--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ron" <sidha7001@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Loving what *IS* may be different than loving what is -
>
> Yes, what appears to be the remnants of dualism. I'm finding as we
> inquire into and integrate our self-righteously scripted reactions
> around warmongers, liars, false gurus, misusers of power, etc. ("I'm
> better than so-and-so!") we see that after all we have been indulging
> in the false-intellect, and have only been projecting our own dramas
> onto the Emptiful perfection, withholding our all-inclusive Love and
> superimposing an illusory snake upon an innocent string, and here and
> now find that what had appeared to be "sin" only IS IS, indescribable,
> radiantly beautiful, a perfect reflection of the Self -- as it has
> always been!
>
> Again, we've often found Byron Katie ("Loving what IS") to be very
> useful in helping the divisive mind to catch up with Us :-)
My reading of Byron Katie is that she is primarily focussed on the
message, and analysis in life situations, of "loving what is", not
"loving what IS" . And that "loving what is" is not a prescription to
passively sit back and accept what is, do nothing, and sigh "Isn't
this the most PERFECT, most adorable situation!"
As an example, when a woman says her husband "appears to act like a
dickhead sometimes, but really is a good man, and I think I can change
him (though tht hasn't worked out over the past 20 years, and I think
its a lot my fault, and why do I get stuck with a dickhead, ..." BK
stops the woman dead in her tracks and forces herto accept the fact
that her husband is a dickhead. That there is not getting around it.
Accepting it, loving it, is a mechanism to stop the pity and blame
game. But it doesn't at all mean, per BK, to be resigned to living
with the dickhead or to see it as "perfect". She says, in my reading,
that accepting, without qualification, that the womans husband is a
dickhead is the first step in moving on with her life. To accept he is
not going to change, he has his nature, and she has the option to
leave him. That indeed is exactly what BK did with her first
husband.She didn't sigh an say, "my oh my, isn't this just PERFECT."
This is a similar theme, roughly parallel, to the discussion Jim and I
had about the value in not passively accepting paradoxes.
I am wondering Rory, if you are seeing BK saying "love what IS" as
your view of what BK SHOULD be saying, and not accpeting and loving
what she actually is saying (per my reading -- and perhaps I need to
re-read her).
