Tuesday, 10 April 2012



Tolerance is a word that I feel gets a heavy bashing these days without it being really understood properly. In as far as I can see it is the word describing the act of allowance without committal acceptance. That is to say we tolerate something even if we don't like it or believe in it ourselves. Or we put up with it because it is there and cannot sensibly be removed. A kind of ying and yang, or a trust that for everything good there equally must be some bad.
Here are a couple of examples of how I see that we use tolerance.

  1. The sun is beating down on us and the heat is relevant to the time of year, our place on the surface of the earth and a whole lot of other determining facts. To tolerate this we either, go somewhere cooler, shade ourselves from it, or slap on some U.V. Sunscreen and enjoy it.
  2. Our neighbour is a real pain in the ass, because they play drums until late at night, which keeps both us and our children awake. To tolerate this we can either, call the police and have him arrested for disturbance of the peace, we can sell up and move house, or we can buy some head/ear protection to drown out the sound of him drumming, because he is Cozy Powell the most amazing drummer in the world, or go round there and enjoy the party because he did invite us. (Yes I know that you are all adding your own suggestions to the list...) (In Britain you can't get a gun and do that...)
  3. We move to a country where their laws are different from the ones we were brought up with, and we don't want to marginalise our beliefs on right and wrong. (Dependant upon whether there is freedom of action/speech in this country or not) To tolerate this we make a choice about what is more important to us or bow to the law of that land regardless. Do we perhaps accept that the law of this country is our law now, or do we inculcate our own above the law of that land, because we 'know' ours is better?
  4. We are in a country that says that they believe in freedom of speech and of religion, and that also pushes one particular religion as 'the nations religion', despite the evidence that in the formulation of those countries many peoples from around the globe (coming with their own religious/social/economic/cultural values) were adopted as co-workers/founders of those countries and nations. To tolerate this do we, now evict all those people who's ancestors came and died in the formation of our great nation, move to a desert island and set up our own laws, shoot everyone who disagrees with us, or send them to a detention centre without trial for many years ????
    Or do we say hey, the constitution upon which our civilisation is built is actually only workable, when we actually fully adhere to it, despite that some feelings of hatred/dislike, towards another's views exists ??
For the record I am adding now a dictionary statement about what this word means, as I could have misunderstood the word, as I often do these days.
Collins on-line dictionary version.

tolerance (ˈtɒlərəns



  1. the state or quality of being tolerant
  2. capacity to endure something, esp pain or hardship
  3. the permitted variation in some measurement or other characteristic of an object or workpiece
  4. physiology the capacity of an organism to endure the effects of a poison or other substance, esp after it has been taken over a prolonged period


  • "Live and let live" J.C.F. Schiller
  • "Tolerance is only another name for indifference" W. Somerset Maugham
  • "Tolerance should really be only a temporary attitude; it must lead to recognition" Goethe

Usage examples

  • I endured all the preparations and the panics with amused tolerance.
    Harris, Elizabeth, Time of the Wolf (1994)
  • We have always had, and always will have, a policy of zero tolerance.
    Cycling Weekly (2004)
  • Nothing is being done or seen to be done and the aspiration of zero tolerance is long since forgotten," he said.
    Irish Times (2002)
  • Ministers were also expected to ask for views on whether the government should go ahead with " tolerance zones" for street prostitution.
    Liverpool Daily Post and Echo (2004)
  • This quality of tolerance was matched with a sense of humour.
    Stewart Lamont, WHEN SCOTLAND RULED THE WORLD: The Story of the Golden Age of Genius, Creativity and Exploration (2002)

So as you can see, tolerance is all about being broad minded, sympathetic, patient, open minded and lenient. I would add (hopefully not out of context) agreeable, amenable, allowance, and compassionate.

The first thing about this whole subject that struck me as I contemplated writing it was that it is pretty well a subjective debate. It rests wholly on the assumption that there is, either a RIGHT or a WRONG. Tolerance therefore is dependant upon the basis upon which you would determine either of those labels.

If, for example you were a butterfly none of this matters in your day to day being a beautiful creature. If you were a cat or a dog, this would have no bearing over the issue of where your next meal was coming from.

Sentience has no bearing upon it either.

But if you are a HUMAN BEING, you have a (some would say) God given right to make these kind of judgements.
So if your indoctrination, education, social or economic foundation is based upon some belief of right or wrong, then subsequently your decisions are then based around those ideas to. And logically if you are right then the rest must be wrong, for order and reason to exist...

I feel it reasonable to conclude then, that dependant upon where you were born geographically speaking, that will have a huge if not almost overwhelming importance as to how you evaluate any given topic.

Clearly any amount of permutations exist, so we won't need to go into a detailed response to every single one, sufficed as to say we will deal with some of the most obvious and common ethical/religious/social differences.

(The following assessments are based upon a present day view.)

So if you are born in the United States of America, your views are based supposedly, upon the CONSTITUTION of the U.S.A. You are permitted to join/follow any religious, economic, social group you chose, providing that they don't try to live outside of the constitutional law. Seems very reasonable to me. (I don't live there though)
If you were born in Britain, then similarly you can do/be who you want, as long as you adhere to the law of the land, and don't commit treason to the Monarchy. (One does reside here, lol)
If you were born in Italy then you likely were born into Catholicism and a fairly open minded democracy. Fascism has been eradicated over recent decades. Same for Spain in most cases.
If you were born in Israel, then you are fairly sure to be a Jew, and live under laws laid down by the faith descendants of Abraham. The ten commandments and such.
If you were born in Northern East Africa, Egypt or Saudi Arabia, then you are more likely to be a Muslim and live according to Sharia law.
If you were born in China or Tibet, then you are likely born into Buddhism, and follow either the Dalai Lama or the Laws of the Chinese government.
If you were born in India, depending upon which region, you are likely to be either Hindu, Sikh, Jain, or Buddhist
If you were born in South America you are either a follower of whatever Jungle tribe you hail, or a Catholic or Christian.(Dependant upon which invading force got there first)

So I think that covers the majority of scenarios. (I won't be offended if you have other ideas as to my inclusivity, I swear)

I believe that if we were able to decide for ourselves and not have to follow the one religious or ideological pattern set out for us by our ancestors, then our ability to tolerate would be dramatically increased. I don't see children finding this difficult, as I watch the way in which, in most cases they are very open to inclusivity, only excluding when they are taught to. I am fabled for being all too simplistic, yes that's true, so I realise that what I say may have a grating, nauseating affect upon some of you, but please try to look beyond the simplistic nature of my comments to a road that we can all walk along, whatever our chosen idea of RIGHT or WRONG.

I SEE IT IS ABSOLUTLEY POSSIBLE, for me to hold my views and opinions whilst other also have theirs, and we still live happily and peacefully on this planet. I haven't concluded my views are the ONLY right ones, as I daily adapt them to include new discovery and understanding. They are simply RIGHT for me now, today, (and possibly only me) but none the less right for me to follow and try to accept and tolerate everyone else. I see tolerance as the route to any real and lasting peace in our world. Sure I don't want to live by Sharia law, because I don't believe or accept the basis upon which it was founded. I don't want to live under the law of my land for pretty well the same reasons.

HOWEVER, I do live here in this society and WILL abide by their laws, as far as is humanly possible, because I am not a rebel who wants to cause chaos or live as a totally free entity, otherwise my choice would be that island one.
(There are a couple of exceptions to this statement. (1) If they ask me to kill or be involved in killing another Human Being. (2) Be cruel to anyone intentionally or to other sentient beings. (3) Worship gods I do not believe in, be they heavenly or material)
I am a lover of Peace and Harmony and Love. These beliefs are the motivational factors in any of my present daily decisions. I will do my utmost to inculcate them at every turn of the road as I walk through my life, and if I fail it will be as a result of nothing short of exhaustion or ignorance. Hey I'm not perfect, but I'm doing my bit to make the world a better place. Better means more enjoyable for everyone, more fair and sharing with a compassionate spirit.

So in finale, have you seen what tolerance can be? What it can do to save the world from complete ruin?

Maybe if we all push, just that little bit harder, toward a global understanding and tolerance, we could all see world peace in our time.

I have been a follower of James and Salle Redfields attempts for a long time now. As too those of the Dalai Lama, and many more wonderful people who care enough to sacrifice their entire lives for the cause of global peace. I am in awe of these great spirits, Mahatma Gandhi being amongst the list of incredible motivators to the peace on earth wave of concern. Please take a look at what they are doing with regards to the global shift in consciousness of the critical mass. Loads of love to you both James and Salle.

Poems By Peaceful Warrior about this.

The 14th Dalai Lama
(a peaceful warrior)


Face Book

My hands go out to you all in friendship, to hug you and care for you, and offer a hand of support and comfort on the road to experience.

May you come to shine as the sun, and share love that is abundant.

And just before you go away thinking you are not tolerant enough/too tolerant, have a look at something I just found that has really touched me as I hope it will you also.

Thank you Pamelanred

I'm touched xx
Peaceful Warrior. 

Friday, 6 April 2012



What really is loneliness ?

Does it affect you ?

Can you ever be free from it ?

I was surprised to read that the 14th Dalai Lama, has been recorded as saying that he never feels lonely, or suffers from being lonely. This statement seems somehow alien to my concept of this topic. But as I am a huge fan of this man, I read with interest as to how he would describe his answer in more detail. When asked by the writer Howard C. Cutler if he ever felt lonely his answer was simply no.

The question was then put to him to explain why he wasn't prone to any feelings of loneliness, and he goes on to explain. It would appear that he views each encounter with a sentient being with a perspective of compassion. With this attitude he feels connected with all things, because they both share a certain common ground, and thus he eliminates the need or even the experience of feeling lonely. Wow, what a simple yet effective method, if it works in practice. It would appear that it does if you have ever seen anything of this man.

So I thought, well he's constantly surrounded by people, apart from his 4 hours of meditation each morning. He is inundated with visitors and well wishers and seekers of wisdom so how would he have time to feel lonely ? But he goes on to explain, that there is a marked difference between being alone, and being lonely. The problem we as westerners seem to have is that we have adopted a dramatically more romantic connection to the subject of intimacy. The Dalai lama says that intimacy is the key to losing any feelings of loneliness. Using it and understanding what it is. So let's see if he's right.

We in our society see intimacy as something held sacred, between two or several willing and consenting people, usually with regards to sexual relationships. We see that it is not possible, nay frowned upon to be intimate with anyone except our spouse, girl/boyfriend, or partner. Almost as if it is taboo to think of being intimate with anyone else for fear of offending our loved one, or society in general. And we seem to revere the union of fidelity as if it is the highest of all achievements, yet often fail miserably to come anywhere near to living with it.

If we look back a little way in history we will see that things were very different centuries ago. This new romantic kind of expectation came in around the end of the 18th century. Before that men and women shared far more common intimacy regularly. I'm not talking about just with regards to sexual fidelity, but with physical contact. Somewhere we developed a calling to see that 'one special person' with an almost angelic reverence. A pedestal that few could reach, hence the feeling of elevation to a higher plain of importance. Ironically a place no-one would be able to reach, as we set the pedestal so unbelievably high.

Understanding what intimacy is might help.

According to the Collins on-line dictionary.

intimacy (ˈɪntɪməsɪPronunciation for intimacy



  1. close or warm friendship or understanding; personal relationship
  2. (often plural) euphemistic sexual relations

You see initially I thought that this was only about sexual things, but clearly familiarity/closeness/understanding and confidence are all a major part of this word.

So to put this into a better context, I now better understand why the Tibetan and other eastern approaches are far more enlightened as to what intimacy is and how it can be used. So the Dalai Lama can use this connection of compassion to become close to others in ways of understanding and familiarity and be better able to enjoy the fruits of his time, rather than concerning himself over doubts as to more destructive thinking. This is possibly why we as westerners suffer so much when we feel let down by our significant others, wives, husbands, partners, because we place such a high and almost impossible task ahead of them.

If we simply were close to, cared for and were in contact with these people, wouldn't we feel more happy?

Try to see things differently and the world opens up to you, as it has for me, by considering more opinions and viewpoints. Maybe the world is not a tragedy, but a world where anything is possible, as long as we try to include and tolerate others perspectives.

So if we think that loneliness is just not being in close intimate contact with someone, why not try to include more people and get closer to them. (obviously I'm not encouraging sleeping around or infidelity) I am merely saying, stop seeing it as the thing to be feared. A hug a smile, a pat on the back, a hand up now and again is all it takes to feel more connected. As wild as it seems, I have seen a lot of this between guys (who incidentally are supposed to be macho and not affectionate toward other men) when they are in the pub, the football dressing room, they often touch one another in acts of (more subliminally overlooked) intimacy. It is beautiful to see, even if they are unaware how necessary it actually is for their sense of worth in company.

If we continue to evaluate everything within the confines of intimacy only being allowed between sexual partners, then we are going to miss out on opportunities to feel good and happy about our relationships with others. So how we see intimacy will affect our state of loneliness, or our liberation to pure happiness and joy.

Finally, yes is the answer.

To whether we will ever be able to be free of loneliness.

Go from here determined to contact/interact with more people. Become deeply involved with them in acts of sharing, caring, touching (appropriately) them as friends and fellow human beings. Don't sit and wallow in pity at having no friends, be a true friend and others will flock to you, for they will feel welcomed and cared for. 

Take heart from my post, you are on the road to recovery when you realise there is a problem, and get stuck into dealing with it. It won't be easy, but it is better than getting lost completely in a world of your own.
Big hugs,
Peaceful Warrior.