(10-29-2012, 04:49 PM)Oldern Wrote: Control is the key for "negative" polarization - but it would be quite interesting to equate control with "service to self" in a direct manner. It is not that simple. Balance is not the total elimination of control, and total acceptance (the "positive" counterpart of control) can only be truly acceptance if it is not hiding behind a layer of a belief system that ultimately just wants to control as well.
The paradox is crucial in this. There is someone with a sickness, no matter how severe it is. All this material is available, all this food for thought, and the sickness perseveres - and one asks "why, oh why?". "Shall I accept it? Then it goes away!" is one way to go forward. But that is acceptance AND control bind together. It works or it does not work. "Shall I try to control it? Or hell, destroy it?" I see this mentality regarding to cancer as well. "Killing cancer" or "fighting cancer" are words that are having a powerful meaning. It is one way, leading to "god knows where". For some, it works, for some, it does not.
And then here we are, again, at the crossroads of Control and Acceptance. And one might say "f***, I give up. I am not able to control the outcome, I accept this." And that can be true acceptance. And then, the disease, having served its purpose, could go away freely. Or one could say: "I will strengthen my body in ways that I never bothered to do so before" - and go down in a positive way of control. And that might be a good way as well. It is not all black and white, no matter who spins it and how the spinning is going.
Good points!
(10-29-2012, 04:49 PM)Oldern Wrote: Regarding Gerson-diet, of course someone wants to capitalize on it.
Just to clarify, I'm not promoting Gersen. It's too invasive for my taste (aggressive colonics, etc.) and not radical enough on diet for my taste (still includes cooked food). But, I posted the video because I thought she had some good things to say. And I do know a lot of people have healed using their protocol. There are so many different protocols for cancer though...it's almost comical, how many there are, any one of which has worked for many advanced-stage patients. The whole idea of "find a cure for cancer" would be laughable, were it not so tragic, that proven methods for healing exist but have been suppressed by the drug monopoly.
(10-29-2012, 04:49 PM)Oldern Wrote: I understand that for me, anytime I decide to brag about something health-related, it is a call for my higher self to bring me a new set of body-related problems, just for the fun of it. So let us pray for Tenet
I have found that principle to be true as well, and not just in matters of health! But, in all fairness to Tenet, he was just answering a direct question.
(10-29-2012, 06:10 PM)Pickle Wrote: Yeah i notice it said "key" rather than "is". A key is just a way to unlock something.
Good point. If we dissect that statement, we could logically say that just because a contains b, doesn't mean a=b. In other words, if control is used in an STS way (as a key) it doesn't necessarily logically follow that every act of control is an STS act.
For example, I controlled my cats last night by bringing them inside because it was going to be cold. I did it out of love because I care about them and wanted them to be cozy warm. There was an element of control, but it certainly wasn't STS motivated.
Same with when we control our dogs by keeping them on a leash instead of letting them run out into the street, or when we discipline our children. So control isn't inherently STS, though it is more commonly found in STS actions. If one seeks to control another for the sake of control, or in order to serve self, with no regard for other-self, then that would be STS.
(10-29-2012, 06:10 PM)Pickle Wrote: I assume he throws out self control and discipline.
Who does?
(10-29-2012, 06:10 PM)Pickle Wrote: I only know of one other person on this forum that can measure someones polarity. So i find it humorous when folks fling the terms "polarity" and "sts/sto". I really have to bite my tongue
Well sometimes those terms are used in reference to a specific action, as in this case, rather than to define a person. A person might be 75% STO yet participate in an STS action.