|
Post by sharon on Apr 4, 2011 10:09:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Apr 4, 2011 10:09:45 GMT -5
Hi Max, in a somewhat cryptic message, I was saying the same thing...
Although you get it, that your not the idea of a separate person, thoughts arise from the feelings of being 'wronged' by people.
That sets up a dynamic of a victim and the guilty or offending party.
They are just thoughts, but they have very deep emotional attachments, that keep reinforcing the idea of separateness.
I wasn't suggesting that a person has to convert other peeps into seeing the light, before one can realize freedom.
More like the Christian form of forgiveness, but not the selfish forgiveness that also creates separation. But more like the forgetting of all transgressions perpetrated by man against man and the rest of the planet.
Making a single person guilty of a transgression, forms the separation idea of a sinner (them) and a me...
Only when you can see a person as guiltless and innocent can you remove the polarity that reinforces the illusory me...
Does that make any sense, or is it even more convoluted then before? lol
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 4, 2011 12:29:24 GMT -5
Making a single person guilty of a transgression, forms the separation idea of a sinner (them) and a me... Only when you can see a person as guiltless and innocent can you remove the polarity that reinforces the illusory me... Does that make any sense, or is it even more convoluted then before? lol I'll buy that one, so the next question is how does that come about? Is it possible to see others as innocent before you see yourself as innocent? How could that work? So it begins with your own innocence, and once that is seen clearly the innocence of others is equally obvious. If you are the one flying the plane, or even if you are the air traffic controller, you MUST be guilty if a wrong choice is made. And so the very last thing that any self respecting pilot wants to see is the only thing that can save him; The pilot does NOT have personal control of the plane. (Think about that next time you fly. Hehe.) Naturally this is difficult to accept because it collapses the will of the separate person into a little grease spot, and so it is difficult to see with absolute clarity, but it's huge. You are innocent. You are innocence itself. God is a child playing with the universe. It'smessy and perfect, full of wonder and horror, beauty and ugliness. There are no heros, and no villians.
|
|
|
Post by michaelsees on Apr 4, 2011 14:24:24 GMT -5
Making a single person guilty of a transgression, forms the separation idea of a sinner (them) and a me... Only when you can see a person as guiltless and innocent can you remove the polarity that reinforces the illusory me... Does that make any sense, or is it even more convoluted then before? lol I'll buy that one, so the next question is how does that come about? Is it possible to see others as innocent before you see yourself as innocent? How could that work? So it begins with your own innocence, and once that is seen clearly the innocence of others is equally obvious. If you are the one flying the plane, or even if you are the air traffic controller, you MUST be guilty if a wrong choice is made. And so the very last thing that any self respecting pilot wants to see is the only thing that can save him; The pilot does NOT have personal control of the plane. (Think about that next time you fly. Hehe.) Naturally this is difficult to accept because it collapses the will of the separate person into a little grease spot, and so it is difficult to see with absolute clarity, but it's huge. You are innocent. You are innocence itself. God is a child playing with the universe. It'smessy and perfect, full of wonder and horror, beauty and ugliness. There are no heros, and no villians. Sounds correct you are not the do-er As far as the plane goes I know a bit about this. They do have absolute control of the plane if they need to. Most is flow by auto-piliot and also almost all landings now are hands off with the exception every pilot needs to do a few manual landings each month to be current. All take offs are full manual control and most crashes happen on the ground during taxi. Michael
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Apr 4, 2011 14:37:08 GMT -5
I could pretend that I was playing a hero or a villian though surely? And if everyone else stepped up or down based on the role, it would appear accordingly so, yeah?
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Apr 4, 2011 14:46:03 GMT -5
Making a single person guilty of a transgression, forms the separation idea of a sinner (them) and a me... Only when you can see a person as guiltless and innocent can you remove the polarity that reinforces the illusory me... Does that make any sense, or is it even more convoluted then before? lol I'll buy that one, so the next question is how does that come about? Is it possible to see others as innocent before you see yourself as innocent? How could that work? So it begins with your own innocence, and once that is seen clearly the innocence of others is equally obvious. If you are the one flying the plane, or even if you are the air traffic controller, you MUST be guilty if a wrong choice is made. And so the very last thing that any self respecting pilot wants to see is the only thing that can save him; The pilot does NOT have personal control of the plane. (Think about that next time you fly. Hehe.) Naturally this is difficult to accept because it collapses the will of the separate person into a little grease spot, and so it is difficult to see with absolute clarity, but it's huge. You are innocent. You are innocence itself. God is a child playing with the universe. It'smessy and perfect, full of wonder and horror, beauty and ugliness. There are no heros, and no villians. Precisely, I've already explained how it comes about through selfless forgiving of your brother. If you can do that, your own innocence becomes a mute point... ZD knows the point you made all too well and yet he cries for a street vendor that set himself on fire, because of corrupt politicians. It's an emotionally charged issue of sin and guilt, resulting in an unfortunate outcome. He see's his own innocence, but does he see it in his fellow man, no matter how grotesque the indecencies against humanity... Can we forgive ourselves but deny it in our brother? Being innocent and hating your brother for his actions doesn't illuminate freedom. The idea of separation will not die if we judge our brother, it's that simple.
|
|
|
Post by ivory on Apr 4, 2011 15:14:26 GMT -5
If you can do that, your own innocence becomes a mute point... Can we forgive ourselves but deny it in our brother? I think what Enigma's asking is which comes first, self-forgiveness or the forgiveness of others? Can you truly recognize the innocence in another if you don't recognize it in yourself? Enigma, I take it the key is in conditioning, ya? Being innocent and hating your brother for his actions doesn't illuminate freedom. The idea of separation will not die if we judge our brother, it's that simple. Agreed. But dammit, I'll tell you what, it is difficult to forgive when you've been wronged or hurt badly by someone else.
|
|
|
Post by ivory on Apr 4, 2011 15:38:06 GMT -5
Whoops, you said, "Can we forgive ourselves but deny it in our brother?"
What I'm thinking is that if one can't forgive another then one hasn't completely forgiven himself. Forgive is a strange word though. When I hear it I think of what one should or shouldn't do (i.e. we should forgive one another). I like the way that Enigma worded it.... Recognizing the innocence in one's self or another.
|
|
|
Post by therealfake on Apr 4, 2011 16:44:50 GMT -5
If you can do that, your own innocence becomes a mute point... Can we forgive ourselves but deny it in our brother? I think what Enigma's asking is which comes first, self-forgiveness or the forgiveness of others? Can you truly recognize the innocence in another if you don't recognize it in yourself? Enigma, I take it the key is in conditioning, ya? Being innocent and hating your brother for his actions doesn't illuminate freedom. The idea of separation will not die if we judge our brother, it's that simple. Agreed. But dammit, I'll tell you what, it is difficult to forgive when you've been wronged or hurt badly by someone else. That's the only way selfless forgiveness can become a powerful experience for illumination... Forgiveness of ones self can be self delusion, but forgiveness of someone who has wronged or hurt you definitely cannot be... The result of which blasts you straight into heaven.
|
|
|
Post by klaus on Apr 4, 2011 16:45:46 GMT -5
Who among you is without sin?
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Apr 4, 2011 17:20:13 GMT -5
Yes. Innocence is the key. There is nothing to forgive in either direction. I laugh and cry for no reason whatsoever. Some things are funny and other things are sad. It has nothing to do with logic.
Let's say that someone does something stupid and someone else dies as a result of the stupid act. Is the stupid person responsible? No. Because the person had to be stupid in that particular way at that particular time. That was how reality had to manifest. There was no separate entity in charge of anything that happened. This is why I often say to people, "Everyone is always doing the best he or she can," and "The world is always operating logically."
Someone recently said to me, "I don't see how Jane Doe could have done thus and so." I replied, "Well, it was perfectly logical." She said, "What do you mean?" I said, "Given her personality, life situation, conditioning, genetics, thought processes, and the gravitational influences of all galaxies in the universe (I threw this in just for fun), etc. she was doing exactly what she had to be doing. If you could trade places with her for a short period of time, you would understand exactly why she did what she did. She could no more help doing what she did than you could help thinking that she should have done something differently. It is all perfectly logical."
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Apr 4, 2011 17:27:30 GMT -5
Who among you is without sin? In order for someone to commit a sin there would have to be a someone. Source is all. It does what it does.
|
|
|
Post by michaelsees on Apr 4, 2011 18:17:58 GMT -5
Yes. Innocence is the key. There is nothing to forgive in either direction. I laugh and cry for no reason whatsoever. Some things are funny and other things are sad. It has nothing to do with logic. Let's say that someone does something stupid and someone else dies as a result of the stupid act. Is the stupid person responsible? No. Because the person had to be stupid in that particular way at that particular time. That was how reality had to manifest. There was no separate entity in charge of anything that happened. This is why I often say to people, "Everyone is always doing the best he or she can," and "The world is always operating logically." Someone recently said to me, "I don't see how Jane Doe could have done thus and so." I replied, "Well, it was perfectly logical." She said, "What do you mean?" I said, "Given her personality, life situation, conditioning, genetics, thought processes, and the gravitational influences of all galaxies in the universe (I threw this in just for fun), etc. she was doing exactly what she had to be doing. If you could trade places with her for a short period of time, you would understand exactly why she did what she did. She could no more help doing what she did than you could help thinking that she should have done something differently. It is all perfectly logical." It all sounds great until the very unspeakable happens. What you said would still be true of course but it will take sometime indeed for it to truly sink in. Your approach to this subject sounds much better than well it's just karma. Michael
|
|
|
Post by klaus on Apr 4, 2011 18:39:16 GMT -5
Who among you is without sin? In order for someone to commit a sin there would have to be a someone. Source is all. It does what it does. No s**t that was my point.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Apr 4, 2011 20:32:55 GMT -5
In order for someone to commit a sin there would have to be a someone. Source is all. It does what it does. No s**t that was my point. My sincerest apology! The words made me think something else was intended, but of course I had no choice but to interpret the words incorrectly. Ha ha. I'll blame it on the gravitational forces of distant galaxies. LOL
|
|