On 30 Jun 1995, Doug Seeley wrote:
> Responding to the excellent exchange between Michael McMaster and
> Tobin Quereau in LO1838 and LO1814.....
>
> On Wed. 28th, Tobin said....
>
> > "I do not intend to separate the "action" or motivation from the self or
> >from the larger environment at all. Quite to the contrary, I see it more
> >as an _interdependent_ mutuality rather than a mechanistic cause and
> >effect. To extend your questions, I find it interesting to ask as well,
> >"Who is acting?" and "Who is aware of acting?" The answer in my book would
> >have to include the "whole"--the larger environment of nature, culture,
> >heritage, and spirit--with even the beginnings of an answer. "
>
> I like what You have said here Tobin, and when I can, I try to get things
> as interdependent mutualities..."arising together - nesses". It seems
> easire for me in the contact between another and myself. But frankly, I
> find it difficult at times..... it seems that the structure and grammar of
> my language get in the way a lot... and there also seem to be many
> conventional concepts which are so prevalent, that they act as barriers to
> my getting things this way. Do You or any of our colleagues have any
> clues about how to achieve this type of comprehension on an on-going
> basis??
Ahhhhh! Good question. The experience that comes to mind in response to
your question of an "on-going basis" is a course I took in Mahayana
Buddhism with Bishop Syaku at the California Institute of Integral Studies
(and now I have potentially labled myself one of "those California so and
so's" :)...) Each evening in this graduate class on the Buddhist spiritual
tradition in Southeast Asia, Bishop Syaku would present some concept of
interdependence, emptiness, etc., and upon reading the principle (which he
had no doubt studied for many, many years) to the class, he would exclaim
brightly, "That's true!" as if he were seeing it for the _first_ time!! It
is my perception that here was a being who could maintain the awareness
of, the experience of, and the delight in such truths in a constantly
fresh way. So, short of finding Bishop Syaku and asking him, you might
want to look at the practices of meditation and the concepts of Buddhism
as one place to start.
Now why do I think you already know that???
>
> then Tobin said....
>
> > "And, in doing so, also discover yourself as a player somewhat _freer_
> >from the constraints and limitations of that particular society... Perhaps
> >that emerging sense of self/system-discovery is what "motivates" us to
> >such profoundly challenging dialogue and reflection in the first
> >place...."
>
> For me the intriguing implication of this discussion is the fact that this
> notion of motivation just does not seem very workable and appropriate when
> applied to others. In fact, it seems to me now as a result of reflecting
> upon this discussion and my own experience with it in the context of
> organizational politics,... that it is downright disrespectful...
> moreover, it seems to be a disrespect which arcs back upon us in a strong
> manner, reaping what we sow....
>
> I wonder whether this fact (at least in my experience) is a result of a
> process that when we genuinely attribute to others this "freer player"
> quality, that it is also acknowledging in a powerful way within ourselves,
> enabling more creative emergence to occur between Us?? Or am I off the
> track with this??
I think I am with you on this last part. Please say more about it in terms
of the "it" which is "disrespectful" and the "freer player" which is in
the other and also in us. Fill me in a bit more about how you see this
occuring.
I have a hunch that you are "on track" and making good time as far as I am
concerned....
-- Tobin Quereau quereau@austin.cc.tx.us