The Public Square: Ton and Elena conflict in the Public Square post 121-131

http://bbattleswordd.wordpress.com/2010/02/20/new-page/#comments

Ton:

here is something from a book i’m reading:

The way to peace is to realize that the world-outlooks conjointly, in their reciprocal action on one another, can be in a certain sense explained, but that they cannot lead into the inner nature of truth if they remain one-sided. One must experience in oneself the truth-value of the different world-outlooks, in order — if one may say so — to be in agreement with truth.
Rudolf Steiner, Human and Cosmic Thought

i wish you well

121. Elena - April 11, 2010 [Edit]

Looks like I’ve been banned again but here is the post I had sent to Ton if you care to read it here.

There is nothing wrong with being banned again. I’m beginning to get used to it. Most people that say anything worth the while get banned unless they have a whole institution that is paying for them but how could the fofblog support me when it is an institution supporting the fofcult so that it doesn’t close because Old FOF and so many of them have friends in there that would be out in the streets and No kids father would have to be supported by him and
they wouldn’t have a subject to talk about and pretend that they are doing something against the crimes inside!

Dear Steve, you really have a lousy job but you do it very well. You’ve so much fear and hide behind the curtains to even turn the pages. My dear Steve, life is sweet and lovely and there is no need to be so afraid to speak.

Here is the post I sent in:

Does this “elena experiment” mean that I’ve been banned again?

I had the following post for Ton so I’ll send it in in the hope that it goes through. I haven’t yet read Ton’s last post.

Hi Ton,

I hope you don’t think that I have dismissed you which is always a very painful experience, I have dismissed your reasoning which is painful to me. For you this conversation is about something you know and you want me to guess so you give me clues that I should go and follow and find out. You first state that the humanism I present is not enough and that I should read more and then present us with a video on ecologic consciousness and then say that that isn’t it, that I have to read more and give me the clue of people who’ve done research with entheogens but that is not either that I have to read more and present me with a paper on ego-death. Like Robert, you are trying to convince me that I can’t know what human is until I read what you tell me.

We don’t learn how to be human in books, they can at best inspire us. We learn humanism in the love we share and in the willingness to give the time and attention to what is required which is what Robert cannot do. Parents in the Fellowship cannot take real care of their children, old people or each other because these are relegated to a third class endeavor and replaced for building his arc for humanity: reading great classics so that we might one day know the truth, dining like kings and throwing out the food so that we don’t take our eyes off him while we hide our needs in the closet together with the children and old people, when they are not literally thrown out so that someone else will take care of them.

As I said to Nigel, trust yourself. You don’t need to read books to be human. The majority of truly human people I know have never even picked up a book but never missed to act out what the situation requires with the necessary attention. I wish you well and thank you for the time you put into trying to find out what humanism is about. We are ourselves that open road and have the opportunity to walk it together each day.

Have a good day!

122. Elena - April 11, 2010 [Edit]

Hi again Ton,

I read your last post before leaving and telling you that you’re behaving like Robert is no lie or insult. You are trying to manipulate me and have not addressed anything I say but have questioned my right to say it arguing that I have to read more.

Telling Nigel what he’s doing is also no insult, we must help each other see what we’re doing.

You are Ton very hurt with me because I have repeatedly questioned you. Please forgive me if that has hurt so deeply especially if I ever did it aggressively probably towards the end before I was banned. I’ve had my bad times and been very aggressive but this is not that time. We can each move on freely if we can’t share a decent dialogue.

You were very aggressive at the beginning and I showed that then you softened some, then you turned back to the same mechanism without acknowledging the whole of what I was saying. It happens. Thank you nevertheless for putting a full stop into this attempt to share with people connected to the Fellowship. It is fine if there is nothing I can connect to them with, I have tried in good faith and failed in good faith and time will prove it.

Allons-y !

123. Elena - April 11, 2010 [Edit]

Hi Ton,

I hadn’t even seen your post here, thank you for bringing all the material so that I don’t have to.

I couldn’t agree more with Steiner’s quote, we have no problem with that. You fail to live up to it by your incapacity to address what I actually write and think I fail because I don’t read every author you’ve read to make it into the book of people you consider knowledgeable.

That’s alright, we can live with that!

124. ton - April 11, 2010 [Edit]

dear elena, let’s work on getting clear about perceptions:

you said:
“I couldn’t agree more with Steiner’s quote, we have no problem with that.”

who’s this “we” ? do you purport to speak for me? again ? or are you referring to your own “many selves” ?

elena”
“…You fail to live up to it by your incapacity to address what I actually write and think I fail because I don’t read every author you’ve read to make it into the book of people you consider knowledgeable.”

the question you should be concerning yourself with is this: “how do YOU, (yourself) fail to live up to it” ?

and… if you go back in review, i do address what you write, as i am doing now, it may not be to your liking and so you attempt to negate and dismiss it, but it is a response nonetheless…

i NEVER “accused” you of “failing” — what i attempted to do was to point you in another direction and this seems to deeply offend you… you are disturbed by this… why is that elena?

i’m not saying that you NEED to do ANYTHING, much less read what i’ve read, but when you “ACT” like you’re interested in what informs me, and i then offer you indications of what informs me, it causes you to react in a defensive, agitated and hostile way… why is that? i think it’s because you’re not really interested in what informs me, especially if it doesn’t agree with your perspective… what you ARE interested in is grandstanding… well now you can return to your own little website that is dedicated to just that.

by all means, YOU “should go and find out,” figure things out for yourself, it’s not my responsibility to babysit you or to spoonfeed you… of course it’s entirely up to as to how and what to find out… good luck with that.

elena:
“You first state that the humanism I present is not enough and that I should read more and then present us with a video on ecologic consciousness and then say that that isn’t it”

and i stand by that… “humanism,” or “ecologic consciousness,” or whatever “ism” or philosophy or doctrine or ideology which one cares to latch onto, represents at best “a finger pointing toward the moon.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neti_neti

elena:
“…that I have to read more and give me the clue of people who’ve done research with entheogens but that is not either that I have to read more and present me with a paper on ego-death.”

again, i never “said” you have to do anything… i think this slant on your interpretation is due to living for so many years in a restricted dictatorial environment where you learn to expect to be told what to do…

in order to illustrate alternatives to your current firmly held convictions i offered a very short list of authors who represent other viewpoints… which you may or may not care to look at, it’s your choice… but if you are so determined that your view is absolute, then i don’t expect that you’ll do any exploration in other directions… that’s entirely up to you, obviously.

elena:
“Like Robert, you are trying to convince me that I can’t know what human is until I read what you tell me.”

i am not trying to “convince” you of anything, in my own way i am expressing my point of view through indications of things that have informed and influenced me… it’s really unfair to compare me with BURTON… i get the feeling that this is the worst insult you can think of… you really need to free yourself of that particular frame of reference elena, it takes time and distance from the event but you can do it!

i wish you well

125. Elena - April 11, 2010 [Edit]

Thank you Ton, I too wish you well. I can stay here and keep working on what I am working and you can go back to your blog where you all agree about everything and feed in each other’s comfort after banning anyone who tries to bring the knowledge of what happened in the Fellowship a further step.

There is nothing unfair about comparing you with Robert. You are behaving just like him. Instead of simply supporting what I am saying on humanism and furthering the understanding in other areas that you think pertinent, you dismiss them by attacking me personally for not including other concepts and expect me to read the books you’ve read because you are not willing to offer them. Robert did the same thing to us: he would have us work, work, work, because we were not good enough. It is a manipulative tool to demeanor another person’s right to participate in their full capacity.

What you did and are doing is very sad. The posts with the chapters I presented on the book I am trying to develop address specific things, the idea of humanism is also very specific but you don’t address anything, simply concentrate on how to convince me that I need to read more to be able to speak.

You know very well that we stand for the same things but living those things out, practice them in our encounters with each other is what is difficult. This is all simply absurdly sad.

Yes, I’ll move on, there is much work to do.

126. ton - April 11, 2010 [Edit]

elena writes:
“There is nothing unfair about comparing you with Robert. You are behaving just like him. Instead of simply supporting what I am saying on humanism and furthering the understanding in other areas that you think pertinent, you dismiss them by attacking me personally for not including other concepts and expect me to read the books you’ve read because you are not willing to offer them. Robert did the same thing to us: he would have us work, work, work, because we were not good enough. It is a manipulative tool to demeanor another person’s right to participate in their full capacity.”

like i said, you would do well to change your frame of reference, that way you can avoid continuing the pitfalls and mistakes of drawing comparisons that are based on negative events in your past and which lead to a current type of delusional thinking.

look elena, i don’t have to agree with you and if i am not in agreement with your perspective, i am free to let you know… that offends you but that’s your problem… being emotionally disturbed IS your problem, your imbalance. what you wrote above here, is nothing but the stench that rises from your own personal little rubbish heap of self-pity… oh, poor, poor elena, always the victim, always misunderstood… the problem is that you’re always thinking about “poor little me” and living in the past… that’s a very self-destructive formula elena, get over it, and get over yourself.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

dear grasshopper,
before i leave you to your soapbox, your ranting and raving and grandiose grandstanding — if you’re unfamiliar with the term it means to perform ostentatiously so as to impress — i sincerely hope you can learn something from this:

“Truth has nothing to do with words. Truth can be likened to the bright moon in the sky. Words, in this case, can be likened to a finger. The finger can point to the moon’s location. However, the finger is not the moon. To look at the moon, it is necessary to gaze beyond the finger, right?”

“Analyzing the pointer is pointless… yet we tend to analyze the pointers without noticing it. If we are discussing about whether something is good for us or not or especially if we come to a philosophical debate, we are discussing the validity of models and concepts. We can also go out and experience something directly. It’s the same with spirituality. Spirituality is all about experiencing and the truth itself.

The words are only pointing. So as long as we are pointing and discussing about the different pointers, we are not experiencing. The experience of something is the connection with something… without labeling. What happens in philosophy and in religion again and again is the intense discussion about the pointers. How can it be that there is a discussion about one thing that is true? It is one thing right? It can only be because we represent something differently, which are different pointers. Then it is easy to discuss and disagree about them.

The map is not the territory The map is not the territory is just another way to point to the same thing. The map is the concept of what we have in the mind about something. It’s a belief, an image or a thought-pattern. We use this map in the same way as we use a city-map to find a location. If the map is correct, we will find our location. If it is slightly incorrect, we have to correct it by new knowledge to optimize it. If it is completely incorrect or we move to another city, we have to replace the map altogether. What is happening is that we changed the map. And this is happening all the time.

Another map is the self-image or we may call it the ego. It is everything we saved about ourselves. It is the map of ourselves and we act from it. The map called the ego is a very useful map that we constantly create ourselves. But here is the important thing: it is still a map. It’s nice to have a map, as long as you know it’s a map Which means: The map can change : which means our self-concept (the ego, who we think we are) can change and this is the basis of personal development. This changing map includes our thoughts, beliefs and actions: the whole world-view and the self-image.

The map is not the territory : I am not the ego, my self-image. You are not your self-image, or in other words: You and I are not who we think we are; think in the literally sense of the word: thoughts (and all other concepts) are the map, not the territory. The important step is dropping the map and experiencing what is without the map. But, (for me at least) this means not to remove the map for all time. I need the map to function in the world and to relate to everything. So I create maps and use maps in a very intense way, in the best way possible. But there is one difference: I dis-identified the map from the territory. So I know that my self-image is my self-image but not the self. Ken Wilber called the process “Transcend and include”. Or as Genpo Roshi put it: the reason we are able to transcend the ego but still use it as a human being is that we know the Being side of the Human Being as well as the Human Side.”

good luck with being human

127. Elena - April 11, 2010 [Edit]

Thank you Ton, I hope that map leads you to peace within yourself.

128. Elena - April 11, 2010 [Edit]

129. ton - April 11, 2010 [Edit]

“I hope that map leads you to peace within yourself.”

oh really??

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Imagine there’s no heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today…

130. Elena - April 11, 2010 [Edit]

That’s a good one too and this one!

131. Elena - April 11, 2010 [Edit]