Guest guest Posted October 22, 2000 Report Share Posted October 22, 2000 << You guys want to claim that Jerusalem " belongs " to you " spiritually " - put your ass where your mouth is, fly over there and prepare to die for it. As I should be doing. >> fa, We know you are in anguish dear one. It is felt by others here too - though not as deeply as that which you feel. Let me ask you this: If you did fly over there and DID die for it, what " it " would have been avenged? Is " it " worth YOUR life? Or is there another " it " which may be as worthy (or more worthy) of the rare fa? I don't presume to know the answer to these questions. Warm hugs across cyberspace, Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2000 Report Share Posted October 23, 2000 In a message dated Mon, 23 Oct 2000 12:48:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Toni Priest writes: << Greg, You addressed fa, but I have a question about what you asked her. It boils down, in the end, to two stances in life. A pacifist does not retaliate aggressively, and goes to his death nobly.>> Good points. You have quickly sorted the options of two polar opposites (isn't it interesting what consiousness drives us to do!) Are there other alternatives? Perhaps so; but I don't know what they may be for fa. Only she knows that. The above option contains a key phrase: " death - nobly " . One word is a fact, the other is an adjective. But it seems that once we have limited our options to two, one of which is death (as is always the case in wartime), it is already too late to consider the alternatives. <<A non-pacifist, retaliates in kind and dies for his " higher " good, and goes to his death nobly . Those seem to me to be the basic options in life when one's life is threatened . Are you asking whether this is something for which she is prepared to die>> Here I was merely asking if this particular noble cause is the one for which fa might wish to lay her life on the line. She expressed to us that she felt that she " SHOULD " do so. Is her life truly threatened. Should she put life on the line because of what is happening between rock-throwing teenagers in Ramalla? I was asking her to measure if she really should or if another more effective means to the end of peace could be served by her - or the rest of us for that matter. Alice has proposed an alternative; some have responded. <<Whether this is a " worthy " cause? In the history of this violent human race which all of us are part of, would civilization have survived if millions had not put their lives on the line for their homes, families and their god?>> The survivors of wars include many: the victors, those who were able to stay out of the conflict by whatever means or for whatever reasons. The rest died - no matter how " noble " the cause. <<We are not yet evolved enough to be fully conscious>> Sadly you may be right here. We may not have evolved far enough yet. We have just finished the bloodiest century of the human species. And we think we are quite through with the middle ages. We don't seem to be though. But at what point do we begin to see other possibilities to conflict than the old true and true - killing and maming one another. Widows, orphans and destruction. Maybe we should heed the tilters at windmills in this debate, but now seems to be the time to search for options, before life or death are the only two. Going to war is indeed easier - less compicated. The price is just much higher. <<and therefore we may be attacked or threatened. Do we not have to take a stand on one of the two options above. Religions have always been on one side or the other, nations and tribes had no illusions about survival, and made their decisions. Is there such a thing as a " just " war?>> Most combatants who fight in wars have done so with absolute conviction that justice, God, etc. were one their side. And they are usually right - to them and their countrymen. And the " winners " ultimately get to decide whose cause or God was just in the end and they get to write the history about it. And I am not stating this with sarcasm - it just works that way. Yes, I do believe there are just wars. I am very grateful that a few courageous leaders and millions of brave soldiers took on Hitler and Hirohito 50 years ago, otherwise there would be no Isreal, no Jerusalem, no debate and far fewer Jews alive than there are now. And a lot more people would be speaking German. But I also recognize that my idea of justice and right are not shared by those who have opposed my point of view, and for whom justice was the polar opposite to my own. I am asking fa if this is the right cause and the right time to do what she feels she " should " do. Perhaps it is. But before we commit our life to anything, we should KNOW with strong conviction that it is worth the ultimate sacrifice. <<These are all valid questions and each individual must search his/her soul for an answer. It would be better to make a choice before the heat of battle rouses our emotions.>> We agree on this. <<I am interested in where we all stand, once the idealism, innocence and emotion are put aside and reality faced.>> Again, what is one persons reality is not necessarily another's. We are from different countries, different religious faiths, etc. And before idealism and innocence are sacrificed at the altar of emotion, I hope that we have looked inside long enough to know what we, individually, must do. It will be a different answer for each of us. The emotions (the archetypes if you will) which have us all in their grip are what I am aiming at with these questions. They are questions - not answers. Perhaps some very active " active imagination " by each of us is called for here! Thanks for the dialog Toni. Greg marshkan@... wrote: > > > << You guys want to claim that Jerusalem " belongs " to you " spiritually " - put > your ass where your mouth is, fly over there and prepare to die for it. As I > should be doing. >> > > fa, > > We know you are in anguish dear one. It is felt by others here too - though > not as deeply as that which you feel. > > Let me ask you this: If you did fly over there and DID die for it, what " it " > would have been avenged? Is " it " worth YOUR life? Or is there another " it " > which may be as worthy (or more worthy) of the rare fa? I don't presume > to know the answer to these questions. > > Warm hugs across cyberspace, > Greg > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2000 Report Share Posted October 23, 2000 <<I imagine that problem is occurring in households all over the world.>> Yes Toni, I think you are right. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2000 Report Share Posted October 23, 2000 Greg, You addressed fa, but I have a question about what you asked her. It boils down, in the end, to two stances in life. A pacifist does not retaliate aggressively, and goes to his death nobly. A non-pacifist, retaliates in kind and dies for his " higher " good, and goes to his death nobly . Those seem to me to be the basic options in life when one's life is threatened . Are you asking whether this is something for which she is prepared to die? Whether this is a " worthy " cause? In the history of this violent human race which all of us are part of, would civilization have survived if millions had not put their lives on the line for their homes, families and their god? We are not yet evolved enough to be fully conscious, and therefore we may be attacked or threatened. Do we not have to take a stand on one of the two options above. Religions have always been on one side or the other, nations and tribes had no illusions about survival, and made their decisions. Is there such a thing as a " just " war? These are all valid questions and each individual must search his/her soul for an answer. It would be better to make a choice before the heat of battle rouses our emotions. I am interested in where we all stand, once the idealism, innocence and emotion are put aside and reality faced. Toni marshkan@... wrote: > > > << You guys want to claim that Jerusalem " belongs " to you " spiritually " - put > your ass where your mouth is, fly over there and prepare to die for it. As I > should be doing. >> > > fa, > > We know you are in anguish dear one. It is felt by others here too - though > not as deeply as that which you feel. > > Let me ask you this: If you did fly over there and DID die for it, what " it " > would have been avenged? Is " it " worth YOUR life? Or is there another " it " > which may be as worthy (or more worthy) of the rare fa? I don't presume > to know the answer to these questions. > > Warm hugs across cyberspace, > Greg > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2000 Report Share Posted October 23, 2000 In a message dated 10/23/2000 4:33:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time, josefa@... writes: << None of you have given me a GOOD reason why I should not be in Israel >> So go already! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2000 Report Share Posted October 23, 2000 In a message dated 10/23/00 4:32:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time, josefa@... writes: << None of you have given me a GOOD reason why I should not be in Israel. If anyone can find an appropriate quote from Jung, rather than New-Age fluff, just maybe I'd be convinced. >> Hi fa, I think CG was a person like the rest of us and saw a vague outline of the future but not its tapestry anymore than the rest of us can today. If he had been able to live in today's world,,what would his opinions be? Love, The Mutt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2000 Report Share Posted October 23, 2000 Greg, thanks for your answer. In my opinion the history of the world points out the " survival of the fittest " I am making no value judgment, but so far it has seemed this way in the history of mankind. As long as we live far away, we do have options. Usually we ignore unpleasantness until it becomes " in our National Interest. " While we spin noble thoughts, the Serbs and Albanians, the Tutsis and Hutus, and India and Pakistan who are on the brink, do not have the leisure to think it through calmy.They only have 2 options. In the end there are only two choices. There are no other options once the shouting is over and the shooting starts. Alice's alternative is fine for those of us who are living here in peace, it is no alternative for those involved., Most of us don't " have a dog in that fight " .if you will pardon the expression. Some of us may feel it is our Tribe that is threatened. The option I see is to lie down and let the enemy run over you, or get up and hope you prevail. There are no other options when hate, violence fear, fanaticism have captured the psyche. There was never any agreement on peace. it was imposed on both parties from outside. How do we know how many second thoughts each country had, before it all boiled over. We out here, can not ,and must not force others to solve their problem " our way " In all humility, we do not know the right answer. " We " see other possibilities, but " WE " are not fighting for survival, and " We " have no right to believe we have the right answers for others. I think prayer, concern and fighting our own demons is definitely where it is " at " for those of us watching. It is not an alternative, it is a way to cope, while we are watching. As for those whose Tribe is at risk, we do have to make some earthshaking, (for ourselves and those we love) decisions. We cannot be judged right or wrong by , even by those who have all the answers. As you said ,fa ,because she is young, and not I ,because I am old will have to decide what responsibility she bears. I imagine that problem is occurring in households all over the world. Toni marshkan@... wrote: > In a message dated Mon, 23 Oct 2000 12:48:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Toni > Priest writes: > > << Greg, You addressed fa, but I have a question about what you asked > her. It boils down, in the end, to two stances in life. A pacifist does not > retaliate > aggressively, and goes to his death nobly.>> > > Good points. You have quickly sorted the options of two polar opposites > (isn't it interesting what consiousness drives us to do!) Are there other > alternatives? Perhaps so; but I don't know what they may be for fa. Only > she knows that. The above option contains a key phrase: " death - nobly " . One > word is a fact, the other is an adjective. But it seems that once we have > limited our options to two, one of which is death (as is always the case in > wartime), it is already too late to consider the alternatives. > > <<A non-pacifist, retaliates in kind > and dies for his " higher " good, and goes to his death nobly . Those seem to > me to be the basic options in life when one's life is threatened . Are you > asking whether this is something for which she is prepared to die>> > > Here I was merely asking if this particular noble cause is the one for which > fa might wish to lay her life on the line. She expressed to us that she > felt that she " SHOULD " do so. Is her life truly threatened. Should she put > life on the line because of what is happening between rock-throwing teenagers > in Ramalla? I was asking her to measure if she really should or if another > more effective means to the end of peace could be served by her - or the rest > of us for that matter. Alice has proposed an alternative; some have responded. > > <<Whether this is a " worthy " cause? In the history of this violent human > race which all of us are part of, would civilization have survived if > millions had not put their lives on the line for their homes, families and > their god?>> > > The survivors of wars include many: the victors, those who were able to stay > out of the conflict by whatever means or for whatever reasons. The rest died > - no matter how " noble " the cause. > > <<We are not yet evolved enough to be fully conscious>> > > Sadly you may be right here. We may not have evolved far enough yet. We have > just finished the bloodiest century of the human species. And we think we are > quite through with the middle ages. We don't seem to be though. But at what > point do we begin to see other possibilities to conflict than the old true > and true - killing and maming one another. Widows, orphans and destruction. > Maybe we should heed the tilters at windmills in this debate, but now seems > to be the time to search for options, before life or death are the only two. > Going to war is indeed easier - less compicated. The price is just much > higher. > > <<and therefore we may be attacked or threatened. Do we not have to take a > stand on one of the two options above. Religions have always been on one side > or the other, nations and tribes had no illusions about survival, and made > their decisions. Is there such a thing as a " just " war?>> > > Most combatants who fight in wars have done so with absolute conviction that > justice, God, etc. were one their side. And they are usually right - to them > and their countrymen. And the " winners " ultimately get to decide whose cause > or God was just in the end and they get to write the history about it. And I > am not stating this with sarcasm - it just works that way. Yes, I do believe > there are just wars. I am very grateful that a few courageous leaders and > millions of brave soldiers took on Hitler and Hirohito 50 years ago, > otherwise there would be no Isreal, no Jerusalem, no debate and far fewer > Jews alive than there are now. And a lot more people would be speaking > German. But I also recognize that my idea of justice and right are not > shared by those who have opposed my point of view, and for whom justice was > the polar opposite to my own. I am asking fa if this is the right cause > and the right time to do what she feels she " should " do. Perhaps it is. But > before we commit our life to anything, we should > KNOW with strong conviction that it is worth the ultimate sacrifice. > > <<These are all valid questions and each individual must search his/her soul > for an answer. It would be better to make a choice before the heat of battle > rouses our emotions.>> > > We agree on this. > > <<I am interested in where we all stand, once the idealism, innocence and > emotion are put aside and reality faced.>> > > Again, what is one persons reality is not necessarily another's. We are from > different countries, different religious faiths, etc. And before idealism and > innocence are sacrificed at the altar of emotion, I hope that we have looked > inside long enough to know what we, individually, must do. It will be a > different answer for each of us. The emotions (the archetypes if you will) > which have us all in their grip are what I am aiming at with these questions. > They are questions - not answers. > > Perhaps some very active " active imagination " by each of us is called for > here! > > Thanks for the dialog Toni. > > Greg > > marshkan@... wrote: > > > > > > > << You guys want to claim that Jerusalem " belongs " to you " spiritually " - > put > > your ass where your mouth is, fly over there and prepare to die for it. As I > > should be doing. >> > > > > fa, > > > > We know you are in anguish dear one. It is felt by others here too - though > > not as deeply as that which you feel. > > > > Let me ask you this: If you did fly over there and DID die for it, what " it " > > would have been avenged? Is " it " worth YOUR life? Or is there another " it " > > which may be as worthy (or more worthy) of the rare fa? I don't presume > > to know the answer to these questions. > > > > Warm hugs across cyberspace, > > Greg > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 23, 2000 Report Share Posted October 23, 2000 Dear Toni, you wrote: .. As you said ,fa ,because she is > young, and not I ,because I am old will have to decide what responsibility she > bears. I imagine that problem is occurring in households all over the world. > Toni And once again, you hit the nail right on the head, Toni. I am not angry with Alice, Annette, or any other idealist on this list. I am angry with MYSELF. No-one is going to ask you, (or Alice as she seems to have decided that Jerusalem " belongs " to her because she once saw a dove on the Wailing Wall! - sorry Alice, much as I love you, that doesn't give you a claim in my book!!) to go and fight at your age. But for an able-bodied 25 year-old to be sitting in a comfortable Bloomsbury flat typing e-mails and preparing for seminars with equally privileged students while her homeland goes up in flames - what excuse is there for me? What right to I have to talk about my Jewish heritage if I'm not prepared to go out there and fight for it? What the fuck am I doing, still in London? And yet - what real use would I actually *be* out there? I don't know one end of a gun from another, am not exactly built for farm work, and my Hebrew isn't good enough for office work. Maybe I'd just be a liability. Or maybe I'm making excuses. Yes, I was angry with the Christians (or the " Buddhists on the telephone " - and before you all jump on that, that was Jung's expression not mine!) for presuming to claim that they have a stake in Jerusalem. I was OUTRAGED (Alice's own definition). But, if one is outraged, one must ask oneself, " Am I any better? " I did. And the answer is no. Obviously no. I'm here, typing stupid bloody e-mails. One thing, though. Jung was not a wimpy new-age guy, as some of you seem to want to believe. He most certainly wasn't a pacifist. And, he believed in small nations - not some unrealistic view of world brotherhood - sorry, brother-and-sisterhood. People don't like that, of course. His enemies use his words to call him racist, his supporters ignore those passages altogether. None of you have given me a GOOD reason why I should not be in Israel. If anyone can find an appropriate quote from Jung, rather than New-Age fluff, just maybe I'd be convinced. fa 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.