#TaoFu Self-Defense is a strategy for responding to temptation to vice with truth (honesty, including intellectual honesty) and virtue. Exercises will be provided here from time to time and some will be interactive while others you can practice on your own. Practicing these exercises will help you defend yourself against temptations to vice as well as those with whom you interact and their apparent commitment to vice at any given moment.
EXERCISE 1 (ON YOUR
OWN?):
Think about someone or
something you strongly dislike (and/or hate) and challenge yourself to
identify/come up with 5 things you like about him/her/it. The purpose of this exercise is to manage
your temptation to Wrath (i.e. Hate).
[Rev. Minister Angela
Smith's Commentary: I believe I am reasonably unable to come up with five
things I like about the man who sodomized me when I was 6 years old. In fact, I can't come up with a single thing
I like about that person. But, for a
time I've greatly disliked Hillary Clinton though recognize her good
sportsmanship in donating to
Donald Trump's campaign in 2016.
So, I understand if there are some people or some things you strongly
dislike and/or hate for which you can't even name a single thing you like about
them. In such a case, I suggest liking
knowing the fact that they are a temporary condition because their death or end
is guaranteed at some point and meditating on how unlikable the thing or person
you dislike is to you and how you'd feel if you were disliked to that extent by
someone else. If you think "If I
raped a child, I'd hate myself and commit suicide like Jeffrey Epstein or
request the death penalty like Westley A. Dodd," then you are not being
hypocritical if that's truly how you feel about someone who did that to you or
anyone else. Honesty is the best policy
and God doesn't require anyone pretend the vicious and deceptive are likable
but asks that you objectively review all available facts in context before
passing judgment and if you don't you are exhibiting the vice of prejudice to
some degree so may be in no position to judge fairly if at all.]
EXERCISE 2 (For individuals with trauma-related stress or anxiety):
Contemplate or meditate on the following question: "If someone in my environment is allergic to my favorite shampoo, am I responsible for changing shampoos or is the allergy sufferer responsible for addressing their particular issue?" In the event you do not use shampoo, Rev. Angela Smith is allergic to pitted fruits (i.e. peaches). In the event you do not use shampoo and/or do not eat or use pitted fruits such as peaches in any way, go with polyester. Rev. Angela Smith also has an allergic reaction (small breakout of hives) to polyester. In the event you do not use shampoo, do not eat or use pitted fruits, and don't use polyester, perhaps you enjoy peanuts or products containing peanuts like a Snickers Bar and can substitute that.
Now, if you decide the allergy sufferer is responsible, particularly where you were unaware of the allergy in advance and intended no harm, would you find it unreasonable for the allergy sufferer to expect you to stop using items that trigger an allergic reaction? What would you suggest they do to address their allergy symptoms without requiring you to discontinue use of the item(s) that trigger an allergic reaction?
The purpose of the above exercise is to practice honest reason and patience for the sake of empathy, fairness, and equality to avoid hypocrisy (which is a vice that involves the promotion of inequality by expecting more of others than you do of yourself).
[Rev. Minister Angela Smith's Commentary: I always have Benadryl (or
equivalent) on me which helps me manage any allergic reaction I have in most
instances. I can't at this time afford an EpiPen. I only
breakout with hives where something I'm allergic to just touches my skin.
One time at a bath and body shop they asked me to try a lotion and I asked
if it was hypoallergenic and they said it was hypoallergenic. So, I
agreed. My right hand with the test spot immediately broke out.
I asked what was in it and if it contained pitted fruit oils. They
confirmed it contained apricot oil. They immediately assisted me in
getting it off my hand. But, I had hives in that spot for a couple of
days. What I learned from that is to expressly ask if there is pitted
fruit or anything that results in a severe reaction for me in a product
before trying it even if they claim it is hypoallergenic. I didn't
demand they stop selling the lotion with the apricot oil because I
understand that most people do not suffer from the same allergies I do so it
would be unfair to them to expect everyone adopt my protocols particular to
my body. I am not allergic to peanuts and enjoy Snickers candy bars.
I'm not going to stop eating Snickers and I will protest if there are any
more bans on peanuts. I think peanuts should be brought back to all
ballparks where they've been banned out of consideration for a small
minority who can take precautions to avoid exposure and bring emergency
supplies to prevent and/or address a spontaneous allergic reaction.