[MD] Wranglin' with Rigel

[plattholden at gmail.com]

John Carl:

I would merely point out to the guy that he considers his ideas are right 
and therefore have quality. He will also have to admit his work has 
quality. As for a koan, how about, "Life is a series of value choices 
between the no choices of birth and death." Or, "It's impossible to live 
without having assumptions about what is good."

Platt  


On 27 Jun 2009 at 9:51, John Carl wrote:

> So lately I've been helping a neighbor/friend with a little sheetrocking in
> the morning.  He needs a hand hanging the lid.
> 
> 
> He's an interesting guy.  A retired attorney of around my age (50ish) who
> has been living here on the Ridge for about 10 years.  A relative newcomer
> to most of the folks around here, but a hard charging kind of guy who is
> real involved as a community leader - on the county planning commission,
> hosted politcal klatsches for a supervisor candidate (who won) and his wife
> is the head of the school board where his and my son attend.  We carpool a
> lot, through the yuba canyon.
> 
> 
> So we had them for dinner a month or so back, I'd told him about ZAMM, he
> likes to discuss ideas and so he took it, read it, and  I asked him about it
> first day at work.
> 
> 
> He didn't like it.  Said it was full of crap he'd heard before.  So I asked,
> "You actually read the whole thing?"  He didn't really answer me then but
> instead launched into a tirade about the reality of gravity.   So I figure
> he must have gotten stuck at that point, but the fact that he couldn't just
> admit that he rejected a book that he hadn't had the gumption to finish was
> kinda weird and as later clues came together I understood that there is this
> attorney-training thing happening in argumentation that is all about the
> win, baby.  They never concede a point and if any niggling misconstruation
> is possible, they vehemently deny and oppress any point you're making as
> well.
> 
> 
> It can be a disconcerting style to deal with, to say the least.
> 
> 
> Other similarities between my friend and Rigel, besides the community leader
> and being attorneys, was the stiff morality.  For those who observe a strict
> victorian morality there seems to be an intensely emotional attachment to
> "what they believe".  In the middle of a rational discussion, he'd have to
> stop and beg me to stop what we are doing (working on his project) so that
> he could vehemently make his points. Usually points about free markets,
> immorality of socialism, immorality of modernism and so forth.     He's a
> religious man, but has doubts about the bible.  He didn't want to discuss
> religion, but used the philosophy gained from a lifetime exposure (his folks
> were missionaries)  to religion and the bible to justify "his" world view.
> When I pointed out that the self was an intellectual construct, he went
> ballistic on me, but then later contradicted himself and conceded that
> point, sort of.
> 
> 
> Afterwards, I thought about the captain's encounter with Rigel and compared
> our two experiences.  I too felt helpless in the face of SOMish certainty.
> One difference is that that the Captain headed on down the river and out of
> Rigel's orbit forever.  I went back to work the next morning and morn after
> that and all next week and I'll be carpooling and neighbors forever.  I have
> some potential in the continuity of the relationship to get through to this
> guy.   But how?
> 
> 
> How does a budding bodhisattva construct a koan for a Rigelian sheetrocker?
> I must admit, he's the best sheetrock cutter I've ever worked with.  The
> house we're working on has many complicated angles and light fixtures.  He
> takes great pride in getting every single joint and cuttout exact.  Unlike
> the normal sheetrocker who cuts around outlets a little large, he cuts them
> out a little small so that he can fine tune with his keyhole saw on
> installation.  He admits he is working to impress the tapers.  But of course
> who he's really working for is to impress himself.  I've known a lot of
> tapers and they're not usually the kind of guys who's approval would raise
> anyone's status.  Still, there is a craft involved in getting all the lines
> perfect.  I don't call it art, but its something.
> 
> 
> Transferring the MoQ.  That is the issue, eh?  How?  And maybe, why?  Is it
> my own egoistic desire to "convert" that is at the heart of my concern?  Am
> I trying to impress the kind of guy who's approval would raise my status?
> Or am I striving to liberate a sentient being from samsara and lead them to
> enlightenment?
> 
> 
> If I choose, I choose the latter.  But now we are back to the how.  How to
> construct a koan.  How to lead out in a dialogue.  How to deal with
> self-satisfied SOM.  An ongoing challenge.
> 
> -- 
> ------------
> Doing Good IS Being
> ------------