>>On Fri,14 Feb 1997 19:41:29 -0500 Robert White wrote among other things>
>... I promise to never make that mistake again...
     Robert, " jamais toujours jamais "
     It's not the first, not even the last, "(;^))
 
>When it comes to the dialectics/rhetoric I tend to borrow from
>Nietzsche and assert that vengeance must be overcome.
 
     What is overcame isn't vengeance.The most one can do is deal with his
     ( her ) own " death air ", keeping contact,  because when this is not
     done vengeance is impossible to be even percepted. It just comes as
     even unknown, something natural ( remember that revenge is a dish
     to be served cold ).
 
     What I mean is that real vengeance may not even be felt.
     What is called here as vengeance has a proper name: revenge.
 
     So on I agree with " Nitch" ;) revenge must be overcome, not vengeance.
 
     We may even think if Justice should be vengeance and vengeance, Justice.
     It reminds me " greek tragodias".
     And also if neurosis isn't a vengeance? What about??
     And Human Life ???
     Well I prefer vengeance as the realm of every ecosystem.
 
 
>The Buddhist position is to do the same thing. Freud himself could not
>overcome vengence and we see apt indication of this in many of the comments
>he made about his colleagues and even 'America'.
 
     Forgive Freud, he was the only one who did not pass through the
     " eye of the needle " himself ( excuse me use the words of another
     Jew ) , compare him to Marx, both saw too long ahead their time.
 
     I think that " America " has always wanted a revenge on Freud and
     is trying to do a little one, just as some of his " colleagues ".
     Maybe, except for Clinton, the last four Presidents made a reveange
     on Marx, don't you think?
 
     Freud had a few friends and a lot of enemies, just like in our days,
     we may see around in our " associations ".
     Talking about Buddhism, I would like to listen to Dalai Lamas'thoughts
     about Chinese Government. Vengeance or revenge?
 
 
 
> I have always been perturbed over Freud's statement that
>he needed an enemy in light of what he knew about the reasons for his
>own needs?
 
     What about vengeance, obsessive thinking,  and hard work ?????
 
 
 
> Perception of 'love/hate' as extremes might be what is pathological as
>Hampden-turner suggests..Frankly, my 'three idols' died years ago. Marx
will >always be my numer one fallen idol.
 
    If you see as spirals I agree, but if you see as a circle, I do not agree.
    Great loves end under three conditions: death , another great love or hate.
    We are talking about Human Nature and recursivism.
 
    Imagine if your " number one " had not fall !!!!!!!!
 
 
>Zen masters state that love and hate are products of one in the same thing.
>In other words, a monism/monastic theology.
 
    Products of the same thing,,, thinking...
    But, there's always one but, they're different expressions of deep
    Animal Nature not of thinking , and as far as Freud could see all his
work     is based on this expressional duality.
    Except for 1895 Project.Which I admire a lot, first than any other work.
 
    " Touche'e'"
    Osmar