understanding can occur. If it's not, then nothing but struggle occurs, and the struggle is only with ourselves. There's a certain amount of humor in this irony, but it's usually best to keep the humor to ourselves, since this too will be judged. 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.