Caring/Compassion/Sensitivity/Tact vs Lying/Faking

[3DMonkey]

We're always playing the game, silly.

What is this game you keep talking about? Also what do you mean by we are always pretending?

"keep" talking about? If you say that, maybe you did a search? I've only said it twice in this thread.

There is video game, money game, basketball game, relationship game.

Here, I have referred to the mental game. In other words, thinking.

By pretending, I mean we are creating our mental worlds of make believe. For instance, I pretend you have respect for me and that we have a silent, mutual understanding. I'm sure you pretend I am someone inside your own head. I'm in your head, one way or another, and I am completely your creation inside your mind. I don't believe anyone here can deny that.

[zenmaster]

By pretending, I mean we are creating our mental worlds of make believe. For instance, I pretend you have respect for me and that we have a silent, mutual understanding. I'm sure you pretend I am someone inside your own head. I'm in your head, one way or another, and I am completely your creation inside your mind. I don't believe anyone here can deny that.

Doesn't quite work like that. Experience is unique for one's interpretation, but minds are not - and can't be - isolated. Therefore it's never 'completely' a creation 'inside' of mind.

[3DMonkey]

Okay. Not completely. I can "bing" your mind with my mind. That doesn't negate what I call "pretending"

[zenmaster]

Okay. Not completely. I can "bing" your mind with my mind. That doesn't negate what I call "pretending"

As long as you keep your definition of 'pretending' secret, then perhaps it doesn't negate it.

[3DMonkey]

Oh. Too much emphasis. Pretending is pretty self explanatory, no?

[Steppingfeet]

Unity100,

My post to you: http://www.bring4th.org/forums/showthrea...2#pid59232

Your response:
http://www.bring4th.org/forums/showthrea...5#pid59255

Unity100, in justifying what many consider a rather cold approach to relating to others, you fall back on the Law of One, invoking it as your model for how you go about relating to others. You explain that as Ra was blunt in telling the Questioner he was mistaken, you, too, are blunt and tell others they are mistaken. And whereas no one insinuates that Ra lacked compassion, no one should see you as being loveless.

Here’s the key difference.

Those who received the Ra contact (Don, Carla, and Jim) did not feel like they were being minimized, negated, condescended down to, belittled, treated as inferiors, or their right to a point of view completely eliminated. Those who received the Ra contact have never once said about Ra what’s been said about your approach.

UNITY100: the key difference here is, apart from the modicum amount of extra offstandishness in my language and correspondence (which is not always constant By the way), i am in no position to spiritually be present in the room that another entity is reading these lines from, and i am by no means able to impart that much spiritual energy to their environment so they will feel loved and cared for. practically, none of us, are in that position.

1) I noticed fluctuations in your, as you say, “offstandishness”. Sometimes you lay it on thicker than others when you’re really irritated from a position of what I would call, not disrespectfully but accurately, self-righteousness.

2) If I understand you correctly, you say the key difference between your approach and Ra’s is that you cannot possibly impart the quantity/quality/type of energy that Ra imparted.

While I agree with your statement that you cannot offer the energy the way Ra did, nevertheless the fact still stands that I’ve never heard from anyone that they feel judgment from Ra the way they do your words. Ra did not throw the might of the energy against Don in an attempt to convince Don of the superiority of their point of view.

Whether everyone who lodges a complaint against your approach is justified in so doing, the fact of the matter remains that people feel the same basic set of responses to you again and again. Justified or not, it happens.

Why? Did Ra speak just like Unity100 but countered the negative impact of their words through intense radiation of love/wisdom energy? Was that intensive Ra-presence the only difference between your approach and theirs, your language and theirs, your overall energy signature and theirs?

If you do perceive a difference in ability between you and they, and *desire* to represent even in a smidgen of Ra’s love energy, the simplest, easiest means has been described to you repeatedly. Words. Positive words. Words that indicate to the recipient of your thoughts that you respect them. If you genuinely desire to help the recipient to feel what Don/Carla/Jim felt being in dialogue with Ra, why not expend that modicum of energy to adjust your approach along the lines others have suggested? It’s so simple that it doesn’t require the combined/unified energies of a planetary civilization.

GLB: Further, as far as I’m aware, no seeker who has ever read and loved the Law of One has ever said of Ra’s approach what others have said of yours.

UNITY100: actually i know quite an amount of people who thought that Ra's correspondence was lacking emotion/love/compassion when read from a book.

Agreed. Some people read it that way. But no one says of Ra what they say of your approach.

UNITY100: i myself personally stopped reading the material a few times and read other stuff, back in 1994-1997 period. due to the exact same reason.

Clarify please. You stopped reading the material for three years because you felt it was “lacking emotion/love/compassion”?

GLB: Being in a moderator position, I’ve been privy to a great deal of disgruntlement from those who have felt disrespected by your seeming inability/refusal to relate with sensitivity and compassion and respect to the others' point of view. (Note, this does not mean people have necessarily been upset that you have not *agreed* with them, but rather that in your disagreement you approach them as if the conversation of equals is over. You approach others with a single-minded intensity bent on one thing: proving them wrong with little concern for the validity of viewpoints other than your own.)

UNITY100: i did not at any point deny that when i am defending something, i approach it with a single minded intensity. and, someone already should not attempt to defend anything if s/he does not believe or trust to be true/valid in front of others in the first place.

The problem isn’t you defending a thought. The problem isn’t you being true to a position. The problem isn’t you making a case for your point of view. The problem is as Yossarian stated it later on in this thread when he differentiated between you telling someone that they arer wrong, and you telling someone their wrong without respect for the person you’re speaking to.

It seems based upon the experience of multiple members, including my own observations, that you go about “defending” your point in a way which communicates:

a) Your understanding is objectively true,
b) You care more about being right than about mutual learning
c) The other is not your equal

How accurately does this describe your feeling inside? Do you feel that a, b, and c are true, or off the mark?

my reaction to this train of thought has been that, people who were not ready or wanting to engage in intense discussions, should not seek or engage intense discussions in the first place. this doesnt even encompass the spiritual aspect of this kind of necessity, which i have discussed with you and others through open and private discussions.

The problem isn’t the intense, or the advanced, nature of your understanding. If the problem were endemic to intensity and advancedness, then anyone who engaged in those energies would achieve results similar to your own: discontent among those with whom they dialogued.

I don’t know why you can’t hear this mantra of reflected critique about the way you relate to others. I don’t understand how one can receive this sort of frequent feedback from others (in all probability predating your entrance into these forums) without genuinely reflecting on the self and asking, “Is there something I can do to improve? Do these other selves have a basis for their complaints?”

While I don’t know your internal thought processes, it seems the conclusion you reach each time is that this is yet another instance of other selves being 100% wrong. And you yet have another something to defend to the teeth, that being your total innocence in these tangles with which you are so intimately involved. You it seems determine that it is others misinterpreting you, it is others not prepared for the advanced/intense nature of your discussion, it is others having their dogma challenged. It bears no reflection on you.

UNITY100: i would like to state that i still feel the love/wisdom balance or love from Ra, even after 17 years of study. i had had my infinite intelligence contact experience when i first read silver birch, and i feel it whenever i open and gaze in the book even today. but, i have not at all felt the kind of love you speak of, from Ra material.

Let’s put it in terms of what readers of Ra don’t feel from Ra. That includes: judgment, condescension, and lack of respect.

Let me make an important point here, that this critique I am providing of your style does not describe the totality of you as an entity, or your interactions on the forums. It *does* attempt to describe very predominant energies of yours that come through in the way you relate to others - aspects of yourself which appear frequently and precipitate one of the primary sources of energy blockages in the forums.

There is so much about you that I want to embrace and celebrate. I've had very happy moments reading your words sometimes because you're able to synthesize data and penetrate into certain areas of inquiry with much greater skill than I possess.

UNITY100: i didnt at any point deny that my discussion and interaction can be intense and energy harsh at times.

I’ve never known you to acknowledge a “harshness” to your energy. This is a first for me.

If I may, what percentage would you estimate your energies move into the “harsh” realm when interacting with others? And what do you mean by “harsh”?

especially at times when people ignore/invalidate the very spiritual principles they seem to be apparently advocating by contradicting them openly based on convenience, only to switch to advocating them when the convenience is accomplished. hypocrisy and turnaboutness.

Hypocrisy exists within us all. And I did see it come out in a thread a long while back when others jumped on you for not being loving while themselves failing to exhibit love.

And if you want to call someone on what you feel is hypocrisy, by all means, it’s your prerogative to do so, but you keep missing the key point: *provided that there is respect given to the speaker*. And honestly, Unity100, I feel that you lack it, not infrequently.

When we created the forums we did not build a lifeguard perch on our beach. We did not assign someone to sit up there in overview and judgment of others to strike those others down when hypocrisy or anything deemed less-than-perfect understanding was witnessed. We don’t know of anyone whose understanding is so perfected that they are capable of being the final measure against which all other understandings are evaluated.

- - - - -

So you perceive “errors” in understanding, or contradictions, or horrible misreadings of the Law of One. These things happen, within you and within me as well. Hypocrisy is unavoidable so long as any measure of separation exists within the identity of the entity.

But by whose invitation were you requested to police the streets and knock people over the head with your billy-club of judgment? What guideline sanctions your battle with those whose understanding falls short in your eyes?

We built these forums with the intention not that the entity of poor or hypocritical understanding would have an attack dog unleashed on them, but rather that we could all learn to share and to disagree in a context of mutual respect and love. Mutual respect/love does not exclude honesty.

- - - - - - -

You use multiple tracts to justify your approach, but one justification I have not seen is in terms of results.

If your goal is to illuminate another, to help them gain clearer/better/higher/less distorted understanding, what is your success rate? Do your tactics and does your approach achieve the desired goal? Do other selves tend to feel empowered and more able to accept and to know the self after this sort of conversation with you? Do other selves feel an increase in will and in faith after you have imparted your objective truth? Do other selves feel less separate and more one with all after you throw your energy into proving them wrong?

Is your approach more about consciously serving the other self, or about serving some need within to be right within yourself?

UNITY100: actually it is necessary to use it in polite settings with intense discussions with plurals - because american cultural political correctness requires it. i have given names to identify the certain occasions, however i believe the mentioned people will not mind, since the occasion requires and they already know all of these.

I’m sure that there are some cultural differences that come into play here, but the way you relate transcends the cultural differences. Members of the forums are spread all over the globe representing a great diversity of social and cognitive skills, but none are exempt from the first guideline.

There is no asterisk next to the first guideline that says, “*Unless you are from Turkey, in which case invoke cultural differences as the shield behind which you will justify active lack of respect.”

We had a Turk in Louisville for a couple of years who loved the Law of One and, despite the cultural differences, I never felt disrespected by him. Two entities of very distant cultures will find ways to show each other respect if it is within their will to do so.

as you can see, i didnt provide anything analytical. i bluntly, directly told what i have been thinking. i did not deny anything either, when it seemed inconvenient.

Among your many strengths, not all of which I know, is your capacity to intensely dig into and respond directly to a subject. I also perceive that you will dance around/evade the points of the other in order to avoid the undesirable circumstance of having to step down a notch or two from the tower of absolute rightness.

Love&Light, GLB

[Tenet Nosce]

[yossarian]

Unity is right -- it's really hard to express disagreement in the Anglosphere without being impolite.

I think it would be more accurate to say, "it's really hard to express disagreement in the Anglosphere without being perceived as impolite."

Those are exactly the same. The only part of communication that matters is how it is perceived.

I disagree, there is a huge difference. For instance, say I perceived what you just said as a huge insult.

Yossarian, what you just said was extremely offensive to me. You must lack compassion because what I perceived was hate. My ego is battered and I feel like ceasing my participation on this forum. I can't believe I was slighted like this by a fellow brother of the LOO.


Should you rectify? And apologize? Perhaps reword it to where I would not be offended?

Or, knowing your intent was not to offend and understanding that if I perceive impoliteness, it is my OWN distortion, stick by your words?

What if, in my culture, it is rude to disagree with someone in ANY context in ANY form? Would you then hesitate to disagree? Would you feign agreement to not seem rude? Would it be STS of you to disagree with me, because it would offend me no matter how you put it?

Here's what I would say:

"Sorry you feel that way, I don't hate you, I feel warmly toward you. I hope you reconsider quitting the forum. When I made my comment I was presenting my own opinion about what you said and I didn't mean to insult you or batter you. What do you think about that? What part of what I said seemed hateful to you?"

So, I definitely believe in sticking by my opinions, but I don't think this requires being mean. I'd do my best to clear up any misunderstandings and to let you know that I don't hate you. If my attempts didn't work then I'd just say oh well and move on.

It's true that sometimes people are just going to be offended and it's entirely because of their own distortions and there's nothing people can do about it. I just don't think this is the case with unity. I think he could explain himself better and communicate more effectively so that people would be less offended and there would be fewer misunderstandings.

For the record, I absolutely agree that hiding your opinions/view/truths or lying about them is bad practice. I believe in tact, not lying.

[Tenet Nosce]

The Green vMeme (nothing really to do with heart-chakra 'green') is the local expression of the 6th subdensity here.

Funny you should say that because I was actually thinking it sounded a lot like what I would call "inverted green". It is like green ray energy turned inside out. Fear based love. Of course, part of the distortion is the denial that something such as fear based love actually exists.

Many 'wanderers' or 'new-agers' are still centered at this level, still lost in inflated 'relativism'.

I guess that makes my path here somewhat unusual because I never passed through such a level. I suppose that is why I am resistant to the notion that it is necessary and/or inevitable.

The problem with linear depictions of spiritual growth processes is that they are wrong. Growth occurs in a spiral because that is the nature of growth. This spiraling nature is what allows for the possibility to jump past several levels at once when certain conditions are met.

Wilber's descriptions of the 'Mean Green Meme' fit the behavior and values rather well. I point it out because there's already a great deal written about the phenomenon to which you're alluding.

Yes, I think it largely characterizes my own perceptions on the subject.

If two out of three
Deep thinkers agree
That an uncommon song
Must be true
Then chances portray
At the end of the day
Among those who were wrong
Include you

[Bring4th_Austin]

Here's what I would say:

"Sorry you feel that way, I don't hate you, I feel warmly toward you. I hope you reconsider quitting the forum. When I made my comment I was presenting my own opinion about what you said and I didn't mean to insult you or batter you. What do you think about that? What part of what I said seemed hateful to you?"

So, I definitely believe in sticking by my opinions, but I don't think this requires being mean. I'd do my best to clear up any misunderstandings and to let you know that I don't hate you. If my attempts didn't work then I'd just say oh well and move on.

It's true that sometimes people are just going to be offended and it's entirely because of their own distortions and there's nothing people can do about it. I just don't think this is the case with unity. I think he could explain himself better and communicate more effectively so that people would be less offended and there would be fewer misunderstandings.

For the record, I absolutely agree that hiding your opinions/view/truths or lying about them is bad practice. I believe in tact, not lying.

All well and good, and that method seems to be a good way to prevent "unwanted" catalyst in another person, but perhaps now you see my point? You said:

The only part of communication that matters is how it is perceived.

Communication is not JUST about perception. If the only thing that mattered in communication were perception, then the fact that you didn't intend to insult me would mean nothing. The fact that I was insulted would be the only thing that mattered, and you would be a dastardly insulter.

[zenmaster]

The Green vMeme (nothing really to do with heart-chakra 'green') is the local expression of the 6th subdensity here.

Funny you should say that because I was actually thinking it sounded a lot like what I would call "inverted green". It is like green ray energy turned inside out. Fear based love. Of course, part of the distortion is the denial that something such as fear based love actually exists.

Of course there is fear-based love. Love is the basis for attachment in the first place.

Many 'wanderers' or 'new-agers' are still centered at this level, still lost in inflated 'relativism'.

I guess that makes my path here somewhat unusual because I never passed through such a level. I suppose that is why I am resistant to the notion that it is necessary and/or inevitable.

The problem with linear depictions of spiritual growth processes is that they are wrong. Growth occurs in a spiral because that is the nature of growth. This spiraling nature is what allows for the possibility to jump past several levels at once when certain conditions are met.

No, it doesn't make your path unusual. You may want to look at Spiral Dynamics. We move through the subdensities in a spiral, but in cross-section it's a linear manner - and this linear progression is not necessarily in the scope of an individual lifetime. Our 'personalities' are geared towards some path of balancing which draws from one or more of these levels of awareness, as needed. Yes, we jump around depending on what aspect of our condition is called upon. We reach up and reach down. But each subdensity remains available for our mind to find some expression of a particular condition here. The lower related to survival, the higher related to 'being'. Most people are 'passing through' green vmeme all of the time, as it has a basis in archetype - it's a 'vibration' which is identified by values.

'Green' centering is still fear-based love, but it is the first level that recognizes the value of subjective or interior reality, which of course spawns relativism/pluralism. And that recognition, when new, tends to have a spiritual numinosity which makes it 'the reality' or 'the solution' - hence the narcissism of the 'progressives'.

[yossarian]

Here's what I would say:

"Sorry you feel that way, I don't hate you, I feel warmly toward you. I hope you reconsider quitting the forum. When I made my comment I was presenting my own opinion about what you said and I didn't mean to insult you or batter you. What do you think about that? What part of what I said seemed hateful to you?"

So, I definitely believe in sticking by my opinions, but I don't think this requires being mean. I'd do my best to clear up any misunderstandings and to let you know that I don't hate you. If my attempts didn't work then I'd just say oh well and move on.

It's true that sometimes people are just going to be offended and it's entirely because of their own distortions and there's nothing people can do about it. I just don't think this is the case with unity. I think he could explain himself better and communicate more effectively so that people would be less offended and there would be fewer misunderstandings.

For the record, I absolutely agree that hiding your opinions/view/truths or lying about them is bad practice. I believe in tact, not lying.

All well and good, and that method seems to be a good way to prevent "unwanted" catalyst in another person, but perhaps now you see my point? You said:

The only part of communication that matters is how it is perceived.

Communication is not JUST about perception. If the only thing that mattered in communication were perception, then the fact that you didn't intend to insult me would mean nothing. The fact that I was insulted would be the only thing that mattered, and you would be a dastardly insulter.

Let me rephrase. If your purpose is to communicate, you should attempt to choose words that best create, in the mind of your audience, the correct perception. Your entire goal is to make them perceive the right thing.

Communication is nothing without an audience, and every message is intended for an audience, and the skill of a particular message is whether or not the audience perceives what you want them to perceive.

By following up with you I'm recognizing the failure of my initial message and trying again. I agree that intentions are very important, but what I mean is that your words should be selected ONLY on the basis of what they cause the audience to perceive, if you want to be an effective communicator.

---

The Green vMeme (nothing really to do with heart-chakra 'green') is the local expression of the 6th subdensity here.

Funny you should say that because I was actually thinking it sounded a lot like what I would call "inverted green". It is like green ray energy turned inside out. Fear based love. Of course, part of the distortion is the denial that something such as fear based love actually exists.

Of course there is fear-based love. Love is the basis for attachment in the first place.

Many 'wanderers' or 'new-agers' are still centered at this level, still lost in inflated 'relativism'.

I guess that makes my path here somewhat unusual because I never passed through such a level. I suppose that is why I am resistant to the notion that it is necessary and/or inevitable.

The problem with linear depictions of spiritual growth processes is that they are wrong. Growth occurs in a spiral because that is the nature of growth. This spiraling nature is what allows for the possibility to jump past several levels at once when certain conditions are met.

No, it doesn't make your path unusual. You may want to look at Spiral Dynamics. We move through the subdensities in a spiral, but in cross-section it's a linear manner - and this linear progression is not necessarily in the scope of an individual lifetime. Our 'personalities' are geared towards some path of balancing which draws from one or more of these levels of awareness, as needed. Yes, we jump around depending on what aspect of our condition is called upon. We reach up and reach down. But each subdensity remains available for our mind to find some expression of a particular condition here. The lower related to survival, the higher related to 'being'. Most people are 'passing through' green vmeme all of the time, as it has a basis in archetype - it's a 'vibration' which is identified by values.

'Green' centering is still fear-based love, but it is the first level that recognizes the value of subjective or interior reality, which of course spawns relativism/pluralism. And that recognition, when new, tends to have a spiritual numinosity which makes it 'the reality' or 'the solution' - hence the narcissism of the 'progressives'.

Where do you get all this? And how do you know that we're in 6th subdensity?

[zenmaster]

Where do you get all this?

The valuing memes identified in the system of Spiral Dynamics map to 3D's subdensities, as far as general expressions of core values.

And how do you know that we're in 6th subdensity?

Groups and individuals draw from different subdensities, but tend to a have a center of gravity at a particular density relevant to what they working on - decreasing distortions typically.

[yossarian]

Where do you get all this?

The valuing memes identified in the system of Spiral Dynamics map to 3D's subdensities, as far as general expressions of core values.

And how do you know that we're in 6th subdensity?

Groups and individuals draw from different subdensities, but tend to a have a center of gravity at a particular density relevant to what they working on - decreasing distortions typically.

By 6th subdensity are you referring to green or yellow?

beige - archaic-instinctive
purple - animistic-tribalistic
red - egocentric-exploitive
blue - absolutistic-obedience
orange - multiplistic-achievist
green - relativistic-personalistic
yellow - systemic-integrative
turquoise - holistic

To me it looks like Beige and Purple are both Red ray.

Red is definitely orange ray, blue and orange both seem to be yellow ray, with orange trending toward STS yellow+indigo.

Green is green

Yellow seems like indigo ray

So by my interpretation, 6th subdensity would be Yellow Meme. Is that how you see this?

Based on the descriptions of the memes on wikipedia I actually think I absolutely fit into yellow meme. The description on wikipedia is almost word for word my current philosophy of life :p Turquoise is pretty similar too I guess. But they aren't too clear about either of these memes.

[Oceania]

i've always loved turquoise the most.

[Namaste]

we should instead all 'be ourselves' in an environment in which everyone channels 500 faced 6 horned unicorns and brown interdimensional butterflies, which say that the world has splitted into 500 separate timelines, spanning 6 sub-paraoctaves in the name of lord jesus ezekiah

LOL! Brilliant

In an infinite universe, that *has* to have happened in some way or another, by definition. Makes you wonder (or Wander, perhaps?) :¬)

Perhaps even, your thought alone was the Creator of that universe. Many do say each created thought itself can create. The mind boggles :¬)

[zenmaster]

So by my interpretation, 6th subdensity would be Yellow Meme. Is that how you see this?

Yes, yellow is either 6th or 7th, and could be part of both. Yellow is first vmeme or 'vibration' where fear-based distortions are not prevalent - due to sufficient integration of the personal unconscious. The actual study is an attempt to understand these values so that the particular needs may be recognized and addressed (from those able to provide support) at all levels. Wanderers tend to move quickly to green, however many get stuck there, never making it to yellow.

One problem is that only yellow and above are able to recognize the necessary progression and value of the prior levels. Green is anti-hierarchy, relativistic and thinks everyone (adults) is also 'at' green valuing, for example. However "For a more complex level of human existence to actually be, those more complex problems of existence must be recognized and felt. " i.e. distortions of that vibration lessened. There are many in green right now - maybe 25-30% of Americans.
http://www.spiraldynamics.org/Graves/colors.htm

[AnthroHeart]

This threw me at first saying green was before yellow.
Hmm, going to take some time to get familiar with this.
So is yellow then desirable? One of his systems says it's chaotic.
This colors thing is news to me.

I don't know which subdensity I'm in. That's awesome if we're all in 6SD.

[3DMonkey]

Is this color discussion similar to zodiac signs? As in personality descriptions and characteristics attributed to titles?

[Tenet Nosce]

By 6th subdensity are you referring to green or yellow?

beige - archaic-instinctive
purple - animistic-tribalistic
red - egocentric-exploitive
blue - absolutistic-obedience
orange - multiplistic-achievist
green - relativistic-personalistic
yellow - systemic-integrative
turquoise - holistic

This is from wikipedia?! Which entry? I have never seen this kind of color scheme before.

As for my life path, according to this scheme I moved from red/orange to yellow/turquoise. No blue or green...

---

Let me rephrase. If your purpose is to communicate, you should attempt to choose words that best create, in the mind of your audience, the correct perception.

If I may, I would point out a couple of things that make this sound a bit oversimplified.

Firstly, for any given audience there is a wide swath of awareness, distortions, prejudice, etc. It is not as if everybody is in the same place. The problem is that if one wishes to reach the "widest audience" then they must speak to the "lowest common denominator". Which, let's be frank, is pretty low.

This is especially challenging when speaking/writing on fringe or leading edge topics because there is so much ground to be covered to bring the ignorant person up to speed that it makes the whole effort rather a waste of time.

One or two ignorant fools can undermine the entire communication by insisting that everybody else be pulled down to the level of the "lowest common denominator"... asking inane questions [Did you complete the required reading before class?] and/or bringing up points which are irrelevant or just plain wrong ["But the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination!"]

This serves nobody, least of all themselves.

Your entire goal is to make them perceive the right thing.

I can't make anybody perceive anything. It is their choice whether or not to look within to see if my words resonate with their inner being. And if it doesn't, then it becomes THEIR responsibility to discern the difference and to communicate that in such a way as to help me better understand my own distortion in communicating the truth.

Getting pissed off and angry, or sulky and down on oneself serves NOBODY. The sooner that a seeker can realize this, the better. It will save them much wasted time and energy which can be reappropriated to a higher purpose.

The interesting/frustrating thing about all of this is that those who tend to get angry/sulky, already being in a victim mentality, are very quick to point the finger at the individual whom they perceive to be the source of the butthurt, and to declare that it is THEM who must improve on their communication skills.

How convenient! Seeing as getting angry, sulky, and butthurt demonstrates that the person who is REALLY in need of improved communication skills is actually the angry/sulky/butthurt person and not the individual whom they perceive to be lacking in "tact".

People who don't have a reliable connection to their inner self, or who continually choose to ignore it and instead believe whatever is most convenient at any given moment, have no business participating in spiritual discussions, other to observe and to listen.

People who DO have a reliable connection to their inner self, don't get butthurt. Period. End of story. Why is this? Because to such a person, the moment that butthurt-ness begins to come on, they immediately turn inward, rather than outward, and so discern the truth of the matter.

I know the above will probably sound arrogant to the extreme (especially to some green vMeme folks) but there is a REASON why all of the mystery schools contained inner and outer circles. Until a person can demonstrate a reliable connection to their own inner source, they are better off keeping their mouth shut and listening to what others have to say.

Most legitimate mystery schools require the neophyte to endure a period of strict silence before they are permitted to voice their opinions.

Why? Because they are supposed to be mindless slaves? No! Because active listening will help them to establish a better connection to their own inner knowing. When they hear/read the words of wise people, and search within to find those words within themselves, then it will facilitate their own spiritual growth by leaps and bounds.

Why? Because when they are able to identify the true source of their butthurt (HINT: It is not me, unity100, or anybody external) THEN they will really be on to something valuable.

What these people need to develop is trust. Only then can they be trusted by others.

Neo: I suppose the most obvious question is: how can I trust you?

The Oracle: Bingo. It is a pickle, no doubt about it. Bad news is there's no way you can really know if I'm here to help you or not, so it's really up to you. Just have to make up your own damn mind to either accept what I'm going to tell you, or reject it. Candy?

[Monica]

Let me rephrase. If your purpose is to communicate, you should attempt to choose words that best create, in the mind of your audience, the correct perception.

If I may, I would point out a couple of things that make this sound a bit oversimplified.

Firstly, for any given audience there is a wide swath of awareness, distortions, prejudice, etc. It is not as if everybody is in the same place. The problem is that if one wishes to reach the "widest audience" then they must speak to the "lowest common denominator". Which, let's be frank, is pretty low.

This is especially challenging when speaking/writing on fringe or leading edge topics because there is so much ground to be covered to bring the ignorant person up to speed that it makes the whole effort rather a waste of time.

One or two ignorant fools can undermine the entire communication by insisting that everybody else be pulled down to the level of the "lowest common denominator"... asking inane questions [Did you complete the required reading before class?] and/or bringing up points which are irrelevant or just plain wrong ["But the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination!"]

This serves nobody, least of all themselves.

Your entire goal is to make them perceive the right thing.

I can't make anybody perceive anything. It is their choice whether or not to look within to see if my words resonate with their inner being. And if it doesn't, then it becomes THEIR responsibility to discern the difference and to communicate that in such a way as to help me better understand my own distortion in communicating the truth.

And yet, you seem to have put a lot of care and thought into what you said.

[Tenet Nosce]

And yet, you seem to have put a lot of care and thought into what you said.

Right. And this gets back to the whole being perceived as arrogant thing. I often forget to explicitly state as such, but I am already aware that I am talking to myself. Thank you very much. I understand that -I- am one who will also benefit from applying that which I am attempting to communicate to others. When I write/speak on spiritual topics, I am quite conscientious about being heart-centered and writing/speaking from experience, rather than theory. However, I do often fall short of what I am capable of.

To a butthurt person on the receiving end however, it appears to me that they are unable to look past the "But you do it too! Hypocrite!"

Right... and...? I never declared-

I, Tenet Nosce, am the one true purveyor of spiritual truth! Bow down before me and worship the ground I walk on!

Funny how some folks seem to "hear" this from others wherever they go...

When we were no longer able to have appropriate channels through which to enunciate the Law of One, we removed ourselves from the now hypocritical position which we had allowed ourselves to be placed in. And other myths, shall we say, other understandings, having more to do with polarity and the things of your vibrational complex, again took over in that particular society complex.

Your peoples at that time were much unlike us in physical appearance, as you might call it. We, thus, did not mix well with the population and were obviously other than they. Thus, our visit was relatively short, for we found ourselves in the hypocritical position of being acclaimed as other than your other-selves.

Does this form a sufficient amount of information, or could we speak further?

[βαθμιαίος]

butthurt

I find that the term "butthurt" has uncomfortable resonances with the current Penn State scandal: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20...-fall.html

[Tenet Nosce]

butthurt

I find that the term "butthurt" has uncomfortable resonances with the current Penn State scandal: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20...-fall.html

Please describe! I don't follow sports news at all.

EDIT: Ohhhhh.... nevermind... I already have a good picture.

---

  joe-paterno-409th-win-illinois-vs-penn-state.jpg (Size: 63.3 KB / Downloads: 8)

[Oceania]

the thing that went down with the bullfighter might be more appropriate.

[zenmaster]

So is yellow then desirable?

What's desirable is nothing external, like a color system that groups values. It's just what you personally think is desirable, it's custom and could be anything. The most compelling things are usually the same things that you subconsiously know will lead to balance, and usually your already doing them.

[AnthroHeart]

Thanks zen. I was a bit lost on the whole vcolor scheme, er meme.

[apeiron]

Interesting energy exchange that took place recently. This is new to me, as approaches from members really were not different from before in a significant manner, however, the hostility and ironically lack of compassion from everybody involved was A CHANGE.

I cannot stop thinking for some reason or another, the quote in which Ra mentions that close to harvest or 3d to 4d (around this time, in my opinion), yellow (NEGATIVE) will increase in the short run, AND THOSE WHO REMAIN will be of the positive green.

I am puzzled by this.

Back to the energy exchange, if we imagine for a second that we are part of social memory complex and we assigned certain "tasks" to each of us (sometimes successfully, possible unsuccessfully at other times) and lets say we assigned unity100 with the task to clarify certain things from the material etc...Monica (besides moderator) with task of help us to understand the wrongness of meat eating and a multitude of of other tasks that each of us brought to the table to help each other. And I am mentioning only 2 members but each of us either in this forum or in "real" life, this merely being a place to congregate and share for many (not all) of us.

It is interesting because there was something wrong about this energy exchange in which several members (including me) found something not quite as "we planned (?)" or maybe was just this increase in negative yellow Ra mentions, funny that we did that since I have learned much from many of you however, unity100 always felt "responsible" to "educate us", maybe because it went a little too narcissistic (maybe?) he had a "warning". However, he is one of us.

Anyway, I think this makes sense to me. As I said, this "planning" can go south as well.

[yossarian]

Interesting energy exchange that took place recently. This is new to me, as approaches from members really were not different from before in a significant manner, however, the hostility and ironically lack of compassion from everybody involved was A CHANGE.

I cannot stop thinking for some reason or another, the quote in which Ra mentions that close to harvest or 3d to 4d (around this time, in my opinion), yellow (NEGATIVE) will increase in the short run, AND THOSE WHO REMAIN will be of the positive green.

I am puzzled by this.

Back to the energy exchange, if we imagine for a second that we are part of social memory complex and we assigned certain "tasks" to each of us (sometimes successfully, possible unsuccessfully at other times) and lets say we assigned unity100 with the task to clarify certain things from the material etc...Monica (besides moderator) with task of help us to understand the wrongness of meat eating and a multitude of of other tasks that each of us brought to the table to help each other. And I am mentioning only 2 members but each of us either in this forum or in "real" life, this merely being a place to congregate and share for many (not all) of us.

It is interesting because there was something wrong about this energy exchange in which several members (including me) found something not quite as "we planned (?)" or maybe was just this increase in negative yellow Ra mentions, funny that we did that since I have learned much from many of you however, unity100 always felt "responsible" to "educate us", maybe because it went a little too narcissistic (maybe?) he had a "warning". However, he is one of us.

Anyway, I think this makes sense to me. As I said, this "planning" can go south as well.

When you say this energy exchange you are talking about the discussions in this thread?

[apeiron]

Yes yossarian, recent discussions in this thread.

Although I have noticed significant energetic peaks both negative and positive relating to others (lately more negative). However, today I found some positive interactions but mostly related to yellow energy. I would say two particular people today felt like genuinely positive towards green, with compassionate traits.

Highly negative yellow can be seen almost in crescendo in newspapers headlines, etc. Particularly whats going on re: war games near Iran feels strange.