Room for All

2004-10-16 16:07:00

Larry:
This list is _not_ a "meeting place for ... spontaneous sharing of kindred souls."

Catherine:
your words cast me back into deep mind pool of my early childhood catholic dogmatic teachings and if this is the way the majority want JJ to run his classroom then I for one won't stay.

JJ:
I don't see a problem for you here Catherine if you understand what Larry is saying. He is emphasizing that this list is different that the free-for-all lists that are out there in that it is set up in a classroom format.

BUT... It is not a strict classroom with no room for independent thought or questioning. We also have the OT program for off topic sharing (within reason).

What you see is what you get and I think you sense this list is flexible and tolerant enough to be comfortable for you.

You are a mystic (right brained seeker) and the list is probably composed of 70% left brained seekers. Most other metaphysical lists are the reverse of this. Sometimes the right and left brain have unnecessary conflict. Both sides are needed and we look forward to your future participation.

I do have one suggestion. That is you and other new people (and some older ones) will often make numerous short postings within a day's period. Some readers have complained to me that sorting out the sheer volume of the posts takes a lot of work on their part and it would be helpful if people would combine several short posts into one longer one. You will note that this is what I try and do. I will often respond to two or three people in one post. Since many Keys members find this to be a time saver I would request that others follow my example.

By the way, I would like your opinion of Secret Places of the Lion when you read it. I read it 40 years ago and my 90% true impression may have been a little high, but I think it points in a lot of right direction. This book is not channeled. Williamson claims to have gotten the information from Brotherhood records he was allowed to read in Peru.

Gopi writes:
Is it the facts of certain true doctrines that cause conflict, John, or people's reaction to them a result of their clinging to their own doctrines?

Is attachment to any doctrine or teaching wise?

JJ:
Rarely will a conflict arise on the list merely because of the truth of an injected teaching, or because someone is attached to their doctrine or favorite teaching. What causes the problem is not a truth being presented or a controversial teaching, but the way it is presented.

Sometimes there is a conflict when a member presents a truth that 90% agree with but s so heavy handed or superior in his manner that it grates on the majority.

Suppose we were in an algebra class and a new member comes in and says. "Hey guys, I have these truths in basic math. Listen: 2+2=4, 3+3=6 etc."

The problem is not that the guy is wrong in his facts but that he is out of place and is an aggravation to the rest of the class.

This has been the problem that has been repeated many times on this list over the past six years. The Nothingness Philosophy person will come on and interrupt the flow of the class saying something like: "Hey, guys, we need to learn to love and give up attachments."

The reaction of the majority is: Been there done that.

John's quote gives the goal of this class:
Never ever be afraid to hold two or more incompatible, or apparently contradictory, ideas at the same time. Reality is not your ideas about it; reality is what is.

The average man's judgment is so poor, he runs a risk every time he uses it. Ed Howe (JJ Comment: But use it anyway)