Manila Dreams #10
MANILA DREAMS #10
There is a clarity that comes with practicing lethal technique. The question "under what circumstances are such techniques justifiable?"
For preservation of life, family, or most deeply held values. That's it. That would include protecting others, IMO.
But gaining clarity about that leads one to ask if YOU are respecting your own strictures. Because the substance of your life is TIME and ENERGY. So asking yourself what you can do, every day, to stop "killing your life", to get the greatest amount of LIFE out of every day, is as important as asking what external threats might trigger a mortal response.
Time. Energy. PROTECT THEM. If every time you got a paycheck you had to cut a joint off your body, you'd understand much more clearly what is at stake. And here, I thought to myself: what if I only had another million words to speak in this lifetime? What would I say? What conversations would I avoid?
And what if I only had another 100k words to share about the path I've been describing? Well, I'd let myself get pulled into fewer random conversations. I can honor people for doing the best they can, and simultaneously know they are not going to walk as my companions. I can wish them peace in their journey, and that I pray they find the right teachers and allies, without thinking we fit.
One beautiful use of the Three Gates fits right here. What happens if I reckon I've got another 100k words to talk of these things, and no more?
##
Wasting time, energy, and words becomes anathema.
A person who is rude, or whose core facts do not match those you are willing to commit to, cannot be communicated with reliably--you can probably predict that you'll end the conversation wondering why you wasted all that time.
A woman who referred to her political opponents as "Dumocrat" and expected me to just roll with it and answer her question.
A guy who hallucinated implications from an initial statement, and insisted that I defended that implication, rather than the statement. (No…the first step would be to investigate whether those implications are valid and inevitable. An "If…then" conversation might be possible…but would it be USEFUL?)
If I feel that their core beliefs about race or gender are not grounded in equality, I know that nothing useful will come out of any conversation. Ultimately, these beliefs are "faith based" and I understand that. But there we are.
If their core belief about humanity is that we are stupid, or evil, nothing positive will come out of any discussion other than this first step. And it is legitimate to ask if even that conversation is worth the time and energy invested. I'd say let them find people who agree with them, then look to see how healthy, happy, and successful that group tends to be.
If they don't agree that humans and other animals move away from pain and toward pleasure, it is unlikely that any conversation about human motivations will bear fruit, other than a theoretical "if…then" type conversation. And again, you have to ask yourself: under what circumstances is this conversation worth the time and energy? Let them go.
The fact is that I speak to those who are willing to follow the Three Gates, who believe in equality, who believe human beings are doing the best they can, and that by definition the average person cannot be less than average. In other words, to have an effective conversation, I believe you have to agree both of you have passed at least two of the three "Gates": you have to agree on basic truths, exchange courtesy scrupulously, and strive to become more efficient and effective in thought, action, and results.
