Theos-Talk Archives (January 1997 Message tl00473)

Murray Stentiford writes-->
Whatever JRC's motives, I have found the exchange extremely interesting, both
for its content and for the techniques. 

Tom Robertson writes-->
This surprises me.  I fail to see anywhere near as much good there is in such
an "exchange" as there is harm.  Never in a million years will the
hypocritical preacher of open-mindedness ever consider the possibility that,
in ways in which he and I disagree, he might be wrong.  And from a selfish
perspective, even though I considered that what he said might be true, I had
to wade through so much bullshit in the form of invective and falsehood that
I fail to see anything close to a net gain for me.  <snip>   If you see good
to all of this, maybe you could more specifically explain it, because I have
missed it, so far. 

Richard Ihle writes-->
I have to agree with Murray.  Those few of us who view the exchanges on
theos-l from a "psychogenetic" perspective are always keenly interested in
JRC's "mission."  He is "soul-grower" #1, in my opinion.  He is quick to see
when someone else is trying to establish "semi-Self" dominance by total egoic
indulgence at (transformation into) a given level of contaminated
consciousness.  By providing unpleasant repercussions to individuals, JRC
makes them more "Mindful" (more inclined to preserve a modicum of the
Once-Removed Vantage) the next time there is a similar type of temptation for
egoic indulgence.

As an interested bystander, it is my opinion, right or wrong, that JRC has
already several times "broken" the semi-Self steed that you were not only
riding but that you more or less had ~egoically become~ completely.  This is
not an easy task in your case, because you often ride a "Fifth-Level
thoroughbred"--i.e., you often become "deluded" that you ~really are~ your
dispassionate ideas, logical processes, etc.  There is no shame in this; in
fact, it is a mark of advanced development, since most individuals still
primarily choose to ride (and often completely transmogrify into) the
Fourth-Level, Desire-Mental nag.  Your response above is just one example of
how JRC can sometimes cause you to "change horses" (one can guess that you
were not in Fifth-Level consciousness when you wrote the above, because the
Fifth is associated with pure, dispassionate reason, not like/dislike, anger,
etc.).  

JRC undoubtedly gets some satisfaction from again having proven that you are
not able to be completely stable and unshakable in "unadulterated" manas
consciousness.  If you had a fully developed Sixth-Degree soul (sixth degree
of Self-awareness), however, you could utilize Fifth-Level consciousness and
never be pulled down from it.  This is because the continuity of your
Once-Removed Vantage would not let you be totally deluded you were your ideas
and logical processes to begin with--i.e., you would thus not regard attacks
against the semi-Self you were using as attacks against the "Real You,"
anyway.

Does all of this mean that JRC is necessarily "higher" than you in terms of
Self-awareness ("age of the soul")?  Not at all.  A case could be made (and
Eldon started to make it a few posts ago) that JRC does not always carry out
his "psychogenetic mission" in a Mindful way himself.  Perhaps one might even
say that your remarks about "women wanting to be dominated" etc. "drew first
semi-Self blood" because it caused some serious bucking of the Fourth-Level,
Desire-Mental horse he sometimes rides and sometimes lets go the reins
of--i.e., sometimes completely becomes.  Like you and most of those on
theos-l, of course, JRC also has Fifth- and Sixth-Level horses in his stable.

Does the fact that I am presuming to make a something-manas commentary on
both of you mean that I am necessarily higher than both of you?  Not at all.
 I can assure you that I regularly completely egoically indulge the crappiest
levels of consciousness you can imagine.  All I can say is that I think I am
getting better at recognizing all the varieties of semi-Selves and
maintaining the Once-Removed Vantage upon them.  Similarly, JRC is getting
better.  Similarly, you, I believe, are getting better, and that, in my view
at least, is what is the "good to all of this."

Tom should say, "Thank you, JRC, you son-of-a-bitch."

JRC should say, "Thank you, Tom, you son-of-a-bitch."

You both should say, "Thank you, Richard Ihle, you son-of-a-bitch."

Godspeed,

Mr. Ed