[Buddha-l] Shamatha book--clarification

[Franz Metcalf]

Curt et al.,

I'm glad, Curt, that you "always find honesty admirable - especially 
when it is combined with clear expression - as is the case with 
Batchelor." Where you and I differ really does seem to be on what 
constitutes courage. You reiterate that in your view Batchelor's life, 
including those aspects I single out, reveals "nothing courageous 
here."

We just disagree on courage, then, so enough about that. But there are 
two more points you make that (again!) mystify me.

1) You write "Jung knew that the West needed to (and still needs to) 
drink deeply from the spiritual waters of the East. So what if it 
tastes funny - of course it does after being raised on industrial 
sludge." But if you've read _The Undiscovered Self_ surely you've also 
read his warnings against Westerners' becoming Buddhist. He was serious 
about that, as well, and wanted us to reconnect with the roots of our 
own culture, as you rightly point out. To me, Jung and Batchelor are 
doing almost *exactly the same thing* on the cultural level. So I'm 
mystified why you would contrast them here.

2) You quote me and comment:

>> And now he's not merely facing the fact that what he reviled is, in 
>> fact, deep and vital; he's actually *using* it to critically better 
>> himself and the culture he sprung from.
>
> The phrase "I Love Big Brother" comes to mind.

I'm not trying to be coy here; I really don't know what you're getting 
at. I have a bemused suspicion you're saying I remind you of an 
Orwellian prole because I admire Stephen Batchelor. Could you possibly 
be *doing* that? As Bart Simpson would say, the irony is so delicious.

Franz