(no subject)
Mar. 23rd, 2003 09:26 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
iamomIs anybody else having the problem in which their e-mail notifications for LJ comments and replies are delayed for up to several days after they were originally posted? I can't find any info on that in the FAQ, so I don't know what's going on. It only started happening after I transferred my domain name serving to a different provider a couple of weeks ago. Before that, everything was tickety-boo.
One of yesterday's DailyDharma quotes was quite good, concerning how not to entrench oneself in any one position in life and debate:
This view of the war is far more in keeping with the equanimous approach that has become common to the rest of my life. As I once said about this conflict, it is far removed from what's happening with me in the present moment, and undue emotional involvement with these events does little for me other than to make me upset.
A deeply spiritual and compassionate person by nature, I have enormous sympathy and respect for those who feel the need to protest in the streets about the seeming insanity of this invasion. I may even find myself joining the next peace march next Saturday. But I wouldn't be there with a firm hold on an anti-war position at all costs; I'd be there in general opposition to violence as a means to resolve conflict (my personal, un-equanimous stance on that issue), and in opposition to the illogical and unilateral decision-making process that the Bush administration has used in initiating their attacks on Iraq.
Rex Murphy, the host of CBC Radio's weekly national phone-in show, also said something yesterday which helped to put this into a slightly clearer perspective for me. This war, such as it is being fought today, is most probably the same war that would have been fought had the UN adopted the second resolution that was pulled by the US at the last minute when Russia and France indicated that they would veto it at all costs. It could be credibly argued that France and Russia were about to veto said resolution in large part to protect their own expansive industrial interests in Iraq, and as such, that their veto was motivated more by political and financial interests than by compassionate or pacifist ones. Since most people seem to agree that Saddam Hussein is a dictator the likes of which should be deposed from power, perhaps it could then be argued that the US is simply carrying out this logical objective, albeit in their own way.
Don't get me wrong, though. I don't think that the end justifies the means, and I don't believe that Bush has the moral credibility or otherwise to be the leader in this quest for removing Saddam Hussein from power. I think he lost most of his credibility after not finding Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan, and I also don't believe that he proved by any stretch of the imagination a credible link between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein in order to justify this current invasion. In watching the news coverage, I also can't help thinking that this war is a live showcase to justify the billions that have been spent on the high-tech weaponry being used in the attacks. Am I supposed to be impressed by how cool these weapons are? I'd be more impressed if they didn't have to be used at all.
But leaving ALL of these arguments aside, the fact remains that for whatever reason, Bush IS doing this, and there's no amount of protest in the streets or otherwise that will stop him. If anything, throwing our support behind the guy in order to make the war end as quickly and efficiently as possible would possibly result in the lowest number of civilian deaths and the soonest entry of humanitarian aid to the region.
Personally, it all comes back in the end to withdrawing my personal involvement from the conflict in general, and not getting overly emotional invested in what's happening with it. I'm obviously drawn towards debate and discussion about it, but whatever happens in the end will be whatever happens, and I personally can have no control over it. I'd rather work towards helping my family and friends become more peaceful than try to convince George Bush that what he's doing is wrong.
So, is anyone having any trouble with their meditation practice? Anyone having trouble dealing with their anger or frustration right now? Let's talk about that, instead.
One of yesterday's DailyDharma quotes was quite good, concerning how not to entrench oneself in any one position in life and debate:
In classical Buddhist terms, ‘the middle way’ involves not identifying with anything: either pleasure or pain, separateness or togetherness, attachment or detachment. The middle way is not some bland middle ground. Rather, it requires us to be alert and awake at all times, so that we do not harden into any position, no matter how righteous it may seem. Not solidifying a position keeps us sensitive to continue to flow fluidly. When two people become too invested in their positions (for example ‘I need more closeness’ versus ‘I need more space’), they become polarized and the dance grinds to a halt.Z's schedule prevented us from attending the peace march or rally yesterday, and I awoke this morning with a more dispassionate view of things. This morning, for the first time, I was able to look beyond the events of the invasion itself to get a glimpse of its underlying fabric or reality. The radio news reports, the anti-war protests, and the US propaganda all dissolved into a swirl of nattering noise, interspersed indistinguishably from the myriad events, thoughts and activities of the rest of everyday life.
~~John Welwood
This view of the war is far more in keeping with the equanimous approach that has become common to the rest of my life. As I once said about this conflict, it is far removed from what's happening with me in the present moment, and undue emotional involvement with these events does little for me other than to make me upset.
A deeply spiritual and compassionate person by nature, I have enormous sympathy and respect for those who feel the need to protest in the streets about the seeming insanity of this invasion. I may even find myself joining the next peace march next Saturday. But I wouldn't be there with a firm hold on an anti-war position at all costs; I'd be there in general opposition to violence as a means to resolve conflict (my personal, un-equanimous stance on that issue), and in opposition to the illogical and unilateral decision-making process that the Bush administration has used in initiating their attacks on Iraq.
Rex Murphy, the host of CBC Radio's weekly national phone-in show, also said something yesterday which helped to put this into a slightly clearer perspective for me. This war, such as it is being fought today, is most probably the same war that would have been fought had the UN adopted the second resolution that was pulled by the US at the last minute when Russia and France indicated that they would veto it at all costs. It could be credibly argued that France and Russia were about to veto said resolution in large part to protect their own expansive industrial interests in Iraq, and as such, that their veto was motivated more by political and financial interests than by compassionate or pacifist ones. Since most people seem to agree that Saddam Hussein is a dictator the likes of which should be deposed from power, perhaps it could then be argued that the US is simply carrying out this logical objective, albeit in their own way.
Don't get me wrong, though. I don't think that the end justifies the means, and I don't believe that Bush has the moral credibility or otherwise to be the leader in this quest for removing Saddam Hussein from power. I think he lost most of his credibility after not finding Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan, and I also don't believe that he proved by any stretch of the imagination a credible link between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein in order to justify this current invasion. In watching the news coverage, I also can't help thinking that this war is a live showcase to justify the billions that have been spent on the high-tech weaponry being used in the attacks. Am I supposed to be impressed by how cool these weapons are? I'd be more impressed if they didn't have to be used at all.
But leaving ALL of these arguments aside, the fact remains that for whatever reason, Bush IS doing this, and there's no amount of protest in the streets or otherwise that will stop him. If anything, throwing our support behind the guy in order to make the war end as quickly and efficiently as possible would possibly result in the lowest number of civilian deaths and the soonest entry of humanitarian aid to the region.
Personally, it all comes back in the end to withdrawing my personal involvement from the conflict in general, and not getting overly emotional invested in what's happening with it. I'm obviously drawn towards debate and discussion about it, but whatever happens in the end will be whatever happens, and I personally can have no control over it. I'd rather work towards helping my family and friends become more peaceful than try to convince George Bush that what he's doing is wrong.
So, is anyone having any trouble with their meditation practice? Anyone having trouble dealing with their anger or frustration right now? Let's talk about that, instead.
