Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 20:39:38 +0000
From: Anne Marie Tobias <mtobias-AT-verity.com>
Subject: Re: To two Roberts; look out Anne Marie


Hello Hen (I hope that you don't mind my speaking to you informally),

I'm not quite sure for what it is, that I should be looking out. Perhaps you
are proclaiming your own watchfulness... I hope not, I want to put you at
ease. It is not my intent to threaten you. On the contrary, my arrival on
the list is an expression of my committed stand than all people live a life
that is joyful, related, and fully self expressed.

I've seen thousands of interactions by hundreds of people in the process of
the work I've done around Landmark, and there are things I can say, from
first hand experience about the fundamental function, "The Design", of Being
Human, which is totally independent of race, culture, education, social
class, or personality. I fully appreciate that you may feel threatened, and
well you might... I come armed with technology expressly designed to do
serious damage to your world view... It is only right that from where you
stand, that one would be moved to defend oneself, one's identity, throw up
the mental barriers, pitch the banners, and brandish the weapons of your
words to do battle.

"What look like the end of the world to the caterpillar, is on the other
side of chrysalis, the birth of a butterfly".

I tell you Hen, I have not come to do battle, or even defend a position. Nor
will I attempt to engage in demonstrations of great learning, stunning
intellect, or for that matter an elegant turn of phrase. I'm here neither to
prove or disprove, I will not debate merit. I will however, be overjoyed to
demonstrate what I know, about you, about people... I will invite you to
play (I can not force you to celebrate the miracle of being alive), but I
promise the opportunity of a life designed by passion, courage and boundless
joy, and if you would join me in this game, I will chip away at who you
thought you were, and gently begin exposing the humanity you buried long ago
in the human struggle to be safe (I hope that you are not offended by the
nature of this conversation, it is not designed to be pointed at you "Hen",
but at all of us as human beings).

Hen, among other things, human beings are thrown, determined, by their need
to survive. Often at any cost. The price of this survival is often the
quality of aliveness. Survival of the identity is often expressed by the
overpowering need to be right (most often at the cost making another wrong),
dominating, or avoiding the domination of others, and the ongoing need to
seek the safe path,  feed one's desire for comfort. It is in the area of
stepping out, beyond the drive to survive, to the place where one begins to
fully experience the qualities of being alive, in this work, I have experience.

The course that you find so offensive, is an amalgam of concepts &
observations derived from many diverse sources including various poets (eg.
E.E. Cummings), Aikido, Zen Philosophy, and yes Heidegger. These concepts
and observations form a structure designed to still the mind, and locate the
participant in a place outside of the normal location that people live their
lives. It would be very much like extracting a fish from the sea to show it
water... something it has never experienced because for fish, water is their
ground of being. For most human beings, self as identity is the normal
ground of being. The epiphany of stepping beyond the limited experience of
self, is that access to BEing.

This is not a dogma... it is not a belief system. It is, simply a
perspective, a take on the nature of life for Human Beings, the practice of
which provides access to the machinery of Human behavior, the practice of
which, provides an intimate experience of self other than identity, one's
thinking, one's beliefs, the content of one's life. The practice of which,
provides an experience of simply BEing, for no reason, to fix nothing, to
change nothing, to simply honor the miracle of BEing. It is also why I will
never be in conflict with you. There is nothing that you can say or do, that
is not included in my experience of life, that is not welcomed. I love you
in the broadest sense, I accept you for who you are and I accept you for who
you are not... I acknowledge your perfection, and your being whole and complete.

>(hen-indeed not the One:)
>If I did set the tone of animosity around Robert G's posts, I apologize.
My >animus, if it is that, (and i rather feel more fearful than disdainful
of the
>thing that Robert G proclaims so highly) has to do with past experience with
>the enterprise and with people who are satisfied with the product they have
>purchased. Perhaps I have been unfairly obtuse in my attempts to engage Robert
>G.  and kicked off a kicking session.

Hen, I do not know what your past experience is with "The Enterprise", but I
would be happy to discuss what it is that has you filled with distrust and
concern. There are many things purchased and consumed by "The Masses", some of
value, many not. Is Landmark's popular nature your area of contention? Or is
it their "Product", and if it is the product, what do see as it's lack or
evil? I am curious. Just as a side note Hen, I'm not here to defend
Landmark... after contributing to the lives of nearly 2 million people over
the last 20 years, their work stands on it's own merits...

Anyway, I'll never be able to argue you into changing your stance. It would
take an event outside of your structures of rational justification, for me
to make a difference, so I am not going to speak to Hen, the seasoned
debater, Hen the cogitator, or even Hen the philosopher, all those would
make no difference in your position, or the quality of your life.

>However:  Robert G refuses to join in the praxis of this list,  you insist on
>being the shrill wraith that challenged heidegger (pardon my vivid
imagination)
>with the one question of his intellectual life.  RG, I invited you to discuss
>being, big B Being, i invited you to define your terms so i can understand
what
>you mean by what seems to me a kind of heideggerian ebonics.

I hope Robert doesn't mind my stepping in... He is most eloquent, but I feel
there is a contribution that I can make to this discussion... so I will. As
for your vivid imagination, I hope to exercise it to it's limits over the
very near future. So, please, imagine all you want... I only ask that when
we converse about "What's So" that you actually step outside of your
imagination for a short while.

As for the conversation big B BEing, I will start with, you won't understand
it... because BEing does live in the same place as understanding, that is,
the act of understanding BEing, IS NOT BEING, it is understanding BEing. So,
the act
of describing BEing, or defining BEing, or posing it for you such that you
could intellectually digest BEing, would be a little like having you eat the
combined works of Heidegger. The end result would be gastric upset, and the
transformation of an enlightening experience into something more
scatological. Trust me, this would serve neither of us.

So, the way you arrive at KNOWing, BEing, is by simply BEing... in a way
that has you fully present to "Just BEing". For most people, this is nearly
impossible, because we live in a culture that does not train us to simply
BE, we live in a culture geared to DO, and HAVE. Hen, obviously you are
always BEing, as in Existing, as in YOU "Self Aware" Persist in the
experience of Time and Space. This is not the same as being Present to
BEing, present to the clearing, the opening, the meaningless, empty space of
possibility, the possibility of creation before intent, that is the place
>from which existence is born... And my words won't mean a thing to one who
hasn't ever had the din of his/ her thoughts
quieted. Most people are too busy being their thinking, to simply BE. So
when I speak of BEing Hen, I'm speaking about the Context of Context, the
Possibility of Possibilty. I am speaking about the clearing in which
Indentity lives, and
is not Identity.

Hen, I must say that I am disappointed by your choice of words. The
introduction of "Ebonics" immediately adds a flavor of bigotry, and snobbish
elitism to your conversation. The sarcasm, though clever does not
illuminate. The true student of that which is eternal discovers the universe
in a drop of water, or a mote of dust. Didn't Bhuda receive enlightenment
sitting, watching the river and the ferry-man. If you cannot hear the intent
of Heidegger in the noise of a playground, then maybe your ears are too full
of what you already know... That is actually an inquiry that has always
proved invaluable from my experience... What is it that I already know, such
that my ears have no room to hear, my eyes no room to see?

When I speak, I will endeavor to speak simply, clearly, and straight to the
heart of a matter. If my use of language is unclear or phrased in a fashion
that is peculiar, ask me to explain myself further... it will truly be my
pleasure. Western language does not lend itself well to conversation into
the distinctions of BEing (just as deserts might be very difficult to
discuss in native Inuit). So rather than describing Robert's speaking, as
"Ebonicslike", try the equally valid perspective; speaking simply, but
having to be creative with the language, because of it's inherent limits.
Another way of saying this, is that the speaking has more in common with
poetry, than prose... Hold it that way, and you should find it far more
palatable.

> (the fact is, this list IS multi-lingual in heideggerian, there are many
>people 'beyond my horizon'--RG's heideggerian ebonics is in that same
category)
>In the final analysis, i don't think RG has gotten off square one; you persist
>in demanding a challenging raw conversation on Being and then spout some kind
>of insults comme exasperations when anyone attempts dialogue with you. 
>Accusing me & others of mentation is not helpful, in my opinion.

I wasn't here for this interaction(s), so I can't comment on it/them. I can
say that if I am caught between being polite, or standing for the
development of another, politeness will drop like a lead weight. I am much
more interested in people being brilliant, than my being liked, or looking
good. If I need to confront someone, to create the opportunity of them
getting past fear, uncertainty, or a damaging belief... I will be
confronting. All the while, I will be true to my purpose, standing in my
intention to serve others and make a difference. I promise you, you will
always find my actions and my intent mutually consistent. No word shall
leave my lips that doesn't someplace bear the mark of my compassion.

>You, and now friend Anne Marie, have joined us to speak of heidegger (the
>early, the turn and the late great).  if your "heid for profit"  can
>concentrate on the heidegger-part, i'd appreciate it.  are there texts to
>discuss? are there subjects?  ("authenticity" comes to mind;" being-with"
comes
>to mind; "technology" comes to mind...and on and on)-- RG please do not BE
>HAVING your head explode because i have had these things "come to mind" :)=7F

Hhhhmmmm, I'm not sure that is precisely accurate Hen. Again I can't speak
for Robert, but I have come to learn, and create opportunity to investigate
BEing. Since this was the common thread of Heidegger's life, it seems to me
that this
is the perfect place to investigate the nature of his primary focus. Since
the people here are intensely focused on this conversation, I cannot imagine
a better place to speak about, or investigate the nature of BEing.

I will be absolutely thrilled to leave the discussion of text to those who
are far better read than I. As for "Heid for Profit", I can't imagine that
Heidegger ever claimed that a person or institution shouldn't profit, so it
seems a peculiar hook to hang Landmark on, but if the idea of profiting
somehow repels you, I would be happy to look at this with you further...
perhaps there is an underlying conversation that could be unconcealed that
would serve the entire list? We might even be able to look into the
underlying nature of trust, cynicism, skepticism, what it is that has human
beings listen for one another as charlatans, thieves, and worse.

In the areas of "Authenticty", "BEing with", and "Transformational
Technology", I look forward to discussing with you any and all aspects. More
important Hen, I look forward to illumining in the lives of those I speak
to, these qualities... I do not speak to stir the air, or enchant myself
with the drone of my own voice, these are not the Ends to my Means, my ends
are that people be fully alive, and present to their lives. To the degree
that I speak simply, with power and grace, that "I" BE in my words, I will
achieve my ends.

Hen, studying the words of Heidegger is wonderful, because he pointed to
something truly amazing... Might I suggest though, do not spend so much time
striding the man's hand, and instead follow to where he points... in a
person's life... that will make a difference.

>>Robert Sheets:
>>For it does recall a particular doctrine, praxis vs analysis, of that
earlier >>era, the Sartrean vogue, which I know to be disdained, but have
not seen >>explained...

>dear Robert S,
>most grateful appreciation for your inimitable evaluation of the unfortunate
>nature of this "incident".  I would suggest that were Heid. not completely
>saturated by the question of Being, he might indeed have been lukacs (or
>better, a fine pastoral Catholic-poet )  But i dont think his lines have been
>drawn as dark and necessary  as you indicate with regard to tech vs beyng,
>"thinking" vs beyng, etc.
>
>dicursive practices are not all gerede, perhaps? and the risk of Gerede is
>perhaps necessary for temporal disclosure, I am wondering... along the
lines of
>being-together (Michael E?)
>
>kindest regards,
>hen

On the issue of thinking vs. being... it's a moot point. Human beings
think... it's what human beings do. In this we have no say. Other than to
own and embrace the fact that we are thinking beings. Thinking does not
inherently destroy the
ability to BE, unless the thinker is not having thoughts, but instead BEing
thoughts. When a person HAS thoughts, the thoughts are content, in the
greater context of BEing, there is power to choose, inside or outside the
internal
conversation of thinking. When a person IS their thinking, Thought IS the
context in which life occurs, and there is no place to escape from the
thinking mind.

This is particularly distressing when you consider that just under that
rational inch of cerebrum, is an animal brain designed to drive this human
being, a stimulus response machine, in a direction called for by the
instincts of
survival, and the rational mind simply goes along for the ride justifying,
rationalizing, and in general, weaving a personal mythos regarding the
experience and content of one's life.

This is what is what is described in Zen as the Unruly Horse, one's mind.
Until you can be the rider on the horse, and not the hapless victim dragged
about by the horse, the mind is not the place to pursue Being, even if it
can Understand
the Nature of Being.

The criminal may well understand why he has committed the crime, and if that
was the access to making a difference, he would not be in jail. You may
understand the nature of BEing... but what is the access to living a life
which is abundant, having relationships which are rich and profound, having
a choice in the matter in the way you interact in the lives of those you
love, making a lasting contribution to humanity, touching the lives of
others, managing fear, guilt, frustration, impatience, loneliness, and the
existential angst of simply being. How do we shift the nature of the Human
Condition from one of survival, to one of truly BEing alive.

I promise you, you won't "figure" this one out... It isn't a place you can
think your way to...

Marie

By the way Hen, thank you for the interaction, you have opened the door to
endless possibility, I am truly excited by the opportunity that you create
inside your rigor and eloquence. I hope you won't be offended by a woman
being so bold as to inviting you to dance.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When I was a kid, I loved to connect the dots... not by the numbers,
but by my own imagination, the patterns of my vision... I guess I
haven't changed all that much.

	      Verity "Connecting People with Information"        

Anne Marie Tobias
mtobias-AT-verity.com	ext. 2182		    www.verity.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---