Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] What Ails Thee?

Expand Messages
  • engemi
    Thanks for this, Val and needless to say, if this was the question Perceval should have asked Amfortas, it could have turned out to have a different effect on
    Message 1 of 5 , Dec 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Thanks for this, Val
      and needless to say, if this was the question Perceval should have asked
      Amfortas, it could have turned out to have a different effect on his
      journey, but then, Perceval never even realised his uncle was ailing. At
      least you saw how sick your cat was and could go for a cure.

      In the world today it seems to me the same. Few of the real ailments are
      noticed. and because of so many words (most of them devoid of truth), so
      many ideas and theories - on paper, in books and the media, on the air
      whether radiowaves or cyberspace, and of course on the world wide web, even
      on this list here - encrouching ever more around us, seemingly darkening the
      etheric where the ultimate Healer must appear again, we all miss what are in
      front of us. Only when real disaster strikes, whether personal or national,
      there comes a moment of stillness (the eye - I - of the storm) and only
      then, if I am aware, can I find truth. My own truth: the truth of my I.

      This is not the I AM, because the I AM has been. See how John the Baptist
      tried to steer clear of being named that. One other advantage of your
      rethought question, is that in focussing on the cure and not the ailment,
      the tendency to judge becomes less.

      The truth of my I (methinks) is that of Be Coming, not AM-ing

      Peace
      engemi


      ~~~~~~~~


      > What Ails Thee? That is the question. The great quest of our
      > time, of our day. Or is it? Is it? IS IT? That is the first question,
      > and, as in the case of Gertrude Stein, the last question...
      >
      > Last month my family's Persian six year old cat got out of the
      > house overnight. She is a total housecat and we were having
      > some work done in the house and she slipped out-we feared
      > that she had run away. But she came back in the morning
      > obviously "under the weather" with something like tar on her fur.
      > We cut the tar off and welcomed her back but she was lethargic
      > and refused to eat.
      >
      > Well, I wasn't too concerned as she was still drinking but the next
      > day she began to show signs of dehydration. On the third day
      > she lay on her side with her legs extended straight out and rigid
      > and it looked like the end was near so I took her to the Vet. The
      > Vet said she was in acute kidney failure which could be due to
      > infection, antifreeze ingestion, or chronic kidney disease and
      > that her educated guess was that it was actually a chronic
      > condition. Now the way this was explained to me is that a cat,
      > especially a Persian, can have an underlying hereditary kidney
      > dysfunction that is never apparent until there is a stress-the
      > family goes out of town, the household and cat moves to a new
      > house, the cat goes out on an all-nighter.
      >
      > Well, I was still hanging on to the premise that I came in
      > with-which was the cat got into something that looked like tar-but
      > this underlying chronic condition made sense to me and, if true,
      > the prognosis wasn't good. So now there were four different
      > possibilities regarding my ailing cat and the Vet wanted to
      > perform the various diagnostics to determine which was
      > "correct" and what couse of treatment would be the most
      > effective to the tune of $500-700. Another $700-900 to provide
      > around the clock care for three days which is what she estimated
      > Snoball would require.
      >
      > So I have to say I really didn't care what was wrong with the cat,
      > and you might say well that was your cat but I've been in this
      > situation with my children many times and it's never been very
      > relevant to me what the diagnosis is, what exactly is wrong with
      > them. What I wanted to know, what I always want to know, need
      > to know, is what is the cure? In this case, regardless of the
      > cause the treatment would include immediate hydration. And
      > that's what I left the clinic with-a cat with an I.V. and a bag of
      > fluids and she is fine today, thank you very much.
      >
      > So I would submit that the question is really What Cures Thee?
      > That this is the question that we should be asking. And this is
      > not, emphatically not, to say that we shouldn't be looking at,
      > shouldn't be recognizing dis-ease or dysfunction when we see it.
      > To have looked upon my cat rigid and dying in the middle of the
      > floor and say to my children-gee, but doesn't she have a beautiful
      > coat, lovely eyes, nice teeth, a wonderful disposition, whatever
      > would have been immoral, IMO.
      >
      > The reason being is that it was within my power to assist the cat.
      > If the cat were dead, or beyond human help then yeah, it would
      > be appropriate to focus on all her positive attributes. But she was
      > still, at that point, a living breathing creature with the potential for
      > health. And the appropriate question was, in my mind, what
      > would restore health, not what was wrong with her. I did not need
      > to know what was wrong with her-why-because the bottom line
      > in healing as far as I have seen is to strengthen the etheric. What
      > supports the etheric, what supports health, what strengthens,
      > what builds, what restores, what completes-this is the question
      > that has mattered to me.
      >
      > Not to harp on this point but you of course, have to perceive the
      > problem in the first place-you have to recognize the disease as a
      > necessary first step. To focus on the positive in the face of
      > potential death and disease to the extent of non-action with
      > some type of what will be will be mentality is to be in denial or
      > lala land more specifically. To look for the positive-to re-member
      > that there is an antidote for every "dote" and to seek in earnest for
      > it, is the work.-Val
      >
    • isenhart7
      ... No, thank you Engimi! Of course you are right this was Parcival s question because Parcival was a complete fool, as we all are, being entertained in the
      Message 2 of 5 , Dec 1, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "engemi"
        <chameleon@s...> wrote:
        >
        > Thanks for this, Val

        No, thank you Engimi! Of course you are right this was Parcival's
        question because Parcival was a complete fool, as we all are,
        being entertained in the castle, being too courteous (bound by
        convention) to share his perception. He percieved something
        was off, did he not? But he didn't ask. I was thinking about this
        after I wrote it and in a way they are two sides of the same
        question, what ails thee and what cures thee...if you look at it in
        the sense of the question being what is missing-it's still a
        question of what's lacking. The difference is that in asking what
        would restore health and well-being I am assuming that there is
        something that exists in reality that would, in fact, be available.
        Be available if I asked the question.

        So I can look around me and ask "what's wrong with this picture"
        and I can come up with quiet a few ideas. I think you're right-this
        is what is going on in the world today-we are living in this world
        of all these competing theories and people can get lost in them,
        confused by them, and settle-settle for something that "sounds
        reasonable". And they don't ask, we don't ask-not out of
        convention in the honoring tradition sense but out of the context
        of the answers just being too complex-out of in a sense the new
        convention of our time-honoring specialization.

        Anyway, this is something I've been thinking a lot about lately-that
        it might serve to ask what is needed by an individual rather than
        what is wrong with them and again, like you said, it seems to
        take the judgement aspect out of the conversation. On the other
        hand, if you do this, you may find as I have that many people can't
        tell you, don't know, themselves what their needs are.

        So now I'm going to tell a tell a tale out of school-something I
        should not do, would not do-tattle on myself and my fellow
        anthros but drastic times call for drastic measures and the truth
        is this is the most dramatic illustration that I can think of-you
        know makes for good copy.

        A few years back I was in a meeting and I can't remember what I
        was bringing that was so infuriating but another member (an
        anthroposophist) of the group was livid with me, wagging his
        finger right in my face and spitting at me as he spoke he asked
        why it was that he perceived that I was a conspiracy theorist. And
        I said, I had no idea but that this raised a question for me." What
        is it," I asked, "in your psyche that requires me to wear a black
        hat so that you are able to wear the white hat?" And at this he
        almost lept out of his chair, as he burst out with "I don't know,
        WHAT?" This was a very sincere question-like he wanted to
        know but I could only respond that I had no idea on that one
        either-that that was his work to find out. Pretty much I batted the
        big zero in this exchange.

        You know, us girls, how we have to sometimes process things
        so I related this conversation to a good friend, also an
        anthroposophist, and when I said he asked why he perceived
        that I was a conspiracy theorist-she said "Well, because you
        are". And then when I related his next question she asked-"Well,
        didn't you just love him in that moment, wow don't you just love
        him now?" And I said NO, I didn't love him in that moment-the
        man had been spitting like a reptile in my face. And it has taken
        me years to come to love this man. Years. Actually, I'm just a
        hair beyond lukewarm now about him.

        It seems to me that the questions here were the wrong ones.
        What's wrong with you that I am perceiving this, what's wrong
        with you that you would perceive this about me seems a
        distortion of Parzival's question "What Ails Thee". These are the
        words-three words, NO MORE, no less. The lens that is required
        is THE OTHER PERSON'S. They are in the position to know what
        is bugging them, if anything.-Val
      • dottie zold
        Hi Ladies, I think for me, I feel an inner pain, which is where the question comes from. I find that when I ask this question it is out of what is hurting you
        Message 3 of 5 , Dec 1, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Ladies,

          I think for me, I feel an inner pain, which is where the question
          comes from. I find that when I ask this question it is out of 'what
          is hurting you so much? Not really, 'what is wrong with you' but what
          is hurting you so much'? And then the next question for me
          becomes 'How can I help', 'Is there anything I can be of service
          too'? That' is how it feels in me. It is a heart question and not a
          mind question for me or a judgement one? Although I can see depending
          on the mindsets of both it could be taken either way.

          d


          > > Thanks for this, Val
          >
          > No, thank you Engimi! Of course you are right this was Parcival's
          > question because Parcival was a complete fool, as we all are,
          > being entertained in the castle, being too courteous (bound by
          > convention) to share his perception. He percieved something
          > was off, did he not? But he didn't ask. I was thinking about this
          > after I wrote it and in a way they are two sides of the same
          > question, what ails thee and what cures thee...if you look at it in
          > the sense of the question being what is missing-it's still a
          > question of what's lacking. The difference is that in asking what
          > would restore health and well-being I am assuming that there is
          > something that exists in reality that would, in fact, be available.
          > Be available if I asked the question.
          >
          > So I can look around me and ask "what's wrong with this picture"
          > and I can come up with quiet a few ideas. I think you're right-this
          > is what is going on in the world today-we are living in this world
          > of all these competing theories and people can get lost in them,
          > confused by them, and settle-settle for something that "sounds
          > reasonable". And they don't ask, we don't ask-not out of
          > convention in the honoring tradition sense but out of the context
          > of the answers just being too complex-out of in a sense the new
          > convention of our time-honoring specialization.
          >
          > Anyway, this is something I've been thinking a lot about lately-
          that
          > it might serve to ask what is needed by an individual rather than
          > what is wrong with them and again, like you said, it seems to
          > take the judgement aspect out of the conversation. On the other
          > hand, if you do this, you may find as I have that many people can't
          > tell you, don't know, themselves what their needs are.
          >
          > So now I'm going to tell a tell a tale out of school-something I
          > should not do, would not do-tattle on myself and my fellow
          > anthros but drastic times call for drastic measures and the truth
          > is this is the most dramatic illustration that I can think of-you
          > know makes for good copy.
          >
          > A few years back I was in a meeting and I can't remember what I
          > was bringing that was so infuriating but another member (an
          > anthroposophist) of the group was livid with me, wagging his
          > finger right in my face and spitting at me as he spoke he asked
          > why it was that he perceived that I was a conspiracy theorist. And
          > I said, I had no idea but that this raised a question for me." What
          > is it," I asked, "in your psyche that requires me to wear a black
          > hat so that you are able to wear the white hat?" And at this he
          > almost lept out of his chair, as he burst out with "I don't know,
          > WHAT?" This was a very sincere question-like he wanted to
          > know but I could only respond that I had no idea on that one
          > either-that that was his work to find out. Pretty much I batted the
          > big zero in this exchange.
          >
          > You know, us girls, how we have to sometimes process things
          > so I related this conversation to a good friend, also an
          > anthroposophist, and when I said he asked why he perceived
          > that I was a conspiracy theorist-she said "Well, because you
          > are". And then when I related his next question she asked-"Well,
          > didn't you just love him in that moment, wow don't you just love
          > him now?" And I said NO, I didn't love him in that moment-the
          > man had been spitting like a reptile in my face. And it has taken
          > me years to come to love this man. Years. Actually, I'm just a
          > hair beyond lukewarm now about him.
          >
          > It seems to me that the questions here were the wrong ones.
          > What's wrong with you that I am perceiving this, what's wrong
          > with you that you would perceive this about me seems a
          > distortion of Parzival's question "What Ails Thee". These are the
          > words-three words, NO MORE, no less. The lens that is required
          > is THE OTHER PERSON'S. They are in the position to know what
          > is bugging them, if anything.-Val
          >
        • sky
          Well, eventually you will have to ask WHERE does it hurt , otherwise you might find yourself pulling out a healthy tooth instead of the decayed one... Asking
          Message 4 of 5 , Dec 1, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Well, eventually you will have to ask "WHERE does it hurt", otherwise
            you might find yourself pulling out a healthy tooth instead of the
            decayed one...
            Asking "what ails you" is just the beginning - not the end of the
            journey. You will have to muster up the courage to ask why and where as
            well...

            My three cents, -sky-




            On Dec 1, 2005, at 7:28 PM, dottie zold wrote:

            > Hi Ladies,
            >
            > I think for me, I feel an inner pain, which is where the question
            > comes from. I find that when I ask this question it is out of 'what
            > is hurting you so much? Not really, 'what is wrong with you' but what
            > is hurting you so much'? And then the next question for me
            > becomes 'How can I help', 'Is there anything I can be of service
            > too'? That' is how it feels in me. It is a heart question and not a
            > mind question for me or a judgement one? Although I can see depending
            > on the mindsets of both it could be taken either way.
            >
            > d
            >
            >
            > > > Thanks for this, Val
            > >
            > > No, thank you Engimi!  Of course you are right this was Parcival's
            > > question because Parcival was a complete fool, as we all are,
            > > being entertained in the castle, being too courteous (bound by
            > > convention) to share his perception. He percieved something
            > > was off, did he not? But he didn't ask. I was thinking about this
            > > after I wrote it and in a way they are two sides of the same
            > > question, what ails thee and what cures thee...if you look at it in
            > > the sense of the question being what is missing-it's still a
            > > question of what's lacking. The difference is that in asking what
            > > would restore health and well-being I am assuming that there is
            > > something that exists in reality that would, in fact, be available.
            > > Be available if I asked the question.
            > >
            > > So I can look around me and ask "what's wrong with this picture"
            > > and I can come up with quiet a few ideas. I think you're right-this
            > > is what is going on in the world today-we are living in this world
            > > of all these competing theories and people can get lost  in them,
            > > confused by them, and settle-settle for something that "sounds
            > > reasonable". And they don't ask, we don't ask-not out of
            > > convention in the honoring tradition sense but out of the context
            > > of the answers just being too complex-out of in a sense the new
            > > convention of our time-honoring specialization.
            > >
            > > Anyway, this is something I've been thinking a lot about lately-
            > that
            > > it might serve to ask what is needed by an individual rather than
            > > what is wrong with them and again, like you said, it seems to
            > > take the judgement aspect out of the conversation. On the other
            > > hand, if you do this, you may find as I have that many people can't
            > > tell you, don't know, themselves what their needs are.
            > >
            > > So now I'm going to tell a tell a tale out of school-something I
            > > should not do, would not do-tattle on myself and my fellow
            > > anthros but drastic times call for drastic measures and the truth
            > > is this is the  most dramatic illustration that I can think of-you
            > > know makes for good copy.
            > >
            > > A few years back I was in a meeting and I can't remember what I
            > > was bringing that was so infuriating but another member (an
            > > anthroposophist) of the group was livid with me, wagging his
            > > finger right in my face and spitting at me as he spoke he asked
            > > why it was that he perceived  that I was a conspiracy theorist. And
            > > I said, I had no idea but that this raised a question for me." What
            > > is it," I asked, "in your psyche that requires me to wear a black
            > > hat so that you are able to wear the white hat?" And at this he
            > > almost lept out of his chair, as he burst out with "I don't know,
            > > WHAT?" This was a very sincere question-like he wanted to
            > > know but I could only respond that I had no idea on that one
            > > either-that that was his work to find out. Pretty much I batted the
            > > big zero in this exchange.
            > >
            > > You know, us girls, how we have to sometimes process things
            > > so I related this conversation to a good friend, also an
            > > anthroposophist, and when I said he asked why he perceived
            > > that I was a conspiracy theorist-she said "Well, because you
            > > are". And then when I related his next question she asked-"Well,
            > > didn't you just love him in that moment, wow don't you just love
            > > him now?" And I said NO, I didn't love him in that moment-the
            > > man had been spitting like a reptile in my face. And it has taken
            > > me years to come to love this man. Years.  Actually, I'm just a
            > > hair beyond lukewarm now about him.
            > >
            > > It seems to me that the questions here were the wrong ones.
            > > What's wrong with you that I am perceiving this, what's wrong
            > > with you that you would perceive this about me seems a
            > > distortion of Parzival's question "What Ails Thee". These are the
            > > words-three words, NO MORE, no less. The lens that is required
            > > is THE OTHER PERSON'S. They are in the position to know what 
            > > is bugging them, if anything.-Val
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
            >
            > ▪  Visit your group "anthroposophy_tomorrow" on the web.
            >  
            > ▪  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            >  anthroposophy_tomorrow-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >  
            > ▪  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
            > Service.
            >
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.