Guest guest Posted April 23, 1999 Report Share Posted April 23, 1999 On Sat, 24 Apr 1999 11:09:11 -0000 "Gemini" <currwamp writes: >Be informed as well Bruce that in psychological circles, and there are >two friends of this fellow that are psychologists, that emotional >abuse, and mental abuse is indeed considered to be a form of passive >violence, despite your declaration, and quite independant of what you >believe. > With all due respect to the mental health profession, I understand what is and isn't violence quite well, thank you very much. >There is never an excuse for being abusive to others, regardless of >your mood. > Bringing the published words of someone into question is not "being abusive to others." >One whose tongue is a slave to his passions is like a cotton ball >whipped around in the wind. > ....and what is to be said of (s)he whose tongue is a slave to conditioning? >That is a basic concept Bruce. > That's what it is, Marcus, a "concept" and therefore the play of thought -- the "lower mind." >really. > *Really*? :-) >L >M Marcus, Harsha has made it clear that this satsangh is not a fit venue for dialogue of a contentious or confrontational nature and I will refrain from using it as such and thus abusing his hospitality. http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucemrg.htm http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucsong.htm m(_ _)m _ _________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 1999 Report Share Posted April 23, 1999 On Fri, 23 Apr 1999, Tim Harris wrote: > > > One whose tongue is a slave to his passions is like a cotton ball > > whipped around in the wind. > > So then, what 'exactly' is it that you imply when 'you' refer to > 'another' as a 'cotton ball' in the wind? Would not this 'new' > definition imply an insult and generate 'passive violence'? ROTFLMAO!!! Fuzzy turtle arguments! i love it! --janpa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 1999 Report Share Posted April 23, 1999 Gemini wrote: > One whose tongue is a slave to his passions is like a cotton ball > whipped around in the wind. So then, what 'exactly' is it that you imply when 'you' refer to 'another' as a 'cotton ball' in the wind? Would not this 'new' definition imply an insult and generate 'passive violence'? In my opinion, and obviously it is shrinking, 'some' need to be 'shaken' awake because some of those that are asleep are so because of the 'peaceful' lullabies of the 'masters'. One could wonder then, if it is the 'masters' that wish their 'students' to be asleep... after all... if 'we' were 'all' awake, 'we' would no longer require 'masters' and they would be looking for a job. I recommend land surveying... very peaceful.... Regards. Tim Harris -- For more information on the CASUAL ENLIGHTENMENT METHOD please visit: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Crete/4908/index.html ICQ # 34365156 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 1999 Report Share Posted April 23, 1999 Gemini wrote: >Responding to an attack from one by showing him his own behaviour is whatever you want it to be Yes. But if we are to learn tolerance and peace the 'weakness' IS that we respond to an attack is it not? Further, I know that my weakness is that, unlike 'others', my intention is to be right first, then to make a point. Call it a mirror if you like but 'your' essence remains in 'your' words. If they are taken this way or that way it is because 'you' the 'author' have designed it so. It seems to me that we paint our words black and pass them off as white. There is no place for good intention when peace is the issue. >One whose emotions change like the tides and reflect this in abherrant behaviour towards others is indeed like a cottonball in the wind. Yes. Ebb and flow... why should emotions be any different. I find for myself, I do get frustrated when people do not understand the point that I am trying to get across... am I the 'only' one? >You should know that. I do. That is why I am ever conscious of this aspect of communication and that is where I draw my power of tolerance. >there is nothing with fruit from this Ah. There it is. There is nothing with fruit for you and thus you have no interest. This is where one must learn another aspect of the ego. Just because all 'things' are Shiva or Maya or whatever you choose to call it, it does not mean that 'all' the messages and teachings are for you. Your ego will tell you otherwise. It is kinda like standing in line. Regards. Tim Harris -- For more information on the CASUAL ENLIGHTENMENT METHOD please visit: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Crete/4908/index.html ICQ # 34365156 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 1999 Report Share Posted April 23, 1999 Gemini wrote: >How many times must you be shown how to tie your shoe? Alas, as many times as 'you babblebabblebabble' to me that 'I' do not know how to tie my shoes. Can you not see my master? My shoes 'are' tied. Perhaps it is your shoe that you see? Regards. Tim Harris -- For more information on the CASUAL ENLIGHTENMENT METHOD please visit: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Crete/4908/index.html ICQ # 34365156 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 1999 Report Share Posted April 23, 1999 Bruce Morgen <editor wrote: > With all due respect to the > mental health profession, I > understand what is and isn't > violence quite well, thank > you very much. You do?! Wonderful! Could you explain it to me, simply? I'm perfectly serious; I'm having problems figuring out exactly where the line is between 'doing no harm' and 'being a complete doormat'... gill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 1999 Report Share Posted April 23, 1999 On Fri, 23 Apr 1999 21:28:12 +0000 "Gill Collingwood" <Gill writes: >"Gill Collingwood" <Gill > > Bruce Morgen <editor wrote: > >> With all due respect to the >> mental health profession, I >> understand what is and isn't >> violence quite well, thank >> you very much. > >You do?! Wonderful! Could you explain it to me, simply? Sure! >I'm perfectly serious; I'm having problems figuring out exactly where >the line is between 'doing no harm' and 'being a complete doormat'... >gill > Violence is intentionally cause suffering for selfish reasons. http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucemrg.htm http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucsong.htm m(_ _)m _ _________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 1999 Report Share Posted April 23, 1999 > Bruce Morgen <editor [...] > Violence is intentionally > cause suffering for selfish > reasons. According to the dictionary, violence means: 1. Physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing: crimes of violence. 2. The act or an instance of violent action or behavior. 3. Intensity or severity, as in natural phenomena; untamed force: the violence of a hurricane. 4. Abusive or unjust exercise of power. 5. Abuse or injury to meaning, content, or intent: do violence to a text. 6. Vehemence of feeling or expression; fervor. In some cases 'selfish' and 'intent' are implicit but not in 6. On the I AM list a member used intentional verbal violence for unselfish reasons and this was far from clear, especially for new members Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 1999 Report Share Posted April 24, 1999 Be informed as well Bruce that in psychological circles, and there are two friends of this fellow that are psychologists, that emotional abuse, and mental abuse is indeed considered to be a form of passive violence, despite your declaration, and quite independant of what you believe. There is never an excuse for being abusive to others, regardless of your mood. One whose tongue is a slave to his passions is like a cotton ball whipped around in the wind. That is a basic concept Bruce. really. L M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 1999 Report Share Posted April 24, 1999 Responding to an attack from one by showing him his own behaviour is whatever you want it to be. One whose emotions change like the tides and reflect this in abherrant behaviour towards others is indeed like a cottonball in the wind. Blown around this way and that. You should know that. Other than wasted time, there is nothing with fruit from this. Say what you will. L M Tim Harris <harris < > Friday, April 23, 1999 5:29 PM Re: violence Tim Harris <harris Gemini wrote: > One whose tongue is a slave to his passions is like a cotton ball > whipped around in the wind. So then, what 'exactly' is it that you imply when 'you' refer to 'another' as a 'cotton ball' in the wind? Would not this 'new' definition imply an insult and generate 'passive violence'? In my opinion, and obviously it is shrinking, 'some' need to be 'shaken' awake because some of those that are asleep are so because of the 'peaceful' lullabies of the 'masters'. One could wonder then, if it is the 'masters' that wish their 'students' to be asleep... after all... if 'we' were 'all' awake, 'we' would no longer require 'masters' and they would be looking for a job. I recommend land surveying... very peaceful.... Regards. Tim Harris -- For more information on the CASUAL ENLIGHTENMENT METHOD please visit: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Crete/4908/index.html ICQ # 34365156 ------ Tired of empty chat rooms and out of date bulletin boards? http://www.ONElist.com ONElist: Making the Internet Intimate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 1999 Report Share Posted April 24, 1999 Bah! words words words. Matti! Dust! babblebabblebabblebabblebabble. the babble goes on forever. If you want stay here for another hundred years babble babble babble If you want the peace you speak of, put the mind to sleep. or just babble babble babble babble babble babble forever. How many times must you be shown how to tie your shoe? Tie it and be done! or babble babble babble babble babble forever. L M Tim Harris <harris < > Friday, April 23, 1999 6:16 PM Re: violence Tim Harris <harris Gemini wrote: >Responding to an attack from one by showing him his own behaviour is whatever you want it to be Yes. But if we are to learn tolerance and peace the 'weakness' IS that we respond to an attack is it not? Further, I know that my weakness is that, unlike 'others', my intention is to be right first, then to make a point. Call it a mirror if you like but 'your' essence remains in 'your' words. If they are taken this way or that way it is because 'you' the 'author' have designed it so. It seems to me that we paint our words black and pass them off as white. There is no place for good intention when peace is the issue. >One whose emotions change like the tides and reflect this in abherrant behaviour towards others is indeed like a cottonball in the wind. Yes. Ebb and flow... why should emotions be any different. I find for myself, I do get frustrated when people do not understand the point that I am trying to get across... am I the 'only' one? >You should know that. I do. That is why I am ever conscious of this aspect of communication and that is where I draw my power of tolerance. >there is nothing with fruit from this Ah. There it is. There is nothing with fruit for you and thus you have no interest. This is where one must learn another aspect of the ego. Just because all 'things' are Shiva or Maya or whatever you choose to call it, it does not mean that 'all' the messages and teachings are for you. Your ego will tell you otherwise. It is kinda like standing in line. Regards. Tim Harris -- For more information on the CASUAL ENLIGHTENMENT METHOD please visit: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Crete/4908/index.html ICQ # 34365156 ------ Show mom you love her. Check out our great Mother's Day Gifts! 14K Gold and gemstone jewelry, leather and cloth wallets and purses, gardening, gourmet, kitchen, more! Free Shipping in the US! /ad/shoptheglobe5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 1999 Report Share Posted April 24, 1999 Hi Marcus, I am having quite an experience with my reactions to your posts. I am trying to hold back from expressing my negativity. Am I misreading you that you object to posts which are blunt but also to those that might be considered tactful when one disagrees with your point of view. I do thank you for giving me a lot to consider and to examine within myself. Love, Judy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 1999 Report Share Posted April 24, 1999 > Bruce Morgen <editor > Violence is intentionally > cause suffering for selfish > reasons. Well, that's a bit too woolly for me: I split up with my husband last year, and he could well claim I intentionally caused him suffering (he didn't really want us to split up) for selfish reasons (ie wanting to have some choice over how I live my life). By your definition, any time I do something someone else doesn't like, that's violence. And as it's generally impossible to please all of the people all of the time, a life of non-violence would appear to be impossible... Perhaps if you could define 'suffering' and 'selfish' we might get a bit closer to an answer that would satisfy me? gill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 1999 Report Share Posted April 24, 1999 On Sat, 24 Apr 1999 15:02:07 +0000 "Gill Collingwood" <Gill writes: >"Gill Collingwood" <Gill > >> Bruce Morgen <editor > >> Violence is intentionally >> cause suffering for selfish >> reasons. > >Well, that's a bit too woolly for me: I split up with my husband last >year, and he could well claim I intentionally caused him suffering Well, a "claim" doesn't count. :-) >(he didn't really want us to split up) for selfish reasons (ie >wanting to have some choice over how I live my life). By your >definition, any time I do something someone else doesn't like, that's >violence. Was it your intention to cause him suffering or was his suffering an (as far as you could see) unintentional side effect of you doing what you had to do? >And as it's generally impossible to please all of the >people all of the time, a life of non-violence would appear to be >impossible... Again, intention is the defining factor -- did you benefit by his suffering or was the suffering incidental and/or really an "eye of the beholder" issue for him? >Perhaps if you could define 'suffering' and 'selfish' we might get a >bit closer to an answer that would satisfy me? Suffering: Significant pain, physical or otherwise Selfish: Inclined toward acquisition beyond ones physical and/or psychological well being. http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucemrg.htm http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucsong.htm m(_ _)m _ _________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] 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.