Great post, and good, honest advice.

I see that it was focused at just one client, but I think that if you “read it with the right goggles”, everyone can gain something from this.

Thanks Tom,
you just put a smile on my lips as I thought…

I am not my thoughts.

Namaste!
Alex

Alex Kay’s last blog post..2 Movies to Watch for Learning Sexy Body Language and Masculine Attitude

Taking a position always accelerates conflict. Stepping out of the need for a position can bring peace to almost any situation. I’ve twice had a loaded firearm pointed at me by someone enraged. Staying calm and stepping out of the conflict resolved it and made no enemies – indeed in one case an ‘enemy’ (in their mind) became a friend as I had not made them wrong. It really is very simple but we have to be able to see past the fox.

The question gets slippery fast when you recognize the constructs are not stored on the level of the individual. Just the resistances. (laughs)

Davidya’s last blog post..Stop, Look, Listen

@Tom Thanks for making it even more clear.

In these cases, the contrary position is not doing something someone else might not like; it is the idea that there is a solidified center that makes decisions for us. It is a reliance on the past, which is dead and old.

If I take the keys and he shouts, I understand. If I take the keys and he doesn’t talk to me for weeks afterward, I understand. If I take the keys and he punches me in the face, I understand…and I take the keys. If he shouts, abandons me, or physically hurts me, it doesn’t matter.

When I was younger I was shouted at, abandoned, and physically hurt. But now, If someone shouts, I have to listen because it must be important to them. Why else would they shout? They are screaming to be understood.

And it is also impossible to be abandoned. This physical organism belongs to no one, and there is no somebody with something to lose.

And there may be physical damage, pain sensations or whatever, but there is no one here to make anything personal. One might prefer not to be punched, but after you are punched, that preference creates conflict.

We spend out lives not being punched. But when we actually are punched, that becomes our world. In reality, life after the punch is better because we’re not being punched anymore. Haha.

All war ends here, not out there.

Takuin Minamoto’s last blog post..Sitting #2

For what it’s worth, by the way, nobody’s ever pulled a knife on me either – in fact I haven’t had to defend myself (physically) outside the dojo since I was at school! Don’t want you getting the impression I go round spoiling for a fight.

PS Apologies for the HUGE paragraph in my last post. It didn’t look like that when I typed it up, can’t be easy on the eyes to read it!

And I agree: my client is a cool guy. Actually, all my clients are very cool people. I enjoy working with them immensely.

Again, thanks for your comments and support. Just remember to be kind to the story teller.

@Shadowduck Let me add a bit to Takuin’s statement and see if I can clarify. The big thing is that was are so habituated to believing that we have to THINK about something before any action will occur. And at the core of thinking is always the THINKER, me, the I-thought. Notice that in the example of the drunk friend, it is “I have to talk him out of it” or “I have to take his keys away.” But we all have experiences of acting without conscious thought being necessary, and it is amazing how that can often be the most perfect response.

As we drop the idea that we are a separate self, a “me,” we come to notice that we act more naturally without thinking about it. Takuin has some experience of that. I have a little, too. Life just flows, and the body flows in response to life. This is really what “going with the flow” is all about. Just being and allowing doing to occur. Ultimately, no matter how hard we try to avoid it, we must confront the amazing truth: there is no one doing the things that are done. Just bodies moving. But try as you might, you can never find the doer.

Ain’t spirituality fun!

It isn’t that you don’t want him to, you won’t let him. There is a difference there, although it may seem confusing.

Confusing, yes. Surely I won’t let him simply because I don’t want him to?

Is it necessary to have a contrary position to take his keys? No. Just take the keys.

Apart from it being more forceful and probably more likely to result in a shouting match (especially if I have to take the keys out of his pocket!), I really don’t see the difference between “take his keys then refuse to discuss it” and “try to talk him out of it”. Either way, I’m trying to impose my worldview (or position) on somebody else – in other times or cultures I would be seen as a weirdo or troublecauser for trying to prevent someone driving drunk, it’s not something universal. By taking his keys, I’m taking a position – and it’s contrary!

If you don’t want to be stabbed, does that mean you have the image of being stabbed?

Naturally I would try to avoid being stabbed, and for a mixture of reasons. Some probably ego- or attachment-based (the sheer injustice, that some lowlife mugger could stab me and leave my children fatherless for the few quid in my pocket, that I’d become a victim) and some from the reptile brain (fight or flight). Does that mean I have an image of being stabbed? I’m not sure I even understand the question… I certainly wouldn’t allow myself to be stabbed, just on the off-chance it’s not as bad as I expect!
As we go through life, it’s a lucky person who doesn’t find themselves in some kind of conflict from time to time. I’ve found an awareness of ego helps the dingy, dreary, unnecessary nastiness of many people wash over me with equanimity – it’s only my ego that wants to respond, and I’m getting better at accepting that and letting it go. On a good day I can even feel compassion for those who abuse me, and give them a smile before getting on with my day unaffected. To that extent, all that I’ve read about spirituality has really helped my life become a much more relaxed place!
To my mind physical intimidation, bullying, violence or abuse is a different matter. That isn’t just my ego that’s being threatened, it’s my life and well-being or those of my friends or family. In a situation such as that, where I was left with no choice but to defend myself or my loved ones using physical force, I don’t think I would feel I was wrong to do so. Indeed, I’ve spent several years studying martial arts to reduce my vulnerability and the chances of me ever becoming a victim (thankfully I’ve never had to use that training, but I’m glad to have it). Is that view incompatible with your thinking?
Again, I have no intention of being argumentative here, I’d just love to hear your views. And sorry, Tom, for the hijack!

As I read what you had to say, I felt a lift of pressure that I’ve been looking for for the past few days. That’s right, I let the mental noise sucker me into being pinned down by its (bad) stories.

You’re right. They are just stories. I forgot. And I am quite the story teller -let me tell you. Ha.

Anyway, being the ever greatful reader,THANK YOU for this excellent excellent piece. THANK you.

kudos to your client for his candor.

JEMi | Tips for Life, Love, You’s last blog post..What Keeps YOU Young?: An InMyHeels/Lipton FUJI Crosstown Bike Giveaway!!!

The idea of dissipating argument by not holding a position is a difficult one for me.

In other words you are saying The idea of dissipating argument by not holding a position is a difficult one from my position.

Wink, wink.

If your friend is drunk and about to drive home, you won’t let him. It isn’t that you don’t want him to, you won’t let him. There is a difference there, although it may seem confusing. Of course you don’t wish him any harm, but there is no conflict of thought; only action.

If one’s position is involved, there is that back and forth. Have you seen it for yourself? Maybe you’ve been at a party and there is the guy (always a guy in my experience) that is “just fine to drive home.” The friends are talking him out of doing it. There is an unnecessary back and forth. Just take the damn keys. The case is closed.

But why the back and forth, which is almost always the case? Go into it for yourself and see what is there. It is fascinating.

Is it necessary to have a contrary position to take his keys? No. Just take the keys. He may become violent, belligerent, or whatever, but none of that matters. Just take the keys. It does not require a self-designed world or story in order to act. You just take the keys.

And what if a knife is pulled? This is even more interesting, at least to me. Go there for yourself…the knife is pulled. “Give me your money!” or whatever it is. What do you do? Try to take it away from him? Give him your money? What do you do?

If you try to take the knife away, why do you do it? I am not saying it is right or wrong, but why do you do it? Because you don’t want to be stabbed? Because the guy has made you mad? Maybe you want to impress a girl? Why do you do it?

If you don’t want to be stabbed, does that mean you have the image of being stabbed?

If he made you mad, is that also due to an image? Are you mad because he pulled the knife, or are you mad because of what happened in your mind after he pulled the knife?

Do you want to impress someone? Again, is that due to an image? You have an idea of what will happen if you are victorious; the admiration, possible reward, or whatever.

In the above examples, are we dealing with what is happening now, or are we at the mercy of our imagery? You might say, “Yes, there is the image first, but there is still the guy with the knife! If the knife is there, stay with it. Be there one hundred percent.

Without the imagery, without the contrary position, you will know exactly what to do. It will be there with you, in every movement. You will never have to ask, “What do I do?”

It is shocking to have a knife pulled on you, but it doesn’t have to be a matter of control. Control comes through the need to impose what is comfortable – what is known – upon the situation. Again, this is not good or bad. Just go there for yourself and see what is there.

I don’t usually speak of myself, but I’ll give an example from my past. Someone pulled a knife on me when I was around nineteen or twenty years old. My reaction was violent. It didn’t turn out well. Luckily, he was more scared than I, and he didn’t stab so much as slash a bit. (I do have defensive woulds on my hands, but the scars are difficult to see as time goes on.)

My reaction was so violent that, afterward, I was filled with revulsion at what I had done to retaliate. This was way before I had ever questioned anything, so I couldn’t really get into it to see what was happening. On some level it was just a selfish acceptance of what I had done. But at that time, I decided to never strike out in violence again, no matter the situation.

In those days, I had an idea that kept me from violence. And that want kept me attached to the very thing I wanted to be free of. But now, without the idea, without the need to be non-violent, the violence simply stops.

There is only room for violence in thought. It does not exist beyond our mind.

I am not saying that any of this is so. But go inward and see it for yourself. Only you can clear these hurdles.

My comments were really in response to Takuin’s apparent suggestion that it is never necessary or desirable to take a contrary position.

When I mentioned that above, I didn’t mean to suggest that it occurs that way within you, or that you should try to make this happen within yourself. That is just the way it is lived within this organism. But there is absolutely nothing remarkable about what is happening here. I have no advantage over you in any way. But if the violence doesn’t live here, it doesn’t have to live there, either.

Don’t trust me! Go there and look around.

Takuin Minamoto’s last blog post..Rabbit Holes and Artistic Expression

As to arguing a drunk friend out of his keys. For me thats a no brainer. He can be mad at me in the morning,at least he would be alive to be so.

Mark’s last blog post..justa Wishen all the Mom’s out there a happy mothers day!

The idea of dissipating argument by not holding a position is a difficult one for me. Not too much of a problem in an abstract discussion, or even one which is less abstract but relatively inconsequential… But what about situations where refusing to take a position and make a stand could result in seriously adverse consequences? How does it go in a situation where my seriously drunk friend is about to drive home – should I not try to convince him it’s a bad idea? And if that turns into an argument? Or to take a really extreme example, what about the guy who pulls a knife and wants to stab me? Should I passively let him?

I’m not being argumentative, of course. This is a point I’ve struggled with for a long time – maybe you guys can finally make it clear to me.

In the end, I must agree with Adyashanti when discussing words, ideas, concepts and teachings: they are all just strategies employed to help the dreamer awaken. Not a direct quote, but pretty close. I simply wanted to add this little bit to the discussion.

No arguing what a concept. Your taking all the fun out of being married.:)

I like the way you said we only believe 100% in the things we don’t know to be true.That’s interesting to take a strong position on something without really knowing what we are talking about.

I like how Takuin says in closing. “It is absolutely beautiful when all positions disappear”. Voila, No arguing.

Mark’s last blog post..justa Wishen all the Mom’s out there a happy mothers day!

Why does one need to prove anything? To give something to the identity? To show that one has the right knowledge, or is an authority on some subject?

What happens when one argues? What is going on inwardly? In order to argue, one must have a contrary idea. Is this clear enough? You say thought is this, but I know it isn’t, so I will argue and say thought is that. That is it, more or less. What is happening there? Where is the energy and how is it being used?

In order to argue, one must hold the contrary position. That is an incredible waste of energy. But that is not the only wastage. In order have the contrary position, one must have the belief to support that position. All of this energy is going in to holding up the “correct” position, and in the mean time, there is no chance of living freely, or seeing naturally. If one holds the contrary position, it obscures the reality.

The contrary position is already decided beforehand, and is determined by belief. So when one argues, it is merely a reaction built upon what has come before. And what has come before has nothing to do with what is happening now. Is this clear?

There is no contrary position in liberation. That is the dualistic domain of the self. Being present requires all the energy one can muster. Any wastage of that energy on holding up the past, using it as a lens, a shield, or a barometer, places one in a world of imagery and illusion.

I wonder if this is clear to anyone reading this?

It isn’t good or bad, right or wrong. In liberation there is no need to argue, as there is no one to hold a contrary position. Takuin can say all of this, but unless one is there, it is meaningless. Go there and find out how this moves within you. It is absolutely beautiful when all positions disappear.

Takuin Minamoto’s last blog post..Rabbit Holes and Artistic Expression

The flip side of the coin, closely related, is resistance. What we resist persists. It requires constant energy to keep resisting what we don’t want to see. Much like the illusion, all we have to do is stop for a moment. Then its seen through and allowed. It turns out what we have resisted is much less scary than all the energy we’ve put into avoiding it.

In the east, they call this the wheel of karma. The repeaters that come back over and over again. Resisting what is or holding what isn’t. Just stop and allow and the wheel slows then stops.

Davidya’s last blog post..Living the Dream

Evan’s last blog post..Add Joy to Your Life by Playing