Re: Chaos, brutality, and us from afar

[Guest guest]

" Even our national, mitigated state of war would soon come to an end if

everybody could see his own shadow and begin the only struggle that is really

worthwhile: the fight against the overwhelming power-drive of the

shadow....Unfortunately, our religious education prevents us from doing this,

with its false promises of an immediate peace within. Peace may come in the

end, but only when victory and defeat have lost their meaning [ironically we

continue to insist on " victory " as a pre-condition for withdrawing from our

self-made mess in Iraq]. What did our Lord mean when he said: 'I come not to

send peace, but a sword?' If you now compare the present state of mind of the

Germans with my argument you will appreciate the enormous task with which the

world is confronted. We can hardly expect the demoralized German masses to

realize the import of such psychological truths, no matter how simple. But the

great Western democracies have a better chance, so long as they can keep out

of those wars that always tempt them to believe in external enemies and in the

desirability of internal peace. "

He ends the essay with these words of caution: " The State is expected nowadays

to accomplish what nobody would expect from an individual. The dangerous slope

leading down to mass psychology begins with this plausible thinking in large

numbers, in terms of powerful organizations where the individual dwindles to a

mere cipher. Everything that exceeds a certain human size evokes equally inhuman

powers in man's unconscious. Totalitarian demons are called forth, intead of the

realization that all that can really be accomplished is an infinitesimal step

forward in the moral nature of the individual. The destructive power of our

weapons has increased beyond all measure, and this forces a psychological

question on mankind. Is the mental and moral condition of the men who decide on

the use of these weapons equal to the enormity of the possible consequences? "

Jung calls us, individually, to a great task and responsibility...and a most

unwelcome, difficult one, to be sure. And one can only wonder, if were Jung

alive today, how he would answer to this latter question he posed of those

entrusted with the weapons of destruction. And likely no nation is a more

jealous guardian of the widely- projected " weapons of mass destruction " than is

our own country, and our dubiously qualified leaders whose fingers remain

precariously poised over the buttons at the targets of their own unresolved

Shadow elements within. Yet as long as we (individually and collectively)

continue to project outward the (onto the best hook we can find...Osama, the

Shiites, the Sunnis, the whatever) elements of our worst,

unrecognized/unabsorbed dark shadows within, what have we gained from the

blood-drenched wars of our collective,recent past? It seems to me that the true

lessons of the past (psychologically) have hardly been learned.

Greg

_______________________________________________

Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com

The most personalized portal on the Web!

[Guest guest]

Greg, Toni, Alice, all,

I just have a moment and rushing thoughts.

So...slowing down.

In front of me are subjects I could bring to the fire. Some of them offer

a kind of remediation. For example, we could note the difference between

our individual relatedness to the world, and what then is evoked as

matters of our sensitivities and sensibilities, and, note also our sense

of collective patterns, patterns all of which are always generalizations.

As it were: a kind of averaging or aggregating down to large scale,

collective patterns.

In this light, we have individual consciousness stood against individual

instinct, and, on the other hand, from the frame of the analytic

psychology, (tis just one way to see,) the general collection of

collective patterns, also stood against collective instinct. This is

because to recognize and hold collective patterns in individual

consciousness is an awareness of potentials found beyond instinct.

And, certainly, the spark of hope is the lovesome in the midst of the

horrific.

***

But, despair and hopelessness is everybit necessary in the alchemical

sense. There's a very tough love able to forge the retort. We might honor

in this circumstance the seemingly hopeless undersatnding, as we do, that

around this fire our devotions are lent to the gods and goddesses of

difficult, rending, at times unbearable, coming to consciousness.

regards,

[Guest guest]

Dear Greg and all,

Jung famously said that, had he lived in the middle ages and written

and taught as he did, he would have been killed as a heretic. Does

anyone doubt that that he would meet the same fate among modern day

fundamentalist Islamists?

It is a mistake to try to impose "democracy" (i.e., our way of life) on

the Arab world. It is at least as great a mistake to misunderestimate

their desire and determination to impose their way of life upon us .

Eternal vigilance, baby.

Full disclosure: I don't necessarily hate the necessity for struggling

with fundamentalist Islam, as I think it may bring us in the West back

to ourselves, and stop or slow our slide toward last-mannishness. I

welcome the coming of global warming for much the same reason, frankly.

Best,

Dan

Greg wrote:

"Even our national, mitigated state of war would soon come to an end if

everybody could see his own shadow and begin the only struggle that is

really worthwhile: the fight against the overwhelming power-drive of

the shadow....Unfortunately, our religious education prevents us

from doing this, with its false promises of an immediate peace within.

Peace may come in the end, but only when victory and defeat have lost

their meaning [ironically we continue to insist on "victory" as a

pre-condition for withdrawing from our self-made mess in Iraq]. What

did our Lord mean when he said: 'I come not to send peace, but a

sword?' If you now compare the present state of mind of the Germans

with my argument you will appreciate the enormous task with which the

world is confronted. We can hardly expect the demoralized German masses

to realize the import of such psychological truths, no matter how

simple. But the great Western democracies have a better chance, so long

as they can keep out

of those wars that always tempt them to believe in external enemies and

in the desirability of internal peace."

He ends the essay with these words of caution: "The State is expected

nowadays to accomplish what nobody would expect from an individual. The

dangerous slope leading down to mass psychology begins with this

plausible thinking in large numbers, in terms of powerful organizations

where the individual dwindles to a mere cipher. Everything that exceeds

a certain human size evokes equally inhuman powers in man's

unconscious. Totalitarian demons are called forth, intead of the

realization that all that can really be accomplished is an

infinitesimal step forward in the moral nature of the individual. The

destructive power of our weapons has increased beyond all measure, and

this forces a psychological question on mankind. Is the mental and

moral condition of the men who decide on the use of these weapons equal

to the enormity of the possible consequences?"

Jung calls us, individually, to a great task and responsibility...and

a most unwelcome, difficult one, to be sure. And one can only wonder,

if were Jung alive today, how he would answer to this latter question

he posed of those entrusted with the weapons of destruction. And likely

no nation is a more jealous guardian of the widely- projected "weapons

of mass destruction" than is our own country, and our dubiously

qualified leaders whose fingers remain precariously poised over the

buttons at the targets of their own unresolved Shadow elements within.

Yet as long as we (individually and collectively) continue to project

outward the (onto the best hook we can find...Osama, the Shiites, the

Sunnis, the whatever) elements of our worst, unrecognized/unabsorbed

dark shadows within, what have we gained from the blood-drenched wars

of our collective,recent past? It seems to me that the true lessons of

the past (psychologically) have hardly been learned.

Greg

_______________________________________________

Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com

The most personalized portal on the Web!

[Guest guest]

Dear Greg,

you said:

" This is a most cynical and despairing POV Toni. "

No, my dear Greg, it is not cynical, nor an I cynical. Unless you believe in

" deus ex machina " A forvce outside the wo9rld which will make " nice' and fix

everything....I am afraid I am a realist.

To give false hope, to expend energy in holding one's finger permanently in

the dike, to make platitudes is neither helpful nor true. It is fantasy to

imagine anyone or anything can stop the violence from outside.

My faith is strong and it makes miracles only in the heart of man with his

consent. I KNOW that we all will be alright....but earthy karma will play

itself out. There is no way around the effect that was caused by our

actions. We cannot speak out of both sides of our mouths...and we must share

the guilt.

You have got the wrong person...I am an optomist, but I put no timetable on

my optimism. If the Nazis put people in ovens, nothing will keep them from

dying.

If we were going to contain this chaos...we lost our chance, just as the

rest of the world did in WWll, and just as it is now in Darfur. Had we been

more conscious, we might have before it was too late.

Now, now, what gives you the right to suppose :

" it certainly doesn't hold much hope or light for the future of humanity,

either personal or collective sense, therefore I wonder why anyone would

wish to wallow in it This is a most cynical and despairing POV Toni.as we

have the thankless luxury of doing together here around this cyberfire.

I neither wallow, nor find meaninglessness. But " cheap grace " just doesn't

cut it. You have no idea with your judgments of how I feel or what I do with

those feelings.

Mine is never " a thankless luxury, " here or elsewhere. My heart is hourly

filled with gratitude for the meanng I know to be true (for me,huh?)

Either your history has soften of humankind over the last 1000 years, or

you refuse to face the pictures and events you can see every day.

I don't need a flickering candle, my ray of hope is bright for all humanity.

I imagine many hearts bursting with love and compassion...is that all for

naught?

In my experience, and I have had it, we are not able to challenge the

evil...if we could have, there would be no Christianity. To think we can is

the greatest hubris!!

You think commissions, treaties,military force will suddenly change the

hearts of all the people now suffering. You must have forgotten the

wilfulness of human nature and the strict adherence Muslims nsay they give

to the will of G-d who is helping them in this fight against the infindel.

What is your human way out of this? If you have an answer and can convince

the evil spread upon this earth why haven't you done it.

Don't give me " cheap grace " . G-d will send miracles even though mankind has

no time or use for the Divine???

This is not worthy of you:

"

To: <JUNG-FIRE >

Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 4:15 PM

Subject: RE: Chaos, brutality, and us from afar

>

>

>

>

> " Even our national, mitigated state of war would soon come to an end if

> everybody could see his own shadow and begin the only struggle that is

> really worthwhile: the fight against the overwhelming power-drive of the

> shadow....Unfortunately, our religious education prevents us from doing

> this, with its false promises of an immediate peace within. Peace may

> come in the end, but only when victory and defeat have lost their meaning

> [ironically we continue to insist on " victory " as a pre-condition for

> withdrawing from our self-made mess in Iraq]. What did our Lord mean when

> he said: 'I come not to send peace, but a sword?' If you now compare the

> present state of mind of the Germans with my argument you will appreciate

> the enormous task with which the world is confronted. We can hardly

> expect the demoralized German masses to realize the import of such

> psychological truths, no matter how simple. But the great Western

> democracies have a better chance, so long as they can keep out

> of those wars that always tempt them to believe in external enemies and in

> the desirability of internal peace. "

>

> He ends the essay with these words of caution: " The State is expected

> nowadays to accomplish what nobody would expect from an individual. The

> dangerous slope leading down to mass psychology begins with this plausible

> thinking in large numbers, in terms of powerful organizations where the

> individual dwindles to a mere cipher. Everything that exceeds a certain

> human size evokes equally inhuman powers in man's unconscious.

> Totalitarian demons are called forth, intead of the realization that all

> that can really be accomplished is an infinitesimal step forward in the

> moral nature of the individual. The destructive power of our weapons has

> increased beyond all measure, and this forces a psychological question on

> mankind. Is the mental and moral condition of the men who decide on the

> use of these weapons equal to the enormity of the possible consequences? "

>

> Jung calls us, individually, to a great task and responsibility...and a

> most unwelcome, difficult one, to be sure. And one can only wonder, if

> were Jung alive today, how he would answer to this latter question he

> posed of those entrusted with the weapons of destruction. And likely no

> nation is a more jealous guardian of the widely- projected " weapons of

> mass destruction " than is our own country, and our dubiously qualified

> leaders whose fingers remain precariously poised over the buttons at the

> targets of their own unresolved Shadow elements within. Yet as long as we

> (individually and collectively) continue to project outward the (onto the

> best hook we can find...Osama, the Shiites, the Sunnis, the whatever)

> elements of our worst, unrecognized/unabsorbed dark shadows within, what

> have we gained from the blood-drenched wars of our collective,recent past?

> It seems to me that the true lessons of the past (psychologically) have

> hardly been learned.

>

> Greg

>

> _______________________________________________

> Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com

> The most personalized portal on the Web!

>

>

>

>

> " Our highest duty as human beings is to search out a means whereby beings

> may be freed from all kinds of unsatisfactory experience and suffering. "

>

> H.H. Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th. Dalai Lama

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Toni says: >>I was talking about "talk" in the midst of killing. That is the interaction that now predominates. We sit across from each other each fearing for his country and his life.<< --Killing only predominates in the media. Interesting that you make this claim at the same time the Pope is gaining respect from a number of Muslims by praying with them in Turkey. He's not fearing for his life, clearly. Or if he is, he's doing a great job of getting over the fear and doing it anyway. In reality, talk is far more widespread than killing. It's just that people haven't learned to talk effectively, or more to the point, to listen effectively. Learning comes with practice. Americans who don't bother to practice interacting in person with Arabs may become convinced that talking to Arabs won't get us anywhere. Those who *do* interact regularly with people across lines seem quite a bit more

optimistic. What really happened was that terrorists and the Bush Administration started a dialogue that we should have started decades ago. We're just catching up, that's all. Killing isn't working. People are about ready to try something else. >>( I also bet you haven't sat in very many useless committee meetings...I sadly have...some interaction is beyond useless ,it is harmful on occasion)<< --I wouldn't judge all face to face interaction by the worst meetings you've been to. Meetings are overly structured and tend to involve a small number of selected people, and those people are often selected not for their sincerity or willingness to dialogue, but by some other process. An artificial microcosm may not do justice to the process of dialogue. >>Sadly, you come from a different place than the Quakers, those who meditate and those who pray.<< --Actually, I've done some of the Quaker exercises, and I'm pretty sure you know that's not what I was talking about. Quakers frequently do interfaith and reconciliation work that involves dialogue and mediation. They aren't *always* silent, while many Americans have *zero* interaction with Arabs or Muslims, even American Muslims who are easy to find. >>We do not need to be told how to do the everyday normal things that spiritual people take for granted.<< --You'd be surprised how much we know and don't act on. Most people know it's a good idea to talk across lines when there's a rift between cultures. Knowing is not the same as doing. >>Even the prophets of old spoke out....that is so natural I do not see it is anything but normal.<< --It's interesting to me how much we put prophets of old on a pedestal while ignoring the prophets

of now. >>How many fighting militiamen have you talked to face to face?<< --None. They are a tiny minority, and hard to get access to. I've talked to Muslims and Arabs face to face, and online. That's a lot easier. Some of your statements did not seem to be specifically about the small minority of Jihadists or militiamen, but about Muslims and Arabs as a whole. There is probably a mosque near you. Have you paid a visit? >>I was as usually speaking globally...and you are having friendly chats in the peaceful atmosphere of Starbucks.<< --Nothing happens globally. It happens one on one, and then it ripples. >>Who are you interacting with? Those who are murdering and torturing on both sides? Can you reason with them? You cannot even reach them.<< --You seem to think they're the only

people who matter. Talk to the people you can find, instead. >>Peace is a much used word. We do not even know the meaning of it since for us it is a temporary secession of violence.<< --I take the words "Peace on earth" very seriously. They're part of the foundation of Chrsitianity, and while I'm not a Christian, I think Jesus had the right idea once in a while. Islam and Judaism too talk of peace, reverently. Don't dismiss the idea. When war gets too painful, peace will matter to us. It is only our distance from killing that gives us such cynicism and so little urgency to act. >>The Jesus you quote was speaking of inner peace....the peace G-d gives...not the troubles between warring vacations.<< --Surely you can see the connection between inner peace and outer conflict. One thing I admire about Judaism is that it doesn't remove God from man and man from the world.

Man is how God makes a difference in the world. We tend to forget that. Prayer alone does little if your body won't move when it's time to move. >>Holy? that is what is peace because it makes us whole.<< --Being whole means withdrawing projections and stereotypes. A lot of Americans stereotype Muslims and Arabs. They can pray, but they won't find wholeness, unless they start interacting with their shadow and the people who represent shadow.>>Evil is alive and doing well on this earth as it always does. In the end he/it will fail, but not because we mere human beings discount his strength and try to reason with evil.<< --Again, I did not say "reason". I talked about face to face interaction. It can be without reason or with it. It is when collectives avoid face to face interaction that the beast starts to feed on the gap between them. We feed the beast by avoiding

interaction with people who are affected by our collective behavior. We use the world's resources, and we have little interest in hearing their personal experiences with our power. Jihadists feed on the fact that few Palestinians have access to Americans, apart from a handful of activists. They feed on stereotypes about us. That's how evil works. Evil is not abstract, it's more like a virus. It works in specific ways, at specific times, and it can be stopped, but only if enough people change how they interact across dividing lines. >>All people of prayer and faith are not paralyzed<< --I agree. I especially admire some of the Quakers and Methodists I've met who are very active. One woman I met worked with Rwandan Tutsis and Hutus. She seemed to me a very "spiritual" person. There's a lot of great work being done by religious and nonreligious people, working across lines that would normally divide human

beings. >>If we know how to love we have been loving for a long time.people do not suddenly love each other when all else fails"...not in my world.<< --I'm talking about loving your enemy, not your friends or family, or a stranger at a soup kitchen. Those are all good. But stepping across dividing lines when violence is flaring in the middle takes a different kind of energy. It's not something everyone wants to do, but there seems to be more interest in the idea lately. >>Are you to tell me and the rest of us "what are we waiting for" Have you no idea of how much of yourself you must away to love?<< --I am telling you what I know. You are free to disagree. There is no hell for people who disagree with me, and I have no fear of sounding judgmental because my judgments come with no penalty. >>I am waiting for change on the

human level...1x1x1.<< --That's a great idea. Do you have a Muslim or Arab friend? If so, dialogue can begin there, and radiate outward. >>But we don't go around dousing everything with false hope that "if we just try a little harder, it will all work itself out"<< --Not harder. Smarter. We've been allowing politicians and the media to represent our collective spirit in the world, while avoiding travel and communication across cultural lines. There are Israelis and Palestinians who communicate across lines on a regular basis, and they do not make many of the mistakes in perception or action made by those who see the other side entirely through the filter of their own group mythology. If they can do it, risking accusations of collaborating with the enemy, anyone can.>>My my, how profound. What do you actually know about what an "enemy" can do to you

and your loved ones/" It is easy to "love" long distance...And that isn't love..it is a fantasy until it is proven in actuality.<< --Communication across a distance can be effective at times. My fear is not that my body will be hurt by an enemy. I'd be more afraid of my spirit being damaged by my *perception* of my enemy, with all the shadow that would necessarily be in the middle. In any case, dialogue isn't likely to kill you, don't worry about that. Most journalists who talk to Jihadists don't die in the process, and I'm not asking you to go that far. >>To love one's enemy means first we forgive him, then if that is possible, we have to trust he will not do whatever again.<< --No. You love your enemy *even* if he might do it again. I can't reasonably trust even friends never to hurt me. If I waited for that, I'd never love anyone. And, something a lot of people seem to

forget, there are safe ways to express love. With spiritual eyes, you can forgive people who are currently doing evil, as well as those who have stopped. But not if you assume that loving your enemy means letting him hurt you. You can even *kill* your enemy and still love him. But you have to communicate the love, or it doesn't help. >>It is relatively easy to forgive those who harmed someone else...we were safe.<< --True. But again, I'm not talking about forgiveness. I'm talking about philosophical love. >>We can only forgive what HAS IMPACTED US PERSONALLY.<< --We certainly seem willing to despise people who haven't impacted us personally, or to view them solely as objects of fear. Forgiveness is opening up the possibility that a person is not ONLY that which has hurt us, or hurt others. >>That is what an enemy is. He takes your life, he sullies your name he murders your family and takes all your worldly goods. Then he stand s before you grinning in victory....its easy to love him?<< --Not easy. Only possible. But only if you believe it's worth doing. Many Israelis and Palestinians, even those who have not suffered directly from the conflict, will convince each other that forgiving the other side is impossible or unwise. It's a form of "political correctness" based in fear, and there's nothing spiritual about it. But if you fear for your physical safety, then dialogue with Muslims and Arabs who aren't physically attacking you. Probably easier to find them anyway. >>Place yourself in the line of fire, sitting in a ruined home with all your children killed....then talk to me about loving your enemy. You haven't a clue.<< --Whatever

happens to me physically, I will preach the same thing. There are people who have lost children on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and who have friends on the other side. Listen to them, at least, if not to me. >>hatred is the desire that the other not exist. That is what to hate means<< --Agreed. The opposite is the recognition that there is something in your enemy that is as justified in existing as you are. >>We cannot call a hurricane an enemy , it is not personal<< --That is why Buddhists, through meditation, are able to understand that hating a human being is no different from hating a hurricane. They're right.>>It doesn't impact you except in your thoughts...fine, love him, you lose nothing. And how proud you (one) feels.<< --Are you afraid that in loving

your enemy or doing some good work, someone will accuse you of doing it for pride? >>How about the guy who just took your job and your income by dishonesty?<< --I could come up with a dozen fear-laden scenarios too. Why bother? I do what I feel is right, regardless. >>It is easy to forgive those who are doing things to others you don't know. Shame on them...but they are not your to forgive.<< --But I can still talk to them and listen to them. I don't have to hate or forgive them.>>But please do not fool yourself until you really have felt hate and fear coming at you...that forgiveness is not easy, and the emotions do not make us reasonable about not hating easy. or that love will suddenly be willed by your reason and you will what??? love him?<< --Love comes automatically. We do a lot of

things to AVOID loving our enemy. We punish those who cross lines to talk to the enemy. We call them names, accuse them of being naive or self-interested. It is only necessary that we stop punishing the part of ourselves that feels a human connection with the "monsters" we fear. What must be given up is an identity formed in reaction against the enemy, an identity designed to produce a sense of innocence or victimhood rather than connection. It's an act of individuation, stepping out from the collective mythology of evil and confronting evil on one's own terms. Then, love takes care of itself. Still, my point was not that you have to go talk to a Jihadist. You could, if you worked at it. But it might be more enjoyable just to develop some friendships with Arabs or Muslims, one on one. It might not bring world peace, but it will be one of those little bricks as the foundation is built. >>interaction with the enemy who

holds your life in his hands?<< --Again, Toni, I'm not saying everyone has to interact with terrorists. I'm saying there is a wall of silence and stereotyping between the Islamic and Western world, and that ordinary people can chip away at that wall very easily. The wall is not created by terrorists. They only feed on it. It's the collective silence between communities, the lack of face to face interaction between ordinary people at the grassroots level, that creates war and terrorism. All leaders can do is express the collective will and represent their fears. Ordinary people *can* do more than they realize to repair the rift.

Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.

[Guest guest]

Dear ,

I probably know more Muslims than you do. They sit at my table,they are going out with my grandchildren and one daughter. My grandfather had department stores all through the Middle East and stayed in Turkey for many years. I have spent only 2 weeks there seeing both east and west Turkey..( with a group of French and German women). Many of the business men who visited my grandparents and ate at their table while I was there were Egyptians, Turks and North Africans...all were Jews or Muslim....or Presbyterians. It didn't REALLY MATTER.

Dear , I am not some country bumpkin...My husband trained foreign pilots and we had them for thanksgiving and other meals while they were in the US learning how to fly. Had 3 Iranians once...It was great fun.

I have been all over the Middle East...and yes, I have been to Muslim worship...even if I had to sit with the women. I have also been to the same places the pope just went. What is it with you ? You know some Muslims...American probably, and you take that as being such a good guy???

I had students who were Muslim, Jews, Christians and of African countries, and Japanese, I taught in a Japanese School in Tokyo and attended many Buddhist temples while in Japan. The same with the rest of the world. I come from a cosmopolitan family with members and friends in all European and North African friends...some in the family?

Do you think you just invented an international outlook? We've been at for many centuries, from North Africa to Spain to Italy to Turkey to Armenia to Romania and to Vienna...that is on my mother's side. My father's side was from Czechoslovakia...and points east.I knew many of the family.

So yes I know a few Muslims, a few Jews, a few Catholics and even protestants...as well as Buddhists.

You remind me of the old cliché; " Some of my best friends are Jewish" So now you can be proud and say" some of my friends are Muslim."..good for you, do you want special recognition, a medal perhaps ?. Have you and Greg just notices the multi-cultural nature of America?

Most of the people I know do not pick acquaintances by their religion or color. We Europeans, as I am by birth ,are used to all different races and colors and religions as natural...we do tend to draw distinctions between classes, but never by religion or race...and we are learning much about our American "classless" society" which of course isn't.

My Russian and Egyptian friends would also wonder at what took you so long? The rest of the world is used to mixing together.

Please do not ask me such dumb questions?:

"They are a tiny minority, and hard to get access to. I've talked to Muslims and Arabs face to face, and online. That's a lot easier. Some of your statements did not seem to be specifically about the small minority of Jihadists or militiamen, but about Muslims and Arabs as a whole. There is probably a mosque near you. Have you paid a visit?"

There is not much of the world i haven't visited...I was not an ugly American, and I am not now here in Pennsylvania.( My next door neighbors just moved in...they are from Lebanon and speak very little English.) Ray and I take them around to introduce them to others. That is natural neighborliness...not a specific :"do good work" to show how broad minded I am.

You think e-mail posts and calm dinners once in a great while (probably not at home) make you an Muslim expert? or a judge of how many jihadists there are? Please spare me. I speak of present reality...of course I know that most Muslims are peaceful . They are also fervent religionists, the ones I know. They teach in Universities or are students, those I know here, but I have met others in our travels.( even camel drivers, taxi drivers ...all strange and wonderful, The Greek taxi drivers especially and the One in who had lived in the US for awhile.

I have seen the poverty in Egypt, the hovels in Turkey as well as Hagia Sophia. I have known Turkish foreign workers in Germany...I know the countryside of North Africa ( not Saudi Arabia or the Emirates) I have been to the open markets in Morocco and had tea with those whom were trying to sell me something. I have been run down almost by street-peddlers trying to sell me something ...lots of fun, I have been to Persian rug factories and seen the children weaving....tell me, how does this jibe with your international experiences.? How many Muslim men and even women have served you tea and asked you about America?

Please don't preach to me...I can go to Mass, a Baptist church, Quaker meetings,a synagogue, A Black Episcopal church were I was the only white person, and much welcomed, a Buddhist temple..yes, an Arab mosque and be right at home...even if I have to sit with the women in the back while Ray was escorted to the men's section in front. ( Some Orthodox synagogues still do this also. I can pray anywhere...it is the same G-d.

, it is time you understood that I am not ignorant nor intolerant nor prejudice. I know current events well because I have always had that as my main on-going interest.also my major...History was for my MA. I keep up meticulously to foreign and home grown events. I also read current non fiction, especially about the Near East, even some novels from women ? strange isn't it, in Muslim countries still under strict rule.

So please spread your current enthusiasm for Muslims in America to those who do not know them...and don't feel superior because you have spread out in your culture.

Be of good cheer, you are on the right path. Just don't think others haven't been there before you.

Toni

Original Message -----

From: Lockhart

To: JUNG-FIRE

Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 3:38 PM

Subject: Re: Chaos, brutality, and us from afar

Toni says:

>>I was talking about "talk" in the midst of killing. That is the interaction that now predominates. We sit across from each other each fearing for his country and his life.<<

--Killing only predominates in the media. Interesting that you make this claim at the same time the Pope is gaining respect from a number of Muslims by praying with them in Turkey. He's not fearing for his life, clearly. Or if he is, he's doing a great job of getting over the fear and doing it anyway.

In reality, talk is far more widespread than killing. It's just that people haven't learned to talk effectively, or more to the point, to listen effectively. Learning comes with practice. Americans who don't bother to practice interacting in person with Arabs may become convinced that talking to Arabs won't get us anywhere. Those who *do* interact regularly with people across lines seem quite a bit more optimistic.

What really happened was that terrorists and the Bush Administration started a dialogue that we should have started decades ago. We're just catching up, that's all. Killing isn't working. People are about ready to try something else. >>( I also bet you haven't sat in very many useless committee meetings...I sadly have...some interaction is beyond useless ,it is harmful on occasion)<<

--I wouldn't judge all face to face interaction by the worst meetings you've been to. Meetings are overly structured and tend to involve a small number of selected people, and those people are often selected not for their sincerity or willingness to dialogue, but by some other process. An artificial microcosm may not do justice to the process of dialogue. >>Sadly, you come from a different place than the Quakers, those who meditate and those who pray.<<

--Actually, I've done some of the Quaker exercises, and I'm pretty sure you know that's not what I was talking about. Quakers frequently do interfaith and reconciliation work that involves dialogue and mediation. They aren't *always* silent, while many Americans have *zero* interaction with Arabs or Muslims, even American Muslims who are easy to find.

>>We do not need to be told how to do the everyday normal things that spiritual people take for granted.<<

--You'd be surprised how much we know and don't act on. Most people know it's a good idea to talk across lines when there's a rift between cultures. Knowing is not the same as doing.

>>Even the prophets of old spoke out....that is so natural I do not see it is anything but normal.<<

--It's interesting to me how much we put prophets of old on a pedestal while ignoring the prophets of now.

>>How many fighting militiamen have you talked to face to face?<<

--None. They are a tiny minority, and hard to get access to. I've talked to Muslims and Arabs face to face, and online. That's a lot easier. Some of your statements did not seem to be specifically about the small minority of Jihadists or militiamen, but about Muslims and Arabs as a whole. There is probably a mosque near you. Have you paid a visit?

>>I was as usually speaking globally...and you are having friendly chats in the peaceful atmosphere of Starbucks.<<

--Nothing happens globally. It happens one on one, and then it ripples.

>>Who are you interacting with? Those who are murdering and torturing on both sides? Can you reason with them? You cannot even reach them.<<

--You seem to think they're the only people who matter. Talk to the people you can find, instead. >>Peace is a much used word. We do not even know the meaning of it since for us it is a temporary secession of violence.<<

--I take the words "Peace on earth" very seriously. They're part of the foundation of Chrsitianity, and while I'm not a Christian, I think Jesus had the right idea once in a while. Islam and Judaism too talk of peace, reverently. Don't dismiss the idea. When war gets too painful, peace will matter to us. It is only our distance from killing that gives us such cynicism and so little urgency to act.

>>The Jesus you quote was speaking of inner peace....the peace G-d gives...not the troubles between warring vacations.<<

--Surely you can see the connection between inner peace and outer conflict. One thing I admire about Judaism is that it doesn't remove God from man and man from the world. Man is how God makes a difference in the world. We tend to forget that. Prayer alone does little if your body won't move when it's time to move.

>>Holy? that is what is peace because it makes us whole.<<

--Being whole means withdrawing projections and stereotypes. A lot of Americans stereotype Muslims and Arabs. They can pray, but they won't find wholeness, unless they start interacting with their shadow and the people who represent shadow.>>Evil is alive and doing well on this earth as it always does. In the end he/it will fail, but not because we mere human beings discount his strength and try to reason with evil.<<

--Again, I did not say "reason". I talked about face to face interaction. It can be without reason or with it. It is when collectives avoid face to face interaction that the beast starts to feed on the gap between them. We feed the beast by avoiding interaction with people who are affected by our collective behavior. We use the world's resources, and we have little interest in hearing their personal experiences with our power. Jihadists feed on the fact that few Palestinians have access to Americans, apart from a handful of activists. They feed on stereotypes about us. That's how evil works. Evil is not abstract, it's more like a virus. It works in specific ways, at specific times, and it can be stopped, but only if enough people change how they interact across dividing lines.

>>All people of prayer and faith are not paralyzed<<

--I agree. I especially admire some of the Quakers and Methodists I've met who are very active. One woman I met worked with Rwandan Tutsis and Hutus. She seemed to me a very "spiritual" person. There's a lot of great work being done by religious and nonreligious people, working across lines that would normally divide human beings.

>>If we know how to love we have been loving for a long time.people do not suddenly love each other when all else fails"...not in my world.<<

--I'm talking about loving your enemy, not your friends or family, or a stranger at a soup kitchen. Those are all good. But stepping across dividing lines when violence is flaring in the middle takes a different kind of energy. It's not something everyone wants to do, but there seems to be more interest in the idea lately.

>>Are you to tell me and the rest of us "what are we waiting for" Have you no idea of how much of yourself you must away to love?<<

--I am telling you what I know. You are free to disagree. There is no hell for people who disagree with me, and I have no fear of sounding judgmental because my judgments come with no penalty. >>I am waiting for change on the human level...1x1x1.<<

--That's a great idea. Do you have a Muslim or Arab friend? If so, dialogue can begin there, and radiate outward.

>>But we don't go around dousing everything with false hope that "if we just try a little harder, it will all work itself out"<<

--Not harder. Smarter. We've been allowing politicians and the media to represent our collective spirit in the world, while avoiding travel and communication across cultural lines. There are Israelis and Palestinians who communicate across lines on a regular basis, and they do not make many of the mistakes in perception or action made by those who see the other side entirely through the filter of their own group mythology. If they can do it, risking accusations of collaborating with the enemy, anyone can.>>My my, how profound. What do you actually know about what an "enemy" can do to you and your loved ones/" It is easy to "love" long distance...And that isn't love..it is a fantasy until it is proven in actuality.<<

--Communication across a distance can be effective at times. My fear is not that my body will be hurt by an enemy. I'd be more afraid of my spirit being damaged by my *perception* of my enemy, with all the shadow that would necessarily be in the middle. In any case, dialogue isn't likely to kill you, don't worry about that. Most journalists who talk to Jihadists don't die in the process, and I'm not asking you to go that far.

>>To love one's enemy means first we forgive him, then if that is possible, we have to trust he will not do whatever again.<<

--No. You love your enemy *even* if he might do it again. I can't reasonably trust even friends never to hurt me. If I waited for that, I'd never love anyone. And, something a lot of people seem to forget, there are safe ways to express love. With spiritual eyes, you can forgive people who are currently doing evil, as well as those who have stopped. But not if you assume that loving your enemy means letting him hurt you. You can even *kill* your enemy and still love him. But you have to communicate the love, or it doesn't help.

>>It is relatively easy to forgive those who harmed someone else...we were safe.<<

--True. But again, I'm not talking about forgiveness. I'm talking about philosophical love.

>>We can only forgive what HAS IMPACTED US PERSONALLY.<<

--We certainly seem willing to despise people who haven't impacted us personally, or to view them solely as objects of fear. Forgiveness is opening up the possibility that a person is not ONLY that which has hurt us, or hurt others.

>>That is what an enemy is. He takes your life, he sullies your name he murders your family and takes all your worldly goods. Then he stand s before you grinning in victory....its easy to love him?<<

--Not easy. Only possible. But only if you believe it's worth doing. Many Israelis and Palestinians, even those who have not suffered directly from the conflict, will convince each other that forgiving the other side is impossible or unwise. It's a form of "political correctness" based in fear, and there's nothing spiritual about it. But if you fear for your physical safety, then dialogue with Muslims and Arabs who aren't physically attacking you. Probably easier to find them anyway.

>>Place yourself in the line of fire, sitting in a ruined home with all your children killed....then talk to me about loving your enemy. You haven't a clue.<<

--Whatever happens to me physically, I will preach the same thing. There are people who have lost children on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and who have friends on the other side. Listen to them, at least, if not to me.

>>hatred is the desire that the other not exist. That is what to hate means<<

--Agreed. The opposite is the recognition that there is something in your enemy that is as justified in existing as you are.

>>We cannot call a hurricane an enemy , it is not personal<<

--That is why Buddhists, through meditation, are able to understand that hating a human being is no different from hating a hurricane. They're right.>>It doesn't impact you except in your thoughts...fine, love him, you lose nothing. And how proud you (one) feels.<<

--Are you afraid that in loving your enemy or doing some good work, someone will accuse you of doing it for pride?

>>How about the guy who just took your job and your income by dishonesty?<<

--I could come up with a dozen fear-laden scenarios too. Why bother? I do what I feel is right, regardless.

>>It is easy to forgive those who are doing things to others you don't know. Shame on them...but they are not your to forgive.<<

--But I can still talk to them and listen to them. I don't have to hate or forgive them.>>But please do not fool yourself until you really have felt hate and fear coming at you...that forgiveness is not easy, and the emotions do not make us reasonable about not hating easy. or that love will suddenly be willed by your reason and you will what??? love him?<<

--Love comes automatically. We do a lot of things to AVOID loving our enemy. We punish those who cross lines to talk to the enemy. We call them names, accuse them of being naive or self-interested. It is only necessary that we stop punishing the part of ourselves that feels a human connection with the "monsters" we fear. What must be given up is an identity formed in reaction against the enemy, an identity designed to produce a sense of innocence or victimhood rather than connection. It's an act of individuation, stepping out from the collective mythology of evil and confronting evil on one's own terms. Then, love takes care of itself.

Still, my point was not that you have to go talk to a Jihadist. You could, if you worked at it. But it might be more enjoyable just to develop some friendships with Arabs or Muslims, one on one. It might not bring world peace, but it will be one of those little bricks as the foundation is built.

>>interaction with the enemy who holds your life in his hands?<<

--Again, Toni, I'm not saying everyone has to interact with terrorists. I'm saying there is a wall of silence and stereotyping between the Islamic and Western world, and that ordinary people can chip away at that wall very easily. The wall is not created by terrorists. They only feed on it. It's the collective silence between communities, the lack of face to face interaction between ordinary people at the grassroots level, that creates war and terrorism. All leaders can do is express the collective will and represent their fears. Ordinary people *can* do more than they realize to repair the rift.