Re: Being mysterious. Posted by Jeff on January 22, 1999 at 15:09:21:
In Reply to: Being mysterious. posted by John (re Jeff; Sally on January 21, 1999 at 18:27:38:
Hello All:
John wrote>These are examples of non-manipulative communication. "I like" tells others who you are in there, and where your interests lie. It leaves a space for them to cooperate with you and collaborate with you, with a feeling of relative freedom in the choice they make on their own. Or, they might go away thinking, "Yeah, that's what Jeff likes, but . . ." You have to just see what happens.
I have been trying this at least when I wake up on it, not only with others but with myself. It is interesting the number of times the word "want comes up in my thoughts or conversations. I have been trying to key on that word, as it does take me away from the moment as you mentioned in an earlier post. I try to substitute like in whenever I wake up, and it feels "good", like being released from something, like my ego.
John wrote>I'm really glad you brought this point up, Jeff. Because this training is not about becoming "mysteriously inscrutible" to other people, of course, but rather to become as open, outfront, and real with other people as is appropriate and comfortable.
Thanks, sometimes I get wrapped up in what I'm trying to do(be awake) and actually loose the connection with others. Progress, not perfection. Its not easy around others, the built-in enculturated responses are all set to go, without my even thinking. Sometimes it seems like it takes rolling the dice to break it. Another thing that I've played with a very little(as its still tough for me) is to look at physical responses. Just looking the physical response is easy, but maintaining a conversation at the same time is another story. I just pick one response(usually breathing or abdomen muscle tension). Its a distraction from normal "thinking/sleeping" state to even be aware of this, and often the reponses from me will be different.
John wrote>Now, you bring up the question of what is "good." As don Coyotl puts it from time to time [we exchanged emails this morning], that is a question for philosophers, not awakened practitioners.
Poor choice of words on my part, as I'm not sure how to describe different responses. Good/Bad, Right/Wrong, Black/White. Maybe there is annswer to this, but its better left to others to debate. Its kind of like the "no mistakes". What is is. If I do not attach or identify with a response of it must be this way, because that way is "wrong", then I open a very interesting door.
John wrote>Part of my "guidance system" in doing the work I'm doing on this site has been in responding to inquiries from actual students who have shown up here and participated in Classroom Talk.........The next logical class in the kindergarten sequence would then be Kinderfeeling, the class that Jeff brings up. Well, since you bring it up, I guess I'll be doing it soon, or sorta soon. Let's see when I feel it start "coming through me." Okay?
Okay. Looking at my question, this is the part of me that "wants"(ie asleep at the wheel again) to see the order, if there's a blank then it "needs"(still sleeping) to be filled in. Progress, not perfection. I like the way the reponses have been, and the way class has been progressing.
I'll be away from the computer for a week or so, but I like the idea of taking time to some of this. Talk to you all when I get back.
Later, Jeff
Archived 22 Mar 99