Theos-Talk Archives (January 1997 Message tl00452)

Eldon,

If I may comment on the exchange between you and JRC -

[JRC]
>>Actual growth and evolution is bound to be
>>uncomfortable and extremely volatile - but ultimately whether the
> ....
>You tend to view the process from a more western standpoint and see
>conflict as an essential ingredient. I'd see is as a rare tonic, a
>medicine, not as a daily ingredient of life.

I don't think a sense of conflict is or should be that rare. If you accept
the idea of there being two main countercurrents, with many others possible,
in our basic makeup (and I find it true in my experience, and commented-on
in mystical literature), the often-wished-for "peace" will not be all that
common until we get a whole further along the road.

A lot of what I've gathered of JRC's opinions on conflict is not to be
afraid of it, and to take a constructive view where one keeps in mind the
deeper, positive processes that are going on at the same time.

[JRC]
>>Their compassion at times has an almost *ruthless* quality about it ... as
>>has virtually nothing to do with modern culture's notions of being "nice"
>>(and sometimes I believe the two are assumed to be the same thing ... but
>>neither HPB or the Masters could be considered *nice*). 
>
>I'd object to the term "almost *ruthless*" though. I'd call it
>astonishing, or surprising, or totally unexpected -- somewhat zen-like,
>rather than something acting with a karate-like quality that simply hits
>you and knocks you down.

For me, the term "almost ruthless" is rather appropriate, because I take it
to mean they are uncompromising, relentless and utterly whole-hearted in
their compassion - not afraid to see short-term pain for a longer-term,
vastly more positive result, within that envelope of compassion; feeling the
pain acutely themselves in the process.


>>I have no illusions, nor desire,
>>to be a "clever guru" ... in fact I don't believe in gurus at all
>
>But you give this impression when you tell Tom that you respond to him
>in the same manner and measure as he acts.

I don't think that's the only interpretion. Far from it.

Whatever JRC's motives, I have found the exchange extremely interesting,
both for its content and for the techniques. Whether I would - or could - do
the same, is another matter.


>> ...I may have to say that much of your writing appears to be in the mode
>>you accuse me of ... no? The next two paragraphs to me and Tom have at
>>least a slight tone of "teacher to pupil", do they not?).
>
>Perhaps a different "teacher" tone than you like to use. Yours has
>more of the sound of a "karate instructor", mine may have more of a
>"traditional guru" sound to it.

I think it's JRC who sounds more like the guru proper, without wanting to
put you down. I'm glad you mentioned surprise somewhere else in your post,
Eldon. It's often quite a pointer.


>It's possible to deflate certain ideas, or defuse an explosive discussion,
>without getting into a personal fight.

Yes, but is it really just a personal fight? I sense more to it than this.


>> I'd say it's possible to disarm someone that
>>is combative without having to take up arms.

Yes, but several of us have tried this already. Tom puts out a lot of
energy, IMO, so it's not inappropriate to reply with a lot of energy. I feel
JRC has spoken, in a way, for many on the list. And, curiously, that
includes Tom.

Murray