Topic: What You Think of Me Is None of My Business

[Jaharkta]

What You Think of Me Is None of My Business by Terry Cole-Whitaker

There was a time when I snatched up and devoured prosperity and positive-thinking authors: Jane Roberts, Catherine Ponder, Emmet Fox, Ernest Holmes, Louise Hay, et al. As they repeated each other in the end, my enchantment with them waned, and somehow I've changed since then and can no longer get fired up through reading them. However, the title of T Cole-Whitaker's book is a mantra, heheh, and since I've been listening to Michael, the issue of 'caring about the opinions of others' has come up time and time again. Obviously I've been long from mastering the immunity one must have to the interpretations/misinterpretations from others, in order to further one's self along the Path.

It is a work in progress, however.

I don't know if I can recommend Whitaker's book now. I read it in the early 90's, and many have come since her, with the same message, more depth, and less glitz -- like Marianne Williamson, for example.  There are ways in which Whitaker's book is as gimmicked as her website (don't go there if your computer is wobbly) -- very "Dr Phil", with all the show-biz that that would seem to imply. As well, she is a Christian minister (of what denomination I'm not sure -- it could be Unity), so there is a lot of syntax about "sinners", etc. 

But the title is rich, and serves. She does have some good insights, about the tyranny of others' opinions and (mis)interpretations, until we free ourselves of them.

Here's one of her chapter titles, a phrase whose original coinage I don't know: "Argue for your limitations and they are yours."  I doubt any here would disagree.  Today, in fact, I came to a twist in the phrase: "Argue for others' limitations, and they are still yours."    In other words, as we might engage in bashing others, and therefore argue for their limitations, we are still the owners of the argument, and it has little to do with the ones we bash.

In the end, this path leads to severing. One can indeed overcome the tyranny of "others' opinions, interpretations, and misinterpretations." But I'm not so sure continued exposure to the opinions is a good thing. At some point, we cut the cord and move on, with our new-found freedom. Or with at least the freedom's seeds. The good in "coming home again" can become more and more absurd -- it's like breathing in the asbestos fibers, repeatedly, after we know they are carcinogenic.

At last, we eliminate such influences as we become free to create, grow, and live our own journey. And what another thinks indeed is none of our business.

[Definitive Journey]

In the end, this path leads to severing. One can indeed overcome the tyranny of "others' opinions, interpretations, and misinterpretations." But I'm not so sure continued exposure to the opinions is a good thing. At some point, we cut the cord and move on, with our new-found freedom. Or with at least the freedom's seeds. The good in "coming home again" can become more and more absurd -- it's like breathing in the asbestos fibers, repeatedly, after we know they are carcinogenic.

At last, we eliminate such influences as we become free to create, grow, and live our own journey. And what another thinks indeed is none of our business.

Indeed.   I just mentioned this exact topic earlier this week somewhere else.

 

z

[≈*≈]

Don't you think the true test is to put yourself in the line of fire, to expose yourself to others condemnation?  To me, this will be the tell tale sign of where you truly Are.  If it hurts, or brings about an inner dialogue with Self, then keep going back until it speaks of "freedom".  Everyone has a message ... it's more difficult to listen to the angry ones ... there is a reason you are there.

As long as that "pull" rears it's head, it Is your business ... a sign to "work it out" ... not with another, but with Self. 

[Definitive Journey]

~

Don't you think the true test is to put yourself in the line of fire, to expose yourself to others condemnation?  To me, this will be the tell tale sign of where you truly Are.  If it hurts, or brings about an inner dialogue with Self, then keep going back until it speaks of "freedom".  Everyone has a message ... it's more difficult to listen to the angry ones ... there is a reason you are there.

As long as that "pull" rears it's head, it Is your business ... a sign to "work it out" ... not with another, but with Self. 

To tag on to this just a bit...

Whether one is in the line of fire or chooses not to be in the line of fire, to me, are two sides of the same coin:  the ego. 

In regards to what don Juan said, becoming unavailable.  If one is unavailable and everyone knows it, this can actually be worse than if you are available.  Why?  Because most that attempt unavailability are delusional, assuming they are truly accomplishing something.

We need to work on our ego folks.  Pretty clear to me.  Michael posted a good post concerning delayed awakening.  I enjoyed it, yet believe he's an optimist.  A well?  Lowering of the bucket?  I love it!  Unfortunately most of what is going on is a bunch of rolling around in the desert sand, lapping it up as If it were water, unable to tell the difference (until they choke to death on their own ego.)  If some work were done, just a simple raising of the eyes and Awareness, one may then see that the well is right next to them.  Then, they could fetch some water and find out the difference between water and sand.   

To steal a few lines from the movie, The American President, with a few modifications:

We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them. And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Your Ego is not the least bit interested in solving it. The Ego is interested in two things, and two things only: making you afraid of it, (Itself or any situation,) and telling you who's to blame for it.  (Who being someone else, or it could be yourself as well.) That, ladies and gentlemen, is how the ego works.

Enough rambling...gardening to do!

z

 




 

[Jaharkta]

Don't you think the true test is to put yourself in the line of fire, to expose yourself to others condemnation? 

No, not endlessly, redundantly and relentlessly. Over and over again, with no hope of change there. I can't change the "other" -- I can only change "me". Walking away is definitely an option. In fact, walking away can be a great act of strength.

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and the wisdom to know the difference.

As long as that "pull" rears it's head, it Is your business ... a sign to "work it out" ... not with another, but with Self. 

Indeed  -- it is between me and me, self and Self, after the awareness enters. That's why constant exposure to the "Other" is no longer necessary. Unless you just like that sort of thing.

Just my .02.

[Jaharkta]

(What we're addressing and trying to nurture back to health is the unconscious, not the conscious.)

[Definitive Journey]

~

(What we're addressing and trying to nurture back to health is the unconscious, not the conscious.)

Hmmm....interesting!

If we looked at the conscious and unconscious as seperate, doesn't then the conscious affect the unconscious?  Straighten out the Tonal, our daily lives, that then  flows to the unconscious?

If not, how do we nuture back to health our unconscious?

What if the conscious and unconscious are the two sides of the same coin?  The coin being...hmm...Awareness?  Intent?

Hmmm....

z

[Jaharkta]

Great questions, but I think it would be easier if I just tell you what I meant by that.  Whitaker isn't a Toltec, though some of her methods sound very much like the kind of observational exercises toltecs do in stalking.

It's her contention that when we are bombarded with negative messages about ourselves, like in our families of origin, for example, these messages go to the back burner -- which to me is the unconscious. We're too young to rationally evaluate the incoming stream of them, so they go back there unexamined and unquestioned, and gain power over us. They form our assumptions about ourselves and the world. Especially as we might not be aware of them. The less awareness of them, the more power they have over us, and the less we're able in adulthood to ignore the "interpretations and misinterpretations of others". (Her words.) 

That's why I said we're healing the unconscious in this schemata -- and through doing so, hopefully releasing the power and energy which has been imprisoned back there. And then we create a more vital, active existence, without a gap between the unconscious and conscious.  It's a taking back of power through awareness. We're healing the unconscious through awareness and insight.

This is the part of her message I can really accept.

Ideally, the unconscious and conscious are working on the same sheet of music, but do they always? Attempts to answer that engendered the field of psychology!

[littlefeather]

(What we're addressing and trying to nurture back to health is the unconscious, not the conscious.)

Nice.