--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "jyouells2000" <jyouells@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> > >
> > > "Some did it out of fear of the balance of power, and
> > that's what your post dealt with most. I think that
> > one reason so many spiritual seekers are so willing
> > to do *anything* rather than believe these types of
> > claims about their teacher is that they're unwilling
> > to admit that the environment they're in *has* an
> > uneven balance of power, and that they're on the low
> > end of it. If you are strongly committed to your
> > spiritual path, and some person has the power to
> > make it such that you cannot *follow* your path
> > (i.e., throw you out of the organization), then is
> > your decision to sleep with such a person ever
> > *really* uncoerced?"
> >
> > This is the heart of the matter. Some people will justify any
> > bad behavior.
>
> Thanks for your reply, John. That's the way I see
> it, too. This is a seriously button-pushing topic,
> and the way that people react to it says a lot
> about them IMO. Once you've put someone up on a
> pedestal that has a label at the bottom that says,
> "Enlightened Person Here. By definition, he can
> do nothing that is not 100% life-supporting,"
> you've placed yourself in the position of *having*
> to justify any bad behavior on his part.
>
> And, when it all comes down, those who are doing
> the justifying rarely even realize that the
> "definition" they're working from was given to
> them by the very person they're excusing.
>
> It's all so unnecessary. How 'bout no pedestal,
> just a scrap of paper that says, "Enlightend
> Person Here. He's no different than you are.
> Hold him to the same principles that you hold
> yourself to. And cut him the same amount of
> compassion."
>
Why not even skip the label, and the scrap of paper. And just enjoy
the persons good qualities.
