02-04-2016, 06:38 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-04-2016, 06:47 PM by Bring4th_Austin.)
Maintaining sustainability of personal energies for service is a type of wisdom, I think. It's an ability to evaluate our own needs for the ultimate goal of maintaining ourselves as instruments of service, allowing for greater quality/quantity of service in the long-run, verses a short run of highly draining service. It does take some stringent self-honesty, though, because it is very easy to trick ourselves into thinking that we are forgoing an opportunity to give of ourselves to others out of attention to a long goal of service, when really we are simply wanting some comfort for ourselves or to fulfill our own self-serving desires.
Not that having some self-serving desires is something to be judged - it's not. So long as we are honest about what we are doing and why. We're all imperfect instruments of service to others.
Setting up boundaries may feel selfish, and in the end we may realize that some of the boundaries were selfish, but I think it's a great thing that you said: "I wish to give of myself purely, but until I know myself purely and understand whom I want to become, I have to set up boundaries on this third density personality construct."
It reminds me a bit from Jung: "If a plant is to unfold its specific nature to the full, it must first be able to grow in the soil in which it is planted."
If it feels like you aren't able to "unfold" in the way you desire, it may be time to figure out more about the soil in which you are planted.
Could you share more specifics about the PUA/MRA information you found helpful? I also consider that stuff to be childish, self-serving, and generally manipulative, and would like to know if it's something that is specific to those lines of thought or if it's advice that would be found in other places.
Edit: Knowing you personally, Jeremy, I would be very surprised if your intent with the dog analogy was to imply that it is the nature of women to nag. I read it as commentary on her as a person, and your personal experience and opinion of her. Certain individuals may have it in their nature to nag: man, woman, or otherwise, and that is their nature. I am thinking this is more along the lines of your thinking. But I do agree with Jade, comparing your wife to a dog pissing miiiiiiight have a bit of the MRA/PUA tinge to it.
Not that having some self-serving desires is something to be judged - it's not. So long as we are honest about what we are doing and why. We're all imperfect instruments of service to others.
Setting up boundaries may feel selfish, and in the end we may realize that some of the boundaries were selfish, but I think it's a great thing that you said: "I wish to give of myself purely, but until I know myself purely and understand whom I want to become, I have to set up boundaries on this third density personality construct."
It reminds me a bit from Jung: "If a plant is to unfold its specific nature to the full, it must first be able to grow in the soil in which it is planted."
If it feels like you aren't able to "unfold" in the way you desire, it may be time to figure out more about the soil in which you are planted.
Could you share more specifics about the PUA/MRA information you found helpful? I also consider that stuff to be childish, self-serving, and generally manipulative, and would like to know if it's something that is specific to those lines of thought or if it's advice that would be found in other places.
Edit: Knowing you personally, Jeremy, I would be very surprised if your intent with the dog analogy was to imply that it is the nature of women to nag. I read it as commentary on her as a person, and your personal experience and opinion of her. Certain individuals may have it in their nature to nag: man, woman, or otherwise, and that is their nature. I am thinking this is more along the lines of your thinking. But I do agree with Jade, comparing your wife to a dog pissing miiiiiiight have a bit of the MRA/PUA tinge to it.
_____________________________
The only frontier that has ever existed is the self.
The only frontier that has ever existed is the self.