This is my first reply in the google group, so I hope I am sending it
to the right place. I'm am so grateful to have my growing discomfort
de-mystified. When I read your comments, Ian, about the process we are
engaged in being likely disruptive, wow! Bells went off in my
head...and I remember another time doing something that resulted in a
growth spurt and expecting all light and happiness, and what I got was
light in the form of illumination. And I wasn't always happy with what
I saw. Which explains a personal habit of avoidance.
As it relates to this current work, I would say that this commitment
to Honesty, in communication and action, is making for some Big waves.
It was totally unexpected and I was feeling really distressed about
it, because I didn't understand, until I read that...Disruptive. Some
boxes don't fit anymore. I really did not expect this - I am an honest
person. Didn't think it would be too hard. But when I really examine
all the things that I DON'T say, and why I don't say them, I am not
being compassionate with myself.
Disruptive. Absolutely.
With gratitude,
Colleen
On Dec 12, 6:55 pm, Nima Namjouy <
n.namj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you for your insight Ian; as I read your email I really felt your
> genuine self. I think your message is a great example that when we show
> our authentic self with all our vulnerabilities, it breaks the barriers
> separating us from everyone we interact with. The first time I met you at
> one Tuesday evening talk, I would have never guessed that we share such
> similar insecurities.
>
> Enjoy the office party :)
>
> -Nima
>
> On 12 December 2012 13:42, Ian Macdonald <
camac...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi Nima,
>
> > Thank you for sharing. I remember having very similar feelings when I
> > first started attending the Tuesday talks. I'd sit there thinking I was the
> > stupidest (or maybe most inauthentic) person in the room. It wasn't
> > Michael's talks --he was the teacher, he *should *be smart, genuine, &
> > inspiring-- but rather the comments from the others that did it. Everyone
> > was *so* insightful, *so* in touch with themselves and aware, *so *creative.
> > It was like there was a bar for attendance and I was it. Anyone more stupid
> > (or less authentic, less creative) than me wouldn't last, but if the
> > standard rose, even the tiniest bit, I would fall out and someone else
> > would become the new threshold. Why did I keep going? Probably because that
> > was just situation: *normal*. It was how I felt most of the time, in most
> > of the groups I've ever been part of. Just on the edge of acceptance, the
> > periphery of *in*.
>
> > Can't say I had any sort of epiphany like you so beautifully describe, but
> > I do think something has changed gradually as a result of the practice.
> > I've been struck by a couple of things I've heard over the last year;
> > they've had a kind of corroding/eroding resonance. One was Enkyo Roshi's
> > visit & talk on the Lotus Sutra (it's up as a podcast<
http://traffic.libsyn.com/centreofgravity/feb_24_12.mp3>),
> > where she spoke briefly about how every kind of growth (most particularly
> > spiritual) involves a sort of betrayal. We can't change without threatening
> > or bursting the boundaries and boxes we & others create for ourselves. That
> > can be difficult and stressful, but is also necessary. I can't be exactly
> > the same guy, only "more enlightened", the process is both more organic and
> > more disruptive. I've got comfortable with that idea (well, sort-of). The
> > other thing was Dogen's idea that we don't practice to get enlightened, we
> > practice *because* we are enlightened. I interpret that to mean there is
> > no end-point. It's not *practice makes perfect* but rather *practice
> > makes practice deeper*. I'm still working on this one too, but the idea
> >>>
http://guru.bafta.org/charlie-**kaufman-screenwriters-lecture-**video<
http://guru.bafta.org/charlie-kaufman-screenwriters-lecture-video>