Guest guest Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 Surely the term "enemy" can be defined as one who would do us harm, without resort to projection, deomonization, etc. That is, surely it is an objective fact that there are those who would do us harm? Yes, that can be a response. It is when we start out making an enemy that we have to endure the consequences, I cn relate a story ab my son , a Pisces w/Mars in Pisces (a born pacifist!). When he was ab 6, we lived on a block w/24 kids under 10. The boys wld gang up n fight n T wld always end up at the bott of the pile. Wh I tried to tell him to defend himself at least, he said in Sun School, Jesus said turn the other cheek... In despair, I went to my Teacher., who smiled n said. "That is true. The first time he got hit, he turned the other cheek. If he got hit again, that's two times. Jesus said nothing ab a third time!!:] After a 3rd time, one becomes a masochist n many a woman needs to hear this. That was the theme of the play "The Ice Man Cometh"....... I say this with feeling, because it so often happens that one can collude and enable a bully. It is a thorny problem wh played out in history/politics. That's why sports/games afford an opportunity for 'fights' on another level that we call 'play'. But wh that vessel is broken, it gets wrecked. The sad thing is that tit-for-tat will NEVER bring peace. Oppositions, as Jung points out, are only solved by the transcendent function. The straight line forms a triangle. 9/11 n the tsunami n hurricanes released an outpouring of goodwill. Hatred n revenge sow ugly seeds. Fear n ignorance acct for a lot of projection. It is a great mistake to think the end justifies the means, because the means have a way of causing unforeseen consequences! Iraq, a case in point. Karma = law of cause n effect. The archetype of the bully might be worth discussing! Power, truly needs to be balanced by wisdom n love. Milkstool principle. What say you, dear Dan? So pleased to hear fr u ag! Mourning Red Sox, on the other hand seems Wh Sox have been underdogs since 1917! bedtime! love ao Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 ----Original Message----- From: JUNG-FIRE [mailto:JUNG-FIRE ] On Behalf Of IonaDove@... In despair, I went to my Teacher., who smiled n said. " That is true. The first time he got hit, he turned the other cheek. If he got hit again, that's two times. Jesus said nothing ab a third time!!:] This reminds me of an interview I saw with the Dalai Lama… I believe the interviewer was Mike Wallace, who was asking about the other man's vows of respect for all life, non-violence, etc. He asked the DL what he would do if a mosquito landed on his arm and bit him. The DL responded that the mosquito is a living creature who must eat to survive, and that means biting other living creatures, and surely he could spare a little blood for that purpose. Wallace then asked what would happen if the same mosquito came back for a second bite. The DL gently moved his fingers across his forearm and indicated that he'd just brush the pesky critter away. " And what if he comes back a third time? " Wallace asked. The DL slapped his forearm to crush the imaginary bug, laughed out loud, and said " Karma! " Kione Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2005 Report Share Posted October 8, 2005 IonaDove@... wrote: Dear Alice, In a message dated 10/7/2005 1:13:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, dwatkins9@... writes: Surely the term "enemy" can be defined as one who would do us harm, without resort to projection, deomonization, etc. That is, surely it is an objective fact that there are those who would do us harm? Yes, that can be a response. It is when we start out making an enemy that we have to endure the consequences, There are certainly times when one makes an enemy unnecessarily, but I think, on the other hand, that we shouldn't fall into the trap of imagining that we can somehow avoid having enemies. Jesus had enemies. Jung had enemies. Because mens' interests are not the same, and are often antithetical, enemies are inevitable. What is the confilict over Israel? Two different peoples can't have sole dominion over the same place. I cn relate a story ab my son , a Pisces w/Mars in Pisces (a born pacifist!). When he was ab 6, we lived on a block w/24 kids under 10. The boys wld gang up n fight n T wld always end up at the bott of the pile. Wh I tried to tell him to defend himself at least, he said in Sun School, Jesus said turn the other cheek... In despair, I went to my Teacher., who smiled n said. "That is true. The first time he got hit, he turned the other cheek. If he got hit again, that's two times. Jesus said nothing ab a third time!!:] After a 3rd time, one becomes a masochist n many a woman needs to hear this. That was the theme of the play "The Ice Man Cometh"....... I say this with feeling, because it so often happens that one can collude and enable a bully. It is a thorny problem wh played out in history/politics. That's why sports/games afford an opportunity for 'fights' on another level that we call 'play'. But wh that vessel is broken, it gets wrecked. The sad thing is that tit-for-tat will NEVER bring peace. Tit for tat will never bring peace, but tit of such a force and degree that it renders the enemy incapable of further tat can bring peace - we haven't had trouble with the Japanese lately ( to anticipate an objection, magnanmity toward a conquered foe is usually a good thing, admittedly). Oppositions, as Jung points out, are only solved by the transcendent function. Fair enough, but one does not *ever* expect such a high level resolution of political matters (war being a political matter), right? Jung, in his remarks on political matters, does not as far as I can see ever suggest such a thing. The transcendent function does not apply to the political. It doesn't and can't work there. The straight line forms a triangle. 9/11 n the tsunami n hurricanes released an outpouring of goodwill. Hatred n revenge sow ugly seeds. Fear n ignorance acct for a lot of projection. It is a great mistake to think the end justifies the means, because the means have a way of causing unforeseen consequences! Iraq, a case in point. I am by no means convinced that Iraq is a lost cause. Further I consider it necessary that someone act to create a stable, pro-Western regime in the area - for the sake of Israel, for the sake of the Western economies (greased by oil), for the sake of squelching violent Islamic fundamentalist jihad. If not us, who? If not now, when? Weakness invites defeat, tyranny, slavery - that is cause and effect. We would be unwise to just assume that we cannot in time be defeated by Islam, especially as the Western "cultures" have already grown so decadent. The end does not justify the means, but necessity justifies all. Necessity for what? For the care of one's own. Justice = helping friends, harming enemies, and keeping a close eye on strangers. Anyone who claims to be a cosmopolitan - a "citizen of the world," and hence loyal to no one in particular - bears watching. Athens had a point. The Beatles were wrong (as why not? They were young guys in their twenties) - love is not all you need. Karma = law of cause n effect. The archetype of the bully might be worth discussing! Power, truly needs to be balanced by wisdom n love. Real bullies - i.e., those who do not strike out rationally, out of genuine necessity - are compensating for personal internal weakness, it seems to me. Everyone who has ever been a boy knows the way to deal with them - you have to back them down. Milkstool principle. Prudence will do - men stand well enough on two legs. Best, Dan What say you, dear Dan? So pleased to hear fr u ag! Mourning Red Sox, on the other hand seems Wh Sox have been underdogs since 1917! bedtime! love ao Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2005 Report Share Posted October 8, 2005 Dear Dan, There may never be a way to outer peace. You may be right. But that does not mean one cannot oneself commit oneself to peace within. You cannot deny this for the simple reason it has never been tried for long. If we do not change our consciousness ,hating and killing will be always with us.The world will spin out of control in revulsion of the actions of mankind.If we really want to we can always try destroying the earth. Or,I can learn to be peaceful, to stop hating, to stop anger, to deny myself a sense of revenge.( probably I would have to lean on the grace of G-d, since I do not have it totally within myself) Although,maybe just knowing that G-d is within will be enough. At least that way I do not add energy to the greater atmosphere of fear we all live in. Love can be as contagious as hate. I don't have to consider the other an enemy. No one can force me to act in fear or violence, and if I must to defend myself, I do not need to hate, even then. I am in control of how I face others. I will not give up that control to anyone, including the collective. We can force others to kill,( in self defense) but not to hate. NOW, and who? You and me. And the Beatles were right. It depends, Dan, on what you know of love and its effects. Conscious love is the aim. But fear and love cannot occupy the same space at the same time. Toni Re: enemies IonaDove@... wrote:Dear Alice, Surely the term "enemy" can be defined as one who would do us harm, without resort to projection, deomonization, etc. That is, surely it is an objective fact that there are those who would do us harm? Yes, that can be a response. It is when we start out making an enemy that we have to endure the consequences,There are certainly times when one makes an enemy unnecessarily, but I think, on the other hand, that we shouldn't fall into the trap of imagining that we can somehow avoid having enemies. Jesus had enemies. Jung had enemies. Because mens' interests are not the same, and are often antithetical, enemies are inevitable. What is the confilict over Israel? Two different peoples can't have sole dominion over the same place. I cn relate a story ab my son , a Pisces w/Mars in Pisces (a born pacifist!). When he was ab 6, we lived on a block w/24 kids under 10. The boys wld gang up n fight n T wld always end up at the bott of the pile. Wh I tried to tell him to defend himself at least, he said in Sun School, Jesus said turn the other cheek... In despair, I went to my Teacher., who smiled n said. "That is true. The first time he got hit, he turned the other cheek. If he got hit again, that's two times. Jesus said nothing ab a third time!!:] After a 3rd time, one becomes a masochist n many a woman needs to hear this. That was the theme of the play "The Ice Man Cometh"....... I say this with feeling, because it so often happens that one can collude and enable a bully. It is a thorny problem wh played out in history/politics. That's why sports/games afford an opportunity for 'fights' on another level that we call 'play'. But wh that vessel is broken, it gets wrecked. The sad thing is that tit-for-tat will NEVER bring peace.Tit for tat will never bring peace, but tit of such a force and degree that it renders the enemy incapable of further tat can bring peace - we haven't had trouble with the Japanese lately ( to anticipate an objection, magnanmity toward a conquered foe is usually a good thing, admittedly). Oppositions, as Jung points out, are only solved by the transcendent function.Fair enough, but one does not *ever* expect such a high level resolution of political matters (war being a political matter), right? Jung, in his remarks on political matters, does not as far as I can see ever suggest such a thing. The transcendent function does not apply to the political. It doesn't and can't work there. The straight line forms a triangle. 9/11 n the tsunami n hurricanes released an outpouring of goodwill. Hatred n revenge sow ugly seeds. Fear n ignorance acct for a lot of projection. It is a great mistake to think the end justifies the means, because the means have a way of causing unforeseen consequences! Iraq, a case in point.I am by no means convinced that Iraq is a lost cause. Further I consider it necessary that someone act to create a stable, pro-Western regime in the area - for the sake of Israel, for the sake of the Western economies (greased by oil), for the sake of squelching violent Islamic fundamentalist jihad. If not us, who? If not now, when? Weakness invites defeat, tyranny, slavery - that is cause and effect. We would be unwise to just assume that we cannot in time be defeated by Islam, especially as the Western "cultures" have already grown so decadent.The end does not justify the means, but necessity justifies all. Necessity for what? For the care of one's own. Justice = helping friends, harming enemies, and keeping a close eye on strangers. Anyone who claims to be a cosmopolitan - a "citizen of the world," and hence loyal to no one in particular - bears watching. Athens had a point.The Beatles were wrong (as why not? They were young guys in their twenties) - love is not all you need. Karma = law of cause n effect. The archetype of the bully might be worth discussing! Power, truly needs to be balanced by wisdom n love.Real bullies - i.e., those who do not strike out rationally, out of genuine necessity - are compensating for personal internal weakness, it seems to me. Everyone who has ever been a boy knows the way to deal with them - you have to back them down. Milkstool principle.Prudence will do - men stand well enough on two legs.Best,Dan 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.