liberation: ('conversation' on - Alan Watts Mailing List) [note: this was in response to Vince's asking what Bruce had against "a living teacher") Bruce: Nothing whatsoever -- it is the idea that "a living teacher" is absolutely indispensable that provokes response. Each person's "path" is unique, and it is not for others to stipulate what will or won't somehow facilitate "liberation." Bill: I agree with this, and most of everything else you said, but I got the feeling from reading it that you are skeptical to the point of pessimism. Bruce: OK, as long as you take responsibility for "the feeling," what you see is what you see. Since I'm neither skeptical nor pessimistic, perhaps my shortcomings as a writer are involved too. Bill: It felt like you brought your skepticism so far as to be mocking the recipient. Is this true? Bruce: It was not my intention to mock Vince, but rather to deliver a kick in the ass(sumptions), to get him to revisit them in dialogue or otherwise. Bill: If so, I consider that highly unconstructive. Bruce: Opinion noted, but moot since any mockery was inadvertent and perhaps in the eye of the beholder. Bill: I, too, am extremely skeptical, often to the point of pessimism, but I find that it does me no good. Bruce: Understandable, but since I am neither skeptical nor pessimistic I can't relate to it directly, at least not from any recollectable experience. Bill: I might be completely right, logically, but somehow that doesn't make me feel any better. Of course it's fun, but it doesn't bring me any closer to that concept you refer to as "liberation." Bruce: First you say it doesn't make you feel better, then you claim it's fun -- interesting, no? Isn't the point of fun to feel better, albeit temporarily? Regarding "liberation," that was Vince's word choice, but probably no less adequate than "enlightenment," "self-realization," etc. As for getting closer, honest negation is probably the only way there is -- the Indians refer to "neti" (not this, not that) and that is a cogent pointer. Moreover, "liberation" as a concept is useless, just another goal for the ambitious ego to set about attaining -- the ashram is the world! Bruce: So, Bill, what are you about, "feeling better" or discovering the true nature of the human psyche and spirit? Are you willing to feel worse, to even feel utterly desolated if that's what life presents to you as you enquire, or are you, like so many so-called seekers, looking for respite, "a balm in Gilead," a psychological comfort zone in a world of suffering? Bill: I'm curious: would you consider yourself "liberated," or have you ever experienced it? Would you say that if or when you or someone does experience it, they don't know it as liberation, and wouldn't you say that this implies that your email about how to most effectively facilitate liberation, is actually not written from a stand point of being liberated? In other words, do you believe that your skeptical email, and your skepticism in general, and extensive discussion regarding liberation, brings you any closer to it? Bruce: Others have assumed that I am indeed "liberated," but the fact is that "I," the thought pattern Freud tagged as "ego," cannot be any such thing. As for my dialogue with Vince, it is merely bread upon the waters, at best a few useful hints in the usual human sea of verbiage. Discussion can be helpful in the spirit of neti -- not trying to define or depict "liberation" per se, but rather mutually noticing what it is not, and perhaps pointing toward certain other matters mutually observable in the moment. Your mileage may vary, but from here this is best done on a narrow, middle way -- always open-minded (receptive), never empty-headed (gullible). From some viewpoints this may indeed seem skeptical, especially in the context of the affirmation craze still rampant in "New Age" circles, but I can assure you it is about as far from pessimistic as Honolulu is from Halifax!