Classroom Talk
Fall 2002 Archive
Re: Not about Posted by Eddie on October 14, 2002 at 06:06:36:
In Reply to: Re: Not about posted by John on October 10, 2002 at 11:45:52:
Coach:
I had a hunch, no a strong premonition that you would pull out of
context this sentence where I carelessly misrepresented "The Not-So-
Kind-Helper." as a personality type there at the first. (Yes letting
this stand was likely the Rebel in me there, I even thought this at the
time, because I ‘had’ noticed the discrepancy right before I posted and
wasn’t really up-to restructuring that whole portion then.) Though I
had hoped my “Clear Description” below this misrepresentation (that you
chose to pull out), and have not chosen to refer here to my clear
description (within context at any rate) what I had “intently”
described as my idea of “The Not-So-Kind Helper”, as coming
from “Essence”. This over all intent was beyond question in my
estimation anyway, not withstanding my apparent misrepresentation.
So from this false starting premise you were off and running. Now as
gently as I can say it I do not “believe” you really missed my point,
but rather chose to evade it. Or “if” not an intentional omission, a
mindless evasion by your Rebels reaction I would “suspect”.
My intentions were never to rewrite your program. I was simply using my
allegorical style in attempting get across an idea, or more to point
here a principle, as is my normal MO, I would have thought you should
be completely used to by now. My best move here so to speak ‘will’ be
to use (by an on going study through application) the two-book set I
have made (printed and bound) for my own purposes of personal study out
of your not so little web sight here. To become more familiar, so as to
be able to identify any certain aspect of character described there
within the curriculum available, and so using those words and ideas in
describing my points in my “very feeble” attempts of non-intellectual
communication here in Classroom Talk. And so that I can continue to
apply the living actions out here in the real world through walking
with eyes wide open being more and more aware of what’s going on inhere
behind these eyes of mine while simultaneously becoming more conscious
of the world about me. But since you insist I will attempt to explain
further. Which by the way I am not at all certain I have not already
given you my “best” attempt at that that I have in me. So let me state
here for the “Record” I do not feel this is altogether such a wise
idea, but at your request here goes nutten!
>“The Not-So-Kind Helper”. Which in my not so humble opinion basically
resembles my “Judge” [[[in a vague way, but not from personality.]]]
Yet my point in the invention of “The Not-So-Kind-Helper” Coach is I
don’t always come from as soft approach as you. Though I’m not at all
sure (You checked off different personality reactions that you were *not*
having. (*----*)
>This was one of the great moments for me in coaching this class. I
laughed and enjoyed it immensely. [From a manipulative conception of
course.]
>Those *deep-rooted* Rebel/Artist tendencies in you have come up with a
type that is different than all the other types on the personality
wheel, different in you than anybody else in class. Heh-heh. (So I can relax. I can feel that we are laughing together on this . . .
with glee. Hee-hee. (As far as I'm concerned, I can accommodate you on this, Eddie. [Note:
not on my Real or intended intention though, but through your Rebels
perception only, subtly expressed by “I can accommodate you on ‘this’,
Eddie”.]
> I don't have to ask you to "do it my way." From here on out, there
can be nine types on our personality wheel, and the ninth type will be
called "The Not-So-Kind-Helper." (People really understand us in our human sides, the sides in which we
have feelings (Ill get back to your experiences of this, Eddie, and, by
golly, I'll accommodate you on that one, too.), and thoughts bubble up,
and we have desires as well as likes and loves, and we have patterns of
behavior that people recognize us by.
This will be fine with me, but please note my challenge in any of this
is not with the “authentic” sharing of any of these feelings, if and
when that is actually being the case. It lies only in the fine line of
discriminating between authentic responses and preprogrammed reactions
and the legitimacy of negative emotions squatting in the mechanical
thinking part of our emotions/pre-programmed feeling mind. And I’ll
wait as well to be giving my input with this subject, or as you’ve put
it, “accommodating you, by golly, too”. Speaking of feelings: this kind-
a feels like an old ‘Gunsmoke’ rerun Mister Marshall Dillon! Please
note this is not pure sarcasm Coach I truly admire and adore “certain”
aspects of this side of you.]
>It is in our human side, our Being that can be experienced, that
people can get to know us as we truly are, authentically. On our
personality side, our Self, the inauthentic selfish behavior that
emerges can only confuse other people about who we really are.
Ah yes, this expresses my point very well, and this “Human… Being” as
to any true authenticity is an [[[extremely rare]]] encounter to be
experiencing in ourselves or coming from others. Of the extremely
highest degree of Mindfulness, Consciousness, or Awakening this would
refer to, I could at best only consider myself a ‘baby’ i.e. a very
young beginner.
>It seems to me that being hard to understand is a function of human
personality. Each and every one of us needs to go on working on
this . . . if we care to do so. Becoming clearer is a great way to cut
down on the scores that come up on our scoreboards.
Yes again I agree unequivocally, and speaking only from “High Ideals”
of course, as a direct Awakening to Mindfulness ones personality would
be as a clear mirror to be reflecting ones pure essential being in this
world. But for a man that tends to take the less Enlightened stance as
a simple man known to us here simply as Coach or John these ideas seem
very advanced to me being yet such a mechanical man so to speak.
It’s very easy to be saying nice things about you Coach, and equally
easy to be being completely authentic about it. But it is not so easy
to be being, authentically speaking, as “Iron against Iron” with a
buddy, friend, Mindfulness practitioner, or even a Coach. Which I
believe to be an authentic, useful, and truly practical even ancient
aspect of being a Mindfulness Warrior, though over looked, or
rationalized away by many if not most modern pseudo-psychology
practitioners. And this would in no way be excluding, depleting, or
moving away from “living on the side of the light” and all the
wonderful teaching you have stated in and around your living life
experience with this ideal. And it is obvious to me that your life has
been, and is richly full with the experience of living on the side of
light. As this unconditional love you speak of is popping up in the
living life picture of our dear o`l Coach fairly regular around these
here parts.
And “That's living [[[from]]] the Essence of one's Being.
Well I’m intent on trying this until I get it right. [>the so-called
demarcation lines between the "Judge/Dictator" and the "Player/Teacher"
are not bold dark division lines but are often fuzzy and overlapping.]
I swear Coach I thought I’d even heard you talk about the lines between
types that bordered each other, as fading so to speak into each other.
Now I clearly understand the distinct separation for study purposes.
And please excuse my confusing input on this. I never meant to take
anything away from this teaching. Where you can decidedly be an ass at
times just like the rest of us, yet this Teaching as extremely well
represented and put together on this web sight is more than less pure
in my book. So as you’ve suggested it might take me some more diligent
study –some more effort on my part to learn the characteristic
qualities of the eight types that make each of them distinctly
different from all the other types sounds like a good test for me to be
making. And since two of my types happen to be side-by-
side “Rebel/Judge” and “Artist/Player” this should give me excellent
studying ground with my own living experience of this testing. And yes
Coach I have and can still see how this can be fun and interesting to
begin "de-coding" the social life around me right and left. And yes
rather than finding continuing study of this tool to be a chore, it has
been and is an opportunity for a more interesting and fun life (not
even counting the *practical* and transformative aspects of learning to
use a diagnostic tool like this). I’ll get back with you on my personal
relaxed psychological position of observations with this ASAP.
>Ah . . . but you must learn to "relax into it." See confusion when
it's happening, and accept it. Let it be. Relax into it.
Ah yes “learn”, but the initial “Gate” of confusion is not relaxed, and
that was and is my point. If I will “Learn” to relax into the
experience of this confusion ‘then’ I will reap the understandings.
> I think I understand you to be saying that you want to keep your
personality "aggressively" charged to face the challenges of life
around you.
Sorry Coach, this was in “no way” what I had intended to be saying. Let
me try and be very simple here. Life makes personality aggressive,
while this type of “Work” as well as others {{{has the potential}}} to
make personality passive so that ones essence can begin to be expressed
and even grow. The personality can become clearer and yes even a more
passive vessel for essence to be expressing itself through. So Coach
unlike what I have understood you to say, I say we must have
personality for our essence to express itself “through”, while its
existence remains in this human form in this body on this earth anyway.
And this essence will not always be passive in its expression. Yet
personality will by necessity need to “be”, and need to be passive for
essence to be being expressed through it as through a conduit so to
speak. I do not hold with the theory our human essence is already fully
grown. Or for that matter exempt from total annihilation or extinction
on an individual bases or even for mankind as a whole to be having that
uncreated status, without active responsibility. There are “NO”
guaranties so to speak. But of course there is no way to prove this,
but again (I believe) it is essential to have yes even “beliefs”
founded on right understandings based on clear and accurate
observations of both internal and external phenomenon which every
individual on the face of this earth is provided with this opportunity
every day. And yes I know this goes far out side of the scope of what
you intend to be teaching here. Yet the over all jest you seem to be
either missing or not so neatly evading is that this type of teaching
as well as many, many others similar or even not so similar run a
strong risk, as in danger of excepting a mechanical maintenance of
their being, to be any more than the subtle refinement of what you call
personality. While ignoring the practical essential and likely the most
important principle, that of the “potential” for eternal “Growth”, and
this is the very trick that has and will continue to keep man-kind
asleep in this organic pain factory we call life. In my personal
opinion (and remember you ask, inadvertently at any rate), the
exclusion of the principle of “The False Personality”, which is what I
consider in my own practice “here”, to be what you designate simply as
Personality, leaves an open ended trap so to speak for one to exchange
or transfer the mental ideas of what this system designates (correctly
I must add) to be “Essence” for a false passive personality. There is
the correct need for a passive or yielded personality granted, but to
mentally as in mechanically apply these what are Essential
characteristics of a persons “Essence” to ones personality is simply a
trick of the False Personality trying to maintain its aggressive or
assertive possession at any cost. Which the cost is at best the
hindering of the growth of ones Essence, which if Essence remains in a
state of inertia ultimately would mean its death. This passive or
yielded personality being of essential necessity to any type of “Real”
or “Essential”, not to mention “Eternal” value being excluded is very
dangerous in my opinion. For me personally it makes no difference for I
understand the difference and rightly apply it to my studies and
participation here. Well now I guess you understand why I was prepared
to just drop the whole thing and keep my mouth shut. And if I go ahead
and post this could very likely regret it.
Now you had stated a lot of “good” stuff here. It was just not in
context with what I had been speaking.
Well I know I have not in anyway touched on anything like all your
points, but I’m feeling grounded, and keeping my knees loose and not
being aggressive or being passive in or around it all.
Eddie
Continue with Fall 2002 Classroom Talk or
Post a new discussion in the current Classroom Talk
Archived 02/04/2003