Lost in Translation

I have no absolute reason why one should not be an ass other than because one chooses not to.

"Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement." Gandalf speaking to Frodo in The Fellowship of the Ring by J.R.R. Tolkien Bingo! What we're really saying is "don't be an a$$#*!3." That's a far cry from "don't be judgemental."

Well said. There is a time to judge and a time not to judge. Discerning between the two is itself a form of judgement. I have been working on letting go of my judgments since most of the time they serve only to bring me pain. It's not easy. But I still believe that judgments are fundamentally necessary to cultivate wisdom. The Tao may flow like water and that may be our ultimate ideal, but we are not water and to pretend otherwise is (at this time) foolish.

This came up on YouTube. It seems apt.

The Wikipedia is limited in its treatment of him. The Eight Immortals of Taoism, by Kwok Man Ho and Joanne O'Brien is an interesting book that delves in detail in to the lives of the Eight Immortals. It shows that gaining immortality does not mean letting go of human emotions, at least not right away. pp. 79 https://www.amazon.com/Eight-Immortals-Taoism-Legends-Popular/dp/0452010705 Eventually Lu Dong Bin realizes the futility of anger, or at least the futility of holding on to anger after it has served its purpose, but he realizes this well after achieving immortality. If you decide to buy this book then let me know. It's an interesting read.

There are also stories about Taoist Immortals who use sex, drunkenness and anger to know Tao. Take a look at the Eight Immortals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_Immortals My favorite is Lu Dongbin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lü_Dongbin

Anger is a weapon, like a club, knife, or gun. It can be used by good people to achieve good things. It can be used by bad people to achieve bad things. Anger is also like a flame. It consumes that which gives it life. If anger is allowed to burn for too long then it will consume its host entirely, twisting and warping him into the same thing that he despises. As such, anger must be tempered with wisdom and bound by justice. It is in this regard that I compared anger to a new credit card. Just as credit cards are used to facilitate purchases, anger is to facilitate actions. And just as credit cards should not be overused to the point of indebtedness, anger should not be overused to the point of burnout.

You are welcome.

The French invented the guillotine. Humor aside, The French are a very passionate people who have learned to be laissez faire. Perhaps they have become too laissez faire? Now that their passions are awakening they might rediscover their bloody heritage. Yes, this was dark humor but I would not be surprised to see a guillotine used in Paris again in our lifetimes.

Erik

Ah... I understand. Everyone needs their "me time."

I understand every word of the above post except for "Lukedaal dows shickens!" yet have no idea what you are saying. You have lost me with your subtle humor.

I, too, am drinking coffee! Mm, coffee...

Anger has a purpose, just as fear, or love, or compassion, or hate has a purpose. It is a basic element in the toolkit of life that we each possess. For example: A man is stalking women in a town. He is a menage to society and needs to be stopped. It is perfectly normal for the people of the town to feel anger towards the man. It is perfectly normal to hate him. This anger, driven by hatred, is the energy that propels the people forward in their pursuit.

Correct, but I would remove the word 'only' from the above, since that unconsciously diminishes and marginalizes anger as an objectively bad thing. Anger is not bad, but it is limited.

I think there are many meanings of judgement. I do not think we are all using the same meaning, thus confusion. One can objectively judge a thing for suitability to a given purpose, for example when judging a handsaw for cutting wood. One can subjectively judge a thing for aesthetic pleasure, for example when judging a handsaw for the color of the stained wood. In both cases one is judging the same handsaw but with different criteria. The person concerned solely with function won't understand the person concerned with aesthetics and the person concerned with aesthetics won't understand the person who ignores aesthetics, and thus it begins. In my view judgement is an essential skill that one must develop and exercise often, but when doing so one must understand the distinction between aesthetics and function. I withhold judge of others for their aesthetic choices. I similarly withhold judgement of others for their functional choices in areas that are not my concern. But in areas that are my concern, I unapologetically embrace my judgements for to do otherwise leads to confusion and suffering.

The French invented the guillotine.

Telling someone to "not be judgemental" is a diversionary tactic that people use to silence the other person without addressing the issue. If a person is judgemental and open to discussion then argue the point to prove their judgement wrong. But oftentimes people can't or won't argue the point. I consider this a thought failure in those who unconsciously use this tactic and a moral failure in those who consciously do.

This is a very good point. Can I borrow $50?

Giving in to anger is like maxing out a new credit card. Yes, you can get a lot done very quickly, but you'll pay a big price eventually.

I prefer a medium/medium-dark roast. Pete's has a good dark roast. https://www.peets.com/major-dickason-s-blend I like my coffee with a slightly acidic taste, not quite as strong as Starbucks. That said, the best coffee so ever had was from Split Pea Andersen's in Buellton, California. It's mild, smooth and very tasty.

No, as long as you are actively working on that same item within yourself and you acknowledge the parallel. That is consistency. But failing to work on yourself or failure to acknowledge the parallel - that is hypocrisy.

I disagree. Perhaps we are not discussing exactly the same thing. When I said "The second form is mostly worthless and serves little more than to bring stress to one's own life," I intentionally added "mostly" because there is one person who is hearing the criticism and the judgements -- you! From that perspective one can use this internal dialog to compare and contrast behaviors, using their natural judgements to acquire understanding and wisdom. But it is a painful process and not one I would encourage.

There is the vocal judgement characterized by complaining about things and telling other people how they are wrong, etc. And there is the silent judgement where we observe behaviors that we disagree with and condemn the other within our own minds. The first form may potentially be productive if the subject respects your opinion and is willing to hear it. The second form is mostly worthless and serves little more than to bring stress to one's own life.

Judging is unconscious. By placing someone else down one feels as if they are raising themselves up. But that's not true. There is no raising. There is only pushing down. Inevitably one reaches a point where the judging becomes a source of pain and frustration, since the other person doesn't change. How can they? They likely don't even know they are being judged! So here you sit, judging others, feeling miserable that no one is changing, feeling isolated and slowly growing angry and frustrated. It's hell. I have much experience with this and have been working on it for many years.