This excerpt is from a conversation at a table in the Jewel Café on June 27, 2019, some of the questioners comments are paraphrased.
Q: I once asked you whether there was a code for true community. You said yes, but this is not an intentional community. I understand that the community is not here for the sake of community: it’s grown because of our response to you. My question is about how we hold, care, relate to each other in this community. Different projects that have occurred have brought up the expectation or entitlement that exists around fairness in terms of people having access to you, to being invited and included. I’m trying to work out what the fine balance is in inclusion and fairness. Because we’re not actually here for that …
Q: Fairness is an issue that is perhaps more in the self than in the beyond …
Q: So the question is, it seems like we’re trying to accommodate that in some way. If we just let that go completely, whoever hosts a gathering invites you and you come or you don’t. It’s as simple as that.
Q: And if the same people get invited every time then the same people get invited every time. So it really is that simple: there’s nothing for us to hold in that. People like me who are involved in holding some of this, is there nothing for us to hold in that?
What there is to hold in that is that fairness isn’t it. The perspective of fairness is really short-sighted. What matters more is: who would be most important to be at those gatherings for the whole of the community? That doesn’t apply to everyone.
Q: So is it more that we can all hold the true perspective of what they’re for, that that would help people who don’t have that perspective?
Q: If those who get it could stand in it, that would help. I feel clear about it. When you say the people who would be most important to have at those gatherings, is that in terms of what they can speak about: their being able to be in dialogue with you and bring out points? Can you speak more about who is most worth having at those? It’s about moving what’s moving, but bringing it out verbally.
It’s not more about that, but it also isn’t without that.
Q: So it wouldn’t necessarily be moving it in silent connection with you.
And they may not say much but what they say moves a lot. Moves those who are listening, pulls them in. In this community there isn’t an inner circle, but there is truth to the workings of what is like an inner circle. An inner circle is something that becomes fixed and part of the culture, whereas those who are coming into something new or moving in something more strongly, or just different things in that, if they are in an organic way being drawn in to more gatherings than other people would be drawn into, that’s important because the group needs that. They need that more than others need it, and that’s also something that’s rotating: more with some than others, but it is in a state of flux.
Q: And those people may not even be visible. They might not be known by others to be going through a deep, internal …
Q: Because your presence would be a quickening for that.
Yes. Where I see that, I also make a point with some impromptu gatherings to include these people.
Q: That’s helpful because it is often not obvious that certain people are really moving.
Q: Do they know that you ask for them to be there, usually?
Q: I really love you using the word ‘organic’. There are these elements that are in play: you inviting somebody, the hosts inviting who they are responding to, all kinds of dynamics involved and it’s always moving. It seems every time we do something to include the community a certain amount of structure needs to be there, but it has to balance with this opportunity for being organic. That balance is something to hold, perhaps. What would happen if we said to people that sometimes people are invited because John is saying that he is including them?
It is all so bumpy, because as soon as that’s said, then anyone who’s really starting to move and they’re not being included, that means I’m not making a point of having them there which means maybe they’re not moving in what they think they are.
Q: Or maybe John didn’t see me!
Yes. It’s all fraught with difficulty. And I’m very relaxed about it and have a sense of balance. And, not everyone needs it. Everyone at some point in their inner development needs to go through a deeper level isolation within.
Q: I also see there’s this value in this being brought into the seminar because it does press on things, creates pressures that people are then in in the seminar that people are addressing. It’s not a smooth ride. How do people truly evaluate where they are if they ask someone to be included or not? That’s about honesty.
Honesty, which includes letting go of the need of self-evaluation.
Q: Then how does that really look?
Being okay in having a growing perspective of not being included. That’s a necessary preparation.
Q: It strengthens what’s in the unseen.
Q: Did you say a growing perspective?
If we’re in a small perspective there isn’t anything real that can address that. The small perspective doesn’t want to be addressed.
Q: So in a way it supports us in developing our bigger perspective. You’re going to sink or swim. If you’re continually not invited.
Everyone swims. Although some not well.
Q: Everyone finds their way?
Some just quietly treading water because they have no idea what direction to go in. Others know their direction and they’re moving in it.
Q: So the fact that someone might get upset about not going to any gathering this seminar, that’s not going to stop them swimming?
That’s sinking or thrashing.
Q: That’s what I mean. So some could.
Anyone who’s upset about anything, on any level, anywhere in their life, in the moments of upsetness they’re not listening within. The antedote to really taking that on everywhere in your life is quietly stepping into integrating what it is to be a golden doormat. That introduces levels of greater perspective that you’re starting to live by, and it’s really difficult sorting all of that through.