Soma
Tools of the Path => Action [Public] => Topic started by: Michael on July 22, 2006, 01:06:31 AM
-
MAKE NO MISTAKE!
Stalkers have a very simple rule - if you get offended, you are in the wrong.
We are allowed to get upset, annoyed, frustrated - these are natural human reactions, and they are something we constantly seek to reduce by looking at the source of these emotions - do they have antecedent causes in our past. But if we are offended or insulted by someone else, feel slighted, miffed, etc, then there is self-importance. How do we tell the difference?
1. The natural part is short lived - felt as a psychic slap, or bump... we don’t like it. We like it when someone praises us - felt as a lift.
2. The insult is long lived, we mull over it again and again, we never forget it, we plan revenge, we get depressed, we get angry, we play it over and over in our minds, in our words. Then we justify, justify, justify - concoct elaborate rationales to show how we are in the right, but always underneath we seethe with injured pride. Then, in the worst cases we paint our assailant with a perfect picture of ourselves - funny how accurate we get it. Inside we really do know exactly what we are doing, just that we project this onto the other. Thank god these are the worst cases, pretty close to madness, though I see a lot of it in politics these days.
If you are stewing, can’t laugh at yourself - from a stalker’s view, you are wrong. And worse, only more pain can cure you, with understanding of course.
Now the other person may well have shovelled you a load of crap, but that doesn’t matter - if you got your nose out of joint, then you are wrong, not them.
The correct approach goes like this - first pain, then laugh at your silliness, then consider a response. You see you need to know how to take offence, how to respond - reaction is not response, it is defence and attack. Response is creative, it chooses it’s own timing, it enjoys the game.
Self-importance hates to be criticised, it bristles with indignation at the slightest slight. Self-importance hates snobs, hates elites, hates anyone who thinks their better than it. Self-importance hates anyone who sets themselves up as being above others, above it, and then rushes to pull them down - bring them down to its level (in fact, don’t tell anyone, but pushes them down beneath it, cause self-importance has to be IMPORTANT).
I’m just trying to flesh this out so we can be perfectly clear, that self-importance hates being underneath. There is no escape, this attitude is wrong. Point blank, no argument - it is a mortal sin, and must always be seen as such.
Now by contrast, dignity sees itself as noble, elevated, keeps it’s head up. When challenged, dignity may feel hurt, annoyed, and it may well seek to identify error in its attacker, but it doesn’t suffer from wounded pride, and thus doesn’t seek to belittle the other - rather it asks that the other also put aside it’s vindictiveness and lift it’s own head, it wants to pull the other up, not down. Of course dignity is allowed to yell at an undisciplined dog to stop it, bring it into line - everyone needs to know dog language.
I may be wrong, but I don’t think dignity has any more place in a Toltec stalker than self-importance. A stalker seeks the truth, and has no time for pride, justified or unjustified. A stalker leans slightly forward with an ever so slight mischievous grin, a keen terrifying eye and hands loose but always ready. A stalker plays friendly, plays dignified, plays offended, plays the human harp but never loses its sight from the truth!
-
This is one of my faves M.
Thanks for bringing it.
8)
-
The classic!!
-
While I understand the premise of this, still though, the thing I don't care for much is the blame issue. Offendedness is treated like a sin. The other person who does the 'offending' or whatnot, is not responsible. In some cases I can see this, but in every case though? The thing I don't like about this, is it doesn't leave much wiggle room. It's becoming an absolute in Toltec, and I'm not big on absolutes.
-
While I understand the premise of this, still though, the thing I don't care for much is the blame issue. Offendedness is treated like a sin. The other person who does the 'offending' or whatnot, is not responsible. In some cases I can see this, but in every case though? The thing I don't like about this, is it doesn't leave much wiggle room. It's becoming an absolute in Toltec, and I'm not big on absolutes.
That's right N. YOU are responsible. That is the point. You take responsibility for you self, your emotions, your actions and re-actions. That is where you get your power.
That's where the power is.
-
While I understand the premise of this, still though, the thing I don't care for much is the blame issue. Offendedness is treated like a sin. The other person who does the 'offending' or whatnot, is not responsible. In some cases I can see this, but in every case though? The thing I don't like about this, is it doesn't leave much wiggle room. It's becoming an absolute in Toltec, and I'm not big on absolutes.
That's right N. YOU are responsible. That is the point. You take responsibility for you self, your emotions, your actions and re-actions. That is where you get your power.
That's where the power is.
But what about the offender's responsibility, if they are an actual offender?
-
You know I think I see the source of your discomfort with this.
What M states as a codes, you see as blaming and sin.
If we could strip away these words, these judgements and see the energetic loop, could we see that it is a matter of perception and holding onto our own personal power and energy. If I want to I can choose to give my power away to someone else, (the 'offender') or I can choose to keep my own power, own my reactions and keep hold of the energy that would otherwise be trapped in the blaming.
-
Well, its like the analogy used many times over. Person walks up and hits them in the face. The person who was hit, and got the broken nose is upset. To myself, it doesn't make sense to say they're at fault for being upset about being hit. There is an offender (the one who hit), but telling the other, if they're upset about it, that's their fault, seems wrong to me.
This is why I question the absolutes in this matter.
-
Maybe it goes to this, and there are fine lines to sort out:
Feeling Offended
"A warrior could be injured but not offended," he said. "For a
warrior there is nothing offensive about the acts of his fellow men
as long as he himself is acting within the proper mood....." ~DJ
An injury has to be addressed, in a variety of ways, the most crucial way, of course, being first aid. (The possibilities for redress are limited, really.)
But to be offended about it means we have taken the energy of it into ourselves. If someone slams their car into mine, I hope that they'll take financial responsibility for the repair, but whenever I get irate about a thing, I always pay for all of it and more. I'm not saying this is a law of the universe, but as soon as I stepped on the path, I was at the mercy of spirit's sense of humor. 8)
I remember spending years trying to exact justice for (real) wrongs done to me. "Wrongs" may have been done, but then I was the one who made the choice to spend years in the hallways seeking my redress. I was the one who took it inside and wouldn't let it go. Then I created a whole new avenue of deeds for which there were consequences. In the end, I came to realize, all of it was my choice, on some level.
(And when I let it go, heheh, finally, "justice" was done, independent of my grousings to the cosmos!)
Another aspect of this is sensitivity. Some are simply more sensitive than others to the dark side of other humans. Some can sense "ill intent" directed their way more easily than others. But that has to be diverted off, energetically, pronto. It takes practice. If you've been an empathic child, you know this. If you have a history of abuse, you know this. The redirect requires learning how to climb out of one's own vulnerability, and to quickly assess what really wasn't intended as something mean, or hateful. To quickly ward off what will not be allowed to enter permanently. To quickly transmute and transform as it washes through our being. To become warriors!
It's a fine art, there's no doubt about it. Especially if there's real violence. That guy who might come up and hit us in the face... whoa there is a challenge for sure. We are injured, in ways deeper than contusions. For letting that violence inside is damaging to the psyche for years and years and years. After the sting of the watery eyes, we must learn how to push that out of our solar plexus, and get rid of it. The faster the better.
To be offended about it... is a concession that there was some truth in whatever the aggressor has wrought. In order to be offended about it, one has to have let the act go through a sieve of self-worth, or lack of it, as it were.
(Ever watch it with cats? I watch it here at my mother's house. When my step-father is irate and his voice raises, or his motions are jerky along with his frustration, the cats here vamoose. The elder cat, george, most definitely takes s-f's actions personally! His feelings are hurt, you can see it all over his face. Luckily, their memory works differently than ours. Their capacity to "hold on" is very different.)
~~Ps ... I haven't mastered all of this.
-
N's point is excellent, and I'm glad she has raised it, because it is exactly the response that most people have to this principle. L and V's response is also very insightful. This discussion need to be had after such a dramatic statement as I have made at the start.
Perhaps N, you could follow through with further teasing out of the angle you see. Many who read this will not have the courage to challenge that remark of DJ's that the jaguar chasing CC may have been a 'bad' cat - that it is an 'achievement' to see no distinction between a rock falling on your head, and a human whose motives you know.
This is a most difficult issue, and it is facile to say, "Yes I believe in not getting offended", and then get miffed immediately some spiteful or arrogant person slaps us. We do need to know the cultural underpinnings of our spontaneous reactions - to recognise that we like to pomp about detachment until its us in the hot seat.
In fact, it would be good N, if you could make the case (as a follower of the spirit of martial arts) of how having the capacity to get offended is not a vulnerability that could be exploited by an opponent (like in the recent soccer World Cup - "I'm only human" the man said, and I'm sure the French understood that, at the cost of the Cup).
a discussion that has to be had...
m
-
I may be wrong, but I don’t think dignity has any more place in a Toltec stalker than self-importance. A stalker seeks the truth, and has no time for pride, justified or unjustified. A stalker leans slightly forward with an ever so slight mischievous grin, a keen terrifying eye and hands loose but always ready. A stalker plays friendly, plays dignified, plays offended, plays the human harp but never loses its sight from the truth!
No you're quite right about the fluid stance of the warrior. He has his roots in infinity, nothing matters especially much more than to be balanced, in the center and act with the power he has available. But there are steps on the way, when we have stopped being offended and have less and less re-action and more and more of enlightment then the phase of dignity may be more present.
The ruthlessness and knowingness in the clean warrior is quite bottomless and for a "normal" guy it would be labelled "unhuman" because that is what they are thaught - being afraid of the bottomless, ruthless, knowingness. That that is too far out, that is scary and not known. Therefore the whole all being warrior must cover up his actions with the folly, and meet his fellow mens where they are.
-
While I understand the premise of this, still though, the thing I don't care for much is the blame issue. Offendedness is treated like a sin. The other person who does the 'offending' or whatnot, is not responsible. In some cases I can see this, but in every case though? The thing I don't like about this, is it doesn't leave much wiggle room. It's becoming an absolute in Toltec, and I'm not big on absolutes.
That's right N. YOU are responsible. That is the point. You take responsibility for you self, your emotions, your actions and re-actions. That is where you get your power.
That's where the power is.
But what about the offender's responsibility, if they are an actual offender?
The other is not you N. So why care about him/her?
-
Person walks up and hits them in the face. The person who was hit, and got the broken nose is upset. To myself, it doesn't make sense to say they're at fault for being upset about being hit. There is an offender (the one who hit), but telling the other, if they're upset about it, that's their fault, seems wrong to me.
This is why I question the absolutes in this matter.
If someone walks up to me and hit me in the face or even broke my nose I would try to kill him. Maybe not so noble but yet a reasonable response. I know my street vein, I have actually been in fights that started unprovoked, so I did my best to beat up those guys then. I cannot run fast now so I will be left fighting for my life if someone hit me.
-
Perhaps N, you could follow through with further teasing out of the angle you see. Many who read this will not have the courage to challenge that remark of DJ's that the jaguar chasing CC may have been a 'bad' cat - that it is an 'achievement' to see no distinction between a rock falling on your head, and a human whose motives you know.
This is a most difficult issue, and it is facile to say, "Yes I believe in not getting offended", and then get miffed immediately some spiteful or arrogant person slaps us. We do need to know the cultural underpinnings of our spontaneous reactions - to recognise that we like to pomp about detachment until its us in the hot seat.
In fact, it would be good N, if you could make the case (as a follower of the spirit of martial arts) of how having the capacity to get offended is not a vulnerability that could be exploited by an opponent (like in the recent soccer World Cup - "I'm only human" the man said, and I'm sure the French understood that, at the cost of the Cup).
a discussion that has to be had...
m
One of the things I'm seeing with toltec and various interps, is this statement by DJ being misused. Say you have two toltec folks who know this principle. Each one tells the other "You're offended, you're in the wrong." Being upset about something, frustrated, whatnot, "You're offended, that's your fault." So you have one asshole who likes to use this against people to disassociate himself from responsibility for their actions. I think the meaning is being screwed up. People are using offended meaning, like others hold up the "cast the first stone" to halt a christian.
The thing I think DJ was trying to get across with the offendedness issue, works like this:
The samurai is ordered to kill his enemy because he killed his master. He encounters his enemy, extends his sword. The enemy spits in the samurai's face. The samurai sheaths his sword and walks away. He doesn't kill him because this would've broken the code to not strike an enemy in anger. There is no perfect balance in such an act. So he was ordered to do one thing, but would've broken the code if he'd acted, which he couldn't do.
My opinion, when it's right, is the offendedness issue is like this. When you're offended, and you act on being offended, on this particular energy, there is no perfect balance. Offendedness, however, is being taken out of context. I've seen dumb butt who wrote the idiots guide on her website, using this against folks, if they're hurt, or husband's have cheated on them, whatever, they're upset, their fault. That is bullshit to me, and not what DJ meant by this statement, IMPO.
-
Say you have two toltec folks who know this principle. Each one tells the other "You're offended, you're in the wrong."
But you see N,
the point is not to tell the other he is wrong.
The point is to listen to myself being offended and
learn, through stalking, something about myself.
I want to know WHY I am becoming offended. So I stalk that
and in doing so get to know myself better.
I do not care, so don't bother telling the other guy he is wrong.
What I am concerned with is my own self.
It's not "If you are offended, you are wrong. It's if I am offended, I am wrong"
See?
:P
-
"You're offended, that's your fault." So you have one asshole who likes to use this against people to disassociate himself from responsibility for their actions.
yes this is the nub of it - these ideas, esp toltec, are so often used against another, and to defend oneself against self-examination and self-change. Interestingly recently I heard a critique of Freud for introducing the concept of guilt avoidance - therapy to make us feel better and dispel our guilt, instead of looking at what we did wrong to feel guilty - ie taking self-responsibility.
As usual, and this is what I think Lori is saying, the difference lies in the person. Some will use anything to avoid the work on self - not just toltec, christ's words are also used this way - while others use whatever they find to change themselves.
Also this is a well know phase of development, where someone acquires all the ideas and words that are designed to assist growth, becomes an expert, and thus one's own worst enemy. Because all these tools can be picked up by the false mind to defend itself.
It is an old story - ideas and words are not enough. Without the impress of one who has succeeded in progressing along the path, the tools are worse that dead, they are dangerous, which is why in the past these things were kept secret.
It is, in the end, up to each of us to see through the false, and not associate. I have often tried to enlighten such people with words, and to my knowledge have never succeeded, because underneath, the intent is wrong.
What you say is true - there is nothing to be done, except avoid that mind, as it is infectious. But the tools, like this one, remain of immense value to one who is genuine, with appropriate guidance in how to use the tool.
-
But what about the offender's responsibility, if they are an actual offender?
:)
Responsibility is always 50-50. Whatever the crime or occasion.
-
:)
Responsibility is always 50-50. Whatever the crime or occasion.
In all cases?
-
In all cases?
Yes. There is always karma in action. It spans all lives and there always comes a time to pay the bill.
-
Yes. There is always karma in action. It spans all lives and there always comes a time to pay the bill.
I have few ideas about karma. Maybe Mea Culpa suites me better.
That means we work with an accumulated pie of Karma. It is not necessary our souls that have created this and that that we have to deal with. (I open another thread for this discussion).
-
Juan, individual or collective, but we have undertaken to work through the karma. Hence it is always 50-50 responsibility whatever happens to us.
We select our parents, we select our worst torturers.
We select all these punches and bruises and pains that are necessary for waking up in this life.
-
I know what you're talking about, but I can't accept that definition. For example (here's my skeptical mind again, Michael), say you have a child born to abusive parents. Some say they were born to those parents because of past karma. They may have been an abusive person in the past. This isn't based on reality. This is taking the concept of karma, and trying to mold/shape it into the person's experiences. People dont wish to let go of 'that' particular karma idea. Others say something different. They say we may choose our circumstances, our parents, our place of birth. But how can we know for sure, this is so? What if it's simple, that some can choose, or some do choose, and others may not? What if some are born randomly. What if we're all born randomly? What if?
In cases like offender/offendee, I see it more like this. We may have something inside us which gravitates, pulls, an offender to us. We may not be able to help this, s/a in extreme violent cases, where simply being a woman, or a young man, or five feet tall may isolate us, to the point some offender may zone in on someone, for various reasons.
For cases which aren't as traumatic, more mainstream, we have something in us which may place us into situations such as these, we may encounter people who are attracted to whatever in us, which is weak, vunerable, etc. A person is an easy target to "offend" in various ways, shake them up, another zones in on them because they can manipulate this vunerability. Another is much stronger, and another type of offender wants to break them down, sees them as a challenge. They zone in on them and try to find their weakness too, or be stronger, break down their strength. And very common, a person has something in them, which may remind them of something in themselves, they don't like. They zone in on this person, attacking them in various ways, because in a way, they're attacking themselves. And so on.
And we can use these interactions in viewing what in us is being offended. We can probe further behind blaming the person, and find what in us which is weak. Sure, I can agree with this. But there is still an issue of absolutes. Born of "always" or "all cases" are exceptions to the rule. They're is always an exception somewhere.
-
say you have a child born to abusive parents. Some say they were born to those parents because of past karma. They may have been an abusive person in the past. This isn't based on reality. This is taking the concept of karma, and trying to mold/shape it into the person's experiences. People dont wish to let go of 'that' particular karma idea. Others say something different. They say we may choose our circumstances, our parents, our place of birth. But how can we know for sure, this is so? What if it's simple, that some can choose, or some do choose, and others may not? What if some are born randomly. What if we're all born randomly? What if?
My parents weren't exactly loving, quite destructive actually. This is how i see the situation: this has all been just good for gaining somekind of detachment of the usual world which is useful for this journey to freedom.
Who are these people who don't wish to let go of that karma idea?
I suppose you won't know anything for sure if you haven't proved it with your own seeing.
I don't understand why are you making up these supposititous situations.
-
I tend to look to "offended" in different angles.
If I 'feel' offended, I will look to myself to see why - that 'feeling' is totally mine.
If I 'think' offended, I will also look to myself. Usually the feeling comes a moment before the thought. I will 'feel' something that i then translate mentally to "offended". All that is in that process belongs to me, since I am the one feeling and thinking.
If someone hits me physically, I do not immediately feel offended. My first immediate feeling is pain. From that feeling, I may or may not follow through to "offended".
If someone I care about hits me, I feel hurt, not offended. If someone I don't care about hits me, I feel angry.
Offended for me is rooted in pride. On a mental level, if what happens results in my feeling offended, I can usually trace it to self-importance and lack of recognition.
Those are 2 very interesting aspects to stalk.
If the feeling offensive is more emotional, I can usually trace it to self-pity.
While I do see that many terms are used not only by 'toltecs' as a defense/attack one against an-other, it does not really matter - what matters to me is what i do about that, and that then brings in personal responsibility.
Many things are connected one to the other, and it is in following the connections that I can trace back to the source and reclaim there.
This does not take away the 'other's' responsibility in the interaction. Just that it is not my responsibility as to the why and wherefore of the other. The other has been rather like a catalyst to show me myself. i can do nothing about an-other, but i can do everything about myself.
If I can get beyond my body's reaction, I then have a choice in how to respond. And the choices are many!
-
I am not sure what the idea of karma has to do with feeling offended or not, other than perhaps in the sense of past expereinces and expectations?
Perhaps there is a link I am not seeing?
Whatever the expereince, whether offended or not, it is happening now, in the present, and it is in the present that we have our choice.
Feeling offended or not is a bodyily reaction first, then comes the emotions and thoughts associated with it - or at least.. that is how I have expereinced it.
-
I'm thinking on this along the same lines, Daphne.
Regardless of theories, what matters at the end of the day, is what we do about our daily situations.
The desired end-state is clear - there can be nothing in our whole beingness that can be hooked on.
As to the connection of karma to responsibility for our situations and feeling offended - I brought it in to show that 50% of responsibility is always ours.
I can imagine that the person who has evolved past his little 'me' always takes on more than 50% - they consciously burn collective karma in every second of their existence.
-
My parents weren't exactly loving, quite destructive actually. This is how i see the situation: this has all been just good for gaining somekind of detachment of the usual world which is useful for this journey to freedom.
Who are these people who don't wish to let go of that karma idea?
I suppose you won't know anything for sure if you haven't proved it with your own seeing.
I don't understand why are you making up these supposititous situations.
I'm using examples in comparison/contrast to certain beliefs, principles we may hold. Buddha said question everything. So we don't adopt beliefs or principles haphazardly.
The examples are things I've heard manytimes before. A child is born to abusive parents because in a past life they abused people? I can't buy this. How does this deal with whatever healing issues they may need? That point came up cause Juhani brought up karma. It's something I have had difficulty wrapping my mind around, and maybe its cause my mind rejects it. Maybe cause it doesn't fit.
-
I'm thinking on this along the same lines, Daphne.
Regardless of theories, what matters at the end of the day, is what we do about our daily situations.
The desired end-state is clear - there can be nothing in our whole beingness that can be hooked on.
As to the connection of karma to responsibility for our situations and feeling offended - I brought it in to show that 50% of responsibility is always ours.
I can imagine that the person who has evolved past his little 'me' always takes on more than 50% - they consciously burn collective karma in every second of their existence.
Why 50%? Why not 70%? Ahhhh, does anyone understand where I'm coming from? Sometimes we adopt beliefs, and don't think through them, why we believe them.
Maybe I'm questioning some of the accountability issue. Then the absolutes on this. I know its a principle which is rooted in warriorship, but still. I think some of the offended issue is misunderstood by many. It's a principle to live by, but it's not perfect, not meant for all cases, not an absolute. It can't be. Don Juan can be wrong in some cases folks. There are no holy books, that goes for CC. No one is perfect, no writing is always perfect, correct, never to the point we don't question something.
Argh. I think I need to write something else soon.
-
Why 50%? Why not 70%? Ahhhh, does anyone understand where I'm coming from? Sometimes we adopt beliefs, and don't think through them, why we believe them.
Maybe I'm questioning some of the accountability issue. Then the absolutes on this. I know its a principle which is rooted in warriorship, but still. I think some of the offended issue is misunderstood by many. It's a principle to live by, but it's not perfect, not meant for all cases, not an absolute. It can't be. Don Juan can be wrong in some cases folks. There are no holy books, that goes for CC. No one is perfect, no writing is always perfect, correct, never to the point we don't question something.
Argh. I think I need to write something else soon.
You say this issue is misunderstood by many. Why would you care what these many people do?
-
You say this issue is misunderstood by many. Why would you care what these many people do?
That's a good question! I'm glad to see questioning, and accept this -- brings joy to be, thank you!
Ah, Taimi, look at many people who believe in certain gods, or follow certain religions, which aren't necessarily the healthiest. Got Muslims who believe if they go on a suicide bomb mission, they'll be rewarded in heaven and bestowed with many virgins and be heros when they die. We've got millions upon millions on the planet who believe Jesus will come back and save us from destruction. Why would I care about those issues even? I watch the news on CNN, see religion and racism, and all this shit coming up again, and I care because they're people just like me. I care because I'd hate to see a WWIII.
I care about the offended issue, or people getting it all twisted, because this is how false beliefs are born. Maybe part of it is, I'd like to see people probe the offended issue more, what DJ said and why, before they take it all in the wrong direction. Because taking meaning the wrong way, can be unhealthy for people. Thanks for questioning!
-
Ah, Taimi, look at many people who believe in certain gods, or follow certain religions, which aren't necessarily the healthiest. Got Muslims who believe if they go on a suicide bomb mission, they'll be rewarded in heaven and bestowed with many virgins and be heros when they die. We've got millions upon millions on the planet who believe Jesus will come back and save us from destruction. Why would I care about those issues even? I watch the news on CNN, see religion and racism, and all this shit coming up again, and I care because they're people just like me. I care because I'd hate to see a WWIII.
I think this caring won't save the world. It only consumes my energy when getting emotional about it. That's why i don't watch tv much 8) I prefer to walk in the woods, feel the wind on my skin, watch the birdies and so on :P Yes, there are many people who from my point of view are 'wrong'. But i don't care, it's their problem. Or actually they don't see it as a problem - why would i?
War - hm can't quite imagine this. Guess i'm too much in the moment. Or i see only this what is happening around me, there is no war here. And if there was, i'd see it as a chanse to become aware of death.
Actually i have thought about it if this unconcernedness is 'right'. But what can i do if i don't care?
-
BTW Niamh
Thank yoo too. Think I got some refreshing boost from your fierceness :D :-*
-
Well, you can't make yourself care. Sure, caring wont save the world, but still makes me sad to see people killing each other, not learning from the past. Not finding better ways to solve their problems. Innocent kids get bombed, over human stupidity, and hard not for me to care. I know, however, I'm powerless to stop the events. I can only deal with the microcosim that I am, and not fall into the trappings and illusions of the world. And I've known this for quite some time. What else can one do when many in the world are hell bent on destroying themselves in upteen million different ways?
-
BTW Niamh
Thank yoo too. Think I got some refreshing boost from your fierceness :D :-*
You're welcome! And I've enjoyed this conversation. Like I said, good to see you questioning, because that is a good thing!
-
Some say they were born to those parents because of past karma. They may have been an abusive person in the past. This isn't based on reality. This is taking the concept of karma, and trying to mold/shape it into the person's experiences.
So Karma may be a part of reality. Tibetan munks read the natal chart of Michael Palin (BBC) and said that in his previous life he was an Elephant. After that Palin went for an interview with Dalai Lama. I am afraid that to define reality is difficult.
In cases like offender/offendee, I see it more like this. We may have something inside us which gravitates, pulls, an offender to us.
Right, and if we do not have a petty tyrant we better get one! It lies a challenge in this. A sound challenge. How we handle a difficult situation. We want to be in control and then someone stumble in and ruin our circles. To hit back, to take necessary action does not necessary mean that we are offended. To be in our center though requires many years of training.
-
Well, you can't make yourself care. Sure, caring wont save the world, but still makes me sad to see people killing each other, not learning from the past. Not finding better ways to solve their problems. Innocent kids get bombed, over human stupidity, and hard not for me to care. I know, however, I'm powerless to stop the events. I can only deal with the microcosim that I am, and not fall into the trappings and illusions of the world. And I've known this for quite some time. What else can one do when many in the world are hell bent on destroying themselves in upteen million different ways?
Yes we are powerless to the Dream of the planet. And we have to brush our own staircase first. If we hate, then it should be Ok for anyone else to hate. So some think it wise to erase our hate. There we go.
The Dream of the planet, the mass conscious is much more dense than we are. Therefore we experience a "conflict" with that Dream. In fact it is a great opportunity to have a physical body during this time in mans history. The opportunities for growth are the best ever! In almost any field that you choose to work you will find great probabilities.
-
Or i see only this what is happening around me, there is no war here. And if there was, i'd see it as a chanse to become aware of death.
Actually i have thought about it if this unconcernedness is 'right'. But what can i do if i don't care?
well well, so it pops up. my god t, your country is redolent with war death destruction and pain - i'm surprised people in those areas live so casually. these have permeated the etheric level so deeply, i'm surprised you and Juhani can even live there - Juhani at least is aware of this, and is a reason i have been asking him to dig deeper than this level to the older strata - and you are in complete oblivion.
partly due to your youth - it is a good warrior the old youth - but in your case, the signs are all around you - the caves, the man who visits the 'grave' - these are the outer visible of the vast beneath, and you, a sensitive have a lot of awareness to catch up on. i'm not saying what you see is wrong, but that there is so much more right in front of you - calling to you - and you are not wanting to see it. maybe there is a karmic reason.
-
The other has been rather like a catalyst to show me myself. i can do nothing about an-other, but i can do everything about myself.
If I can get beyond my body's reaction, I then have a choice in how to respond. And the choices are many!
Yes to respond and not re-act.
And all I can change is my self. And when I change so will my outer world.
-
Don Juan can be wrong in some cases folks.
I doubt that, seriously. At least not wrong in the sense that we usually mean because that would be rather contradictive. At the end of his teachings Don Juan had completed his transformation to a man of knowledge. By that he aligned to the non-personal line of Toltec Teachers. Always connected through time and space.
Ruthless knowingness and endless compassion cannot be wrong. Could it?
-
Oblivion, probably yes. I haven't seen war. So i don't understand what it is that you think i should see.
PS i still haven't quite figured out what this word 'karma' means.
well well, so it pops up. my god t, your country is redolent with war death destruction and pain - i'm surprised people in those areas live so casually. these have permeated the etheric level so deeply, i'm surprised you and Juhani can even live there - Juhani at least is aware of this, and is a reason i have been asking him to dig deeper than this level to the older strata - and you are in complete oblivion.
partly due to your youth - it is a good warrior the old youth - but in your case, the signs are all around you - the caves, the man who visits the 'grave' - these are the outer visible of the vast beneath, and you, a sensitive have a lot of awareness to catch up on. i'm not saying what you see is wrong, but that there is so much more right in front of you - calling to you - and you are not wanting to see it. maybe there is a karmic reason.
-
I doubt that, seriously. At least not wrong in the sense that we usually mean because that would be rather contradictive. At the end of his teachings Don Juan had completed his transformation to a man of knowledge. By that he aligned to the non-personal line of Toltec Teachers. Always connected through time and space.
Ruthless knowingness and endless compassion cannot be wrong. Could it?
No, I dont think that's wrong at all. I suppose from his perspective, all who are offended are in the wrong. He really believed it. He did walk the walk.
-
well well, so it pops up. my god t, your country is redolent with war death destruction and pain - i'm surprised people in those areas live so casually. these have permeated the etheric level so deeply, i'm surprised you and Juhani can even live there - Juhani at least is aware of this, and is a reason i have been asking him to dig deeper than this level to the older strata - and you are in complete oblivion.
I don't get it. Should i see and feel this killing and pain and everything? What for? I know a lot of people whose grandmothers and grandfathers have been to some concentration camps and heard storys but that doesn't evoke much emotions in me. It's more like just interesting storys. My grandmother wasn't there (haven't seen my grandfathers and the other grandmother is dead), they got a warning from someone and had the chance to escape and hide in the forest. She told about that once how they were hiding there in fear, living in a inn made of spruce branches and the bombs were flying over their heads. Her woice started to tremble when she spoke about it. Well, i couldn't understand that, it was just an interesting story for me and i have been feeling a bit sorry for not being able to hear more of these storys.
PS - just took this book from the library - If This is a Man by Primo Levi
-
No, I dont think that's wrong at all. I suppose from his perspective, all who are offended are in the wrong. He really believed it. He did walk the walk.
Don Juans perspective was nothing of his own. He didn't believe in the same sense that you and I use the word. He acted and his manifestation became pages in CC:s books.
We are in the "wrong" if we trap yourself. We are in the "wrong" if our perception gets clouded. That is what ruthless knowingness is all about. There is just one person in the whole Universe - and that is I. All that matters is me. But not little ego me.
What Don Juan knew was that being offended is just simply self-importance and since ther is nothing useful with self-importance it (the whole offence thing) has to go down the drain together with the rest of our garbage.
The other side of this is to not give away power. There is no room for self-importance but there is also no way that we shall let us be robbed on power. So how do we respond to a attack? We respond from our center of power and that center takes no offense, it don't stir up the emotions. Our center solves the problem, not making it worse.
-
Kabbalists teach that the other persons are like mirrors to us.
This means that if we get offended for a thing another says or does, means that we have a "problem" within ourselves. We have it from the inside and we exteriorize THANKS to another person.
So we should look for good our reactions and try to work on them.
Giving the fault to one another is a mere excuse created from ego.
The first re- action is always to get offended cos we learnt to react at this sensation being offended.
REACTION is the repeting of an action that if perpetrated long time become the classic dog trying to bite its tail.
-
Well said, Tiamat!
-
These Kabbalists seem to fit my inventory, Tiamati. Do you see it as they do, also? Mirrors, mirrors on our eyes. T
-
MAKE NO MISTAKE!
Stalkers have a very simple rule - if you get offended, you are in the wrong.
We are allowed to get upset, annoyed, frustrated - these are natural human reactions, and they are something we constantly seek to reduce by looking at the source of these emotions - do they have antecedent causes in our past. But if we are offended or insulted by someone else, feel slighted, miffed, etc, then there is self-importance. How do we tell the difference?
1. The natural part is short lived - felt as a psychic slap, or bump... we don’t like it. We like it when someone praises us - felt as a lift.
2. The insult is long lived, we mull over it again and again, we never forget it, we plan revenge, we get depressed, we get angry, we play it over and over in our minds, in our words. Then we justify, justify, justify - concoct elaborate rationales to show how we are in the right, but always underneath we seethe with injured pride. Then, in the worst cases we paint our assailant with a perfect picture of ourselves - funny how accurate we get it. Inside we really do know exactly what we are doing, just that we project this onto the other. Thank god these are the worst cases, pretty close to madness, though I see a lot of it in politics these days.
If you are stewing, can’t laugh at yourself - from a stalker’s view, you are wrong. And worse, only more pain can cure you, with understanding of course.
Now the other person may well have shovelled you a load of crap, but that doesn’t matter - if you got your nose out of joint, then you are wrong, not them.
The correct approach goes like this - first pain, then laugh at your silliness, then consider a response. You see you need to know how to take offence, how to respond - reaction is not response, it is defence and attack. Response is creative, it chooses it’s own timing, it enjoys the game.
Self-importance hates to be criticised, it bristles with indignation at the slightest slight. Self-importance hates snobs, hates elites, hates anyone who thinks their better than it. Self-importance hates anyone who sets themselves up as being above others, above it, and then rushes to pull them down - bring them down to its level (in fact, don’t tell anyone, but pushes them down beneath it, cause self-importance has to be IMPORTANT).
I’m just trying to flesh this out so we can be perfectly clear, that self-importance hates being underneath. There is no escape, this attitude is wrong. Point blank, no argument - it is a mortal sin, and must always be seen as such.
Now by contrast, dignity sees itself as noble, elevated, keeps it’s head up. When challenged, dignity may feel hurt, annoyed, and it may well seek to identify error in its attacker, but it doesn’t suffer from wounded pride, and thus doesn’t seek to belittle the other - rather it asks that the other also put aside it’s vindictiveness and lift it’s own head, it wants to pull the other up, not down. Of course dignity is allowed to yell at an undisciplined dog to stop it, bring it into line - everyone needs to know dog language.
I may be wrong, but I don’t think dignity has any more place in a Toltec stalker than self-importance. A stalker seeks the truth, and has no time for pride, justified or unjustified. A stalker leans slightly forward with an ever so slight mischievous grin, a keen terrifying eye and hands loose but always ready. A stalker plays friendly, plays dignified, plays offended, plays the human harp but never loses its sight from the truth!
Michael,
I have been looking for this for like two weeks! Finally stumbled upon it whilst looking at something else. yay!
May I C and P this at the GG?
;D
:-* :-* :-*
-
yeah, sure - it seems to get around
-
yeah, sure - it seems to get around
Yay!
Thank you!
:-* :-*
-
it seems to get around
*heh* nearly wet myself on reading that!
-
<<<Bump>>
Here it is V. I stumbled upon it yesterday while looking for something else.
::)
-
I've got my own personal copy of it.
But thanks for the link!
-
I've got my own personal copy of it.
But thanks for the link!
LOL Me too!
I just thought since you were looking for it and I had just stumbled upon it yesterday, I'd point the way.
-
This was a good thread, wasnt it?
I still say there are exceptions to every rule now... that has not changed!
Even having an exception to the exception to every rule exception, hehe!
-
I will say Michael made good points below here especially. I dont know if saw it that time but, the 'nub of it,' how people use ideas against to defend themselves to death, against the necessary changes they need to make themselves.
yes this is the nub of it - these ideas, esp toltec, are so often used against another, and to defend oneself against self-examination and self-change. Interestingly recently I heard a critique of Freud for introducing the concept of guilt avoidance - therapy to make us feel better and dispel our guilt, instead of looking at what we did wrong to feel guilty - ie taking self-responsibility.
As usual, and this is what I think Lori is saying, the difference lies in the person. Some will use anything to avoid the work on self - not just toltec, christ's words are also used this way - while others use whatever they find to change themselves.
Also this is a well know phase of development, where someone acquires all the ideas and words that are designed to assist growth, becomes an expert, and thus one's own worst enemy. Because all these tools can be picked up by the false mind to defend itself.
It is an old story - ideas and words are not enough. Without the impress of one who has succeeded in progressing along the path, the tools are worse that dead, they are dangerous, which is why in the past these things were kept secret.
It is, in the end, up to each of us to see through the false, and not associate. I have often tried to enlighten such people with words, and to my knowledge have never succeeded, because underneath, the intent is wrong.
What you say is true - there is nothing to be done, except avoid that mind, as it is infectious. But the tools, like this one, remain of immense value to one who is genuine, with appropriate guidance in how to use the tool.
-
Coming back in 2023 - Jahn is still wrong - the 50/50 deal.
It's interesting to read this now, per the Orange Menace and his tirades on his social media platform, "Truth Social" (what a joke), and Twitter, when he has done NOTHING but personally attack other people on it. Constantly attacks, even tries to get others to physically attack or riot for him.
Now his "main" advesary in his eyes is Obama. His hatred is beyond loathesome. He attacked him with the 'birther' lie. He has attacked him continually. Most recent: he posted his address. And one of his idiotic red had "kool aid' followers, went to the house armed (or close to it. The secret service got him).
Is Obama 50/50 responsible in this "thing" Trump had for Obama? flower NO. Dont dare anyone say so. The Orange Menace has attacked him relentlessly cause he is BLACK. And Obama plays a 50/50 role how? What did he ever do to the Orange Menace? How about "be a successful First Black President." Ok? So Jahn if you ever see it - hands down, you lose on that argument.
Right now esp online, its the bullies vs the bulled. Thanks to the Orange Menace, there has been nothing but a bunch of folks attacking others. Everyone knows attacking others due to race, creed, color, religion, gender, sex orientation - is wrong. Please no one come at me and start being philosopical with your "we are mirrors" talk, I know this already. But still, telling those groups to "not be offended," while somewhere they do need to set it down, not everyone is a "warrior" in this world, reared on Toltec philosophy. If they get upset or offended by being attacked - its called being human. And its despicable what the Orange Menace has brought about as a culture and virus to the division in this country.
BUT ill say this. The more folks do these attacks, the more it pollutes them within. And we can "see" this happening to the Orange Menace, who is known to be up posting online his hate speech shit, at all hours of the night. The continual attacking has dirtied his soul so much, he has completely gone dark and insane inside. Thats cause all are a mirror - true - and it bounces back. Like Jesus said "its not what goes into the mouth which defiles you, but what comes out of your mouth which defiles you."
BUT also, this is the time where if we see this shit, we have to speak up and say something to the bullies and not let them push people around as well. There are a lot of c**** running around. Michael says all this dont get offended, but people do, and maybe they are justified. Now ill never go to X or any of that shit, but if i see a bully bullying someone (like in my group it happens on occasion), I wil methodically, take them down.