Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2012 11:35:19 GMT -5
Sometimes 'no' brings such a storm of emotion, a real tirade. It's mostly low blood sugar and sleep deficit. But there's pent up anxiety also, and a seemingly hard-wired neediness. The storm passes. Hopefully the neighbors aren't too annoyed. And in the wake of the emotional release there is re-connection and reflection and transparent love.
Sometimes what-is is and elicits responses and behaviors not easily classifiable under the heading 'love' -- that's the confusing part. Loving is happening in the broad sense. But in the moment, and that's all there is, it can seem to be something else. The love qualia ain't there. And if it ain't there, it ain't there according to QM and other presence models.
Yet there is love. Relationships really challenge this notion of love.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Aug 7, 2012 11:37:06 GMT -5
Sure. I'd say that there is no 'failure to love.' It's just that there are temporary behaviours that mask love. The fumbling ugliness describes such temporary behaviour, sometimes (hyperbolic and self-judgmental). The enforcement of boundaries, controlling of environment, managing social interactions -- these are the things that challenge my sense of 'loving what is,' yet they are all activities I find myself engaging in. Maybe there's a misunderstanding how the word 'love' is used here. Enigma uses the word love in the sense of accepting, of not having to change it, being okay with it's existence. So looking at ugly stuff and loving it isn't a problem then. It's variety. That's all. You seem to use it in the sense of liking it, preferring it. So looking at ugly stuff and loving it is indeed a problem. No one can do that. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 7, 2012 11:39:38 GMT -5
But isn't fumbling ugliness already a failure of love? Of course it's hard to love the failure to allow Love to be. That's what made Marie cry. The games that your children play that bring about your frustration are as much the effect of the failure of love as the cause. Everyone is wanting to know they are loved. Sure. I'd say that there is no 'failure to love.' It's just that there are temporary behaviours that mask love. The fumbling ugliness describes such temporary behaviour, sometimes (hyperbolic and self-judgmental). Yeah, that's what I mean by a failure of love. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2012 11:42:45 GMT -5
Seems to me you have your priorities upside down. In the LOA teachings (Abraham-Hicks version) they say: The only responsibility you have to your children is to provide an avenue into the physical. So after you have given birth, your responsibility is basically over.  Well I'd say that the whole birthing process is a great example of lack of volition/responsibility. Just along for the ride on that one (so to speak). It's starting day 0 that parenting starts. Children can't make it with out us. LOA folks would be in jail right-quick for walking away from an infant. Even when the kids could make it on their own, parents have a role. Dunno about 'responsibility' but response-ability is still happening big time. Did LOA teachings on parenting get channeled from aliens or something? |
|
|
|
Post by topology on Aug 7, 2012 11:44:43 GMT -5
Regardless of the question, the answer is always the same. Love is the answer. Get out of the way and let life take care of itself. Love is a tricky word. I'm sure others would call it knowing, acceptance or just being or whatever else. And they would all be very right in doing so. It can be looked at in many different ways. Seems to me you have your priorities upside down. In the LOA teachings (Abraham-Hicks version) they say: The only responsibility you have to your children is to provide an avenue into the physical. So after you have given birth, your responsibility is basically over. Let them work it out. "daddy, daddy, Teigan hit me." "daddy, daddy, Aedin hit me." What Daddy wants to say: "Well hit him back and establish your boundaries." Of course that would put me in the doghouse with mom. . Not to mention the future complaints from day care and school teachers about "improper behavior". 4 and 3 yos., no concept of boundaries yet. The hitting I'd advise would be along the lines of spanking "stop participating in that behavior". Daddy gets frustrated trying to talk things out rationally with 3 and 4 year olds. Out comes the Wrath of God to try and instill some fear and obedience. But that wrath is mostly toothless, and they are learning that. The youngest one is starting to realize that spankings are just temporary sensations. So I throw my hands up and tag mom in before mt. Vesuvious erupts and buries my two pompeians in hot lava. Nope, I don't have being a Dad mastered at all. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 7, 2012 11:44:58 GMT -5
Regardless of the question, the answer is always the same. Love is the answer. Get out of the way and let life take care of itself. Love is a tricky word. I'm sure others would call it knowing, acceptance or just being or whatever else. And they would all be very right in doing so. It can be looked at in many different ways. Yes, I usually avoid the word for that reason. I mean getting the 'meness' out of the way, or as I say 'come empty'. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 7, 2012 11:58:00 GMT -5
Love is a tricky word. I'm sure others would call it knowing, acceptance or just being or whatever else. And they would all be very right in doing so. It can be looked at in many different ways. Seems to me you have your priorities upside down. In the LOA teachings (Abraham-Hicks version) they say: The only responsibility you have to your children is to provide an avenue into the physical. So after you have given birth, your responsibility is basically over. Let them work it out. "daddy, daddy, Teigan hit me." "daddy, daddy, Aedin hit me." What Daddy wants to say: "Well hit him back and establish your boundaries." Of course that would put me in the doghouse with mom. . Not to mention the future complaints from day care and school teachers about "improper behavior". 4 and 3 yos., no concept of boundaries yet. The hitting I'd advise would be along the lines of spanking "stop participating in that behavior". Daddy gets frustrated trying to talk things out rationally with 3 and 4 year olds. Out comes the Wrath of God to try and instill some fear and obedience. But that wrath is mostly toothless, and they are learning that. The youngest one is starting to realize that spankings are just temporary sensations. So I throw my hands up and tag mom in before mt. Vesuvious erupts and buries my two pompeians in hot lava. Nope, I don't have being a Dad mastered at all. Hehe. Neil Walsch (Conversations with God) put forward the idea that raising kids must be a community effort, and no parents can actually fulfill that responsibility alone. Makes a lot of sense to me but probly not in this society. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2012 12:03:59 GMT -5
My wife and I often gasp "it takes a friggin' village!"
There ain't no village in this society. I suspect it's a myth.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Aug 7, 2012 12:15:51 GMT -5
Im feeling ya here max. In a way, being a parent challenges all the ideals that the 'enlightenment' body of work inadvertently sets up. Which is a good thing. Having kids has pushed me to a level of self-acceptance that I don't think I would ever have 'attained' otherwise. Yes I love the crucible. The totally amazing thing is to see how resilient and forgiving children are. It's a continual gift. The forgiving resilience seems harder among the adult relationships. So much of conflict has to do with blood sugar and sleep deficits. Part of being a successful parent is just getting good food accessible and a consistent bed routine. Yes, I agree that helps. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Aug 7, 2012 12:16:30 GMT -5
Aye. I liked the thread title by the way. A couple months ago, Marie started a Facebook page called "Love is the answer". As usual, her explorations are perfect. She was also wearing a shirt yesterday that said "LOVE LIFE". |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Aug 7, 2012 12:29:09 GMT -5
Regardless of the question, the answer is always the same. Love is the answer. Get out of the way and let life take care of itself. Love is a tricky word. I'm sure others would call it knowing, acceptance or just being or whatever else. And they would all be very right in doing so. It can be looked at in many different ways. Seems to me you have your priorities upside down. In the LOA teachings (Abraham-Hicks version) they say: The only responsibility you have to your children is to provide an avenue into the physical. So after you have given birth, your responsibility is basically over. Let them work it out. Im feeling ya here max. In a way, being a parent challenges all the ideals that the 'enlightenment' body of work inadvertently sets up. Which is a good thing. Having kids has pushed me to a level of self-acceptance that I don't think I would ever have 'attained' otherwise. What ideals? Several years ago I was heavily into Abraham-Hicks and then I moved somewhat away from Abraham-Hicks when I became a parent, and the reason was that their particular 'no responsibility' teaching was somewhat inapplicable to the situation I was in. During this time the likes of Niz and Ramana became more relevant in my life. In the last eighteen months I have returned to Abraham-Hicks, but that's only really happened because our family are now functioning in such a way that allows me/us to embrace the material. We are all basically 'on the same page' these days. Enlightened ideals of being perfectly blissful, allowing, accepting, unconditionally loving, non-judgemental, peaceful. Usual stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Aug 7, 2012 12:30:41 GMT -5
Sometimes 'no' brings such a storm of emotion, a real tirade. It's mostly low blood sugar and sleep deficit. But there's pent up anxiety also, and a seemingly hard-wired neediness. The storm passes. Hopefully the neighbors aren't too annoyed. And in the wake of the emotional release there is re-connection and reflection and transparent love. Sometimes what-is is and elicits responses and behaviors not easily classifiable under the heading 'love' -- that's the confusing part. Loving is happening in the broad sense. But in the moment, and that's all there is, it can seem to be something else. The love qualia ain't there. And if it ain't there, it ain't there according to QM and other presence models. Yet there is love. Relationships really challenge this notion of love. Again, appreciation being felt for your message there max. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Aug 7, 2012 12:32:09 GMT -5
Seems to me you have your priorities upside down. In the LOA teachings (Abraham-Hicks version) they say: The only responsibility you have to your children is to provide an avenue into the physical. So after you have given birth, your responsibility is basically over. Well I'd say that the whole birthing process is a great example of lack of volition/responsibility. Just along for the ride on that one (so to speak). It's starting day 0 that parenting starts. Children can't make it with out us. LOA folks would be in jail right-quick for walking away from an infant. Even when the kids could make it on their own, parents have a role. Dunno about 'responsibility' but response-ability is still happening big time. Did LOA teachings on parenting get channeled from aliens or something? Hehe yes. I can almost hear them laughing in my ear right now actually. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2012 12:32:18 GMT -5
Sure. I'd say that there is no 'failure to love.' It's just that there are temporary behaviours that mask love. The fumbling ugliness describes such temporary behaviour, sometimes (hyperbolic and self-judgmental). The enforcement of boundaries, controlling of environment, managing social interactions -- these are the things that challenge my sense of 'loving what is,' yet they are all activities I find myself engaging in. Maybe there's a misunderstanding how the word 'love' is used here. Enigma uses the word love in the sense of accepting, of not having to change it, being okay with it's existence. So looking at ugly stuff and loving it isn't a problem then. It's variety. That's all. You seem to use it in the sense of liking it, preferring it. So looking at ugly stuff and loving it is indeed a problem. No one can do that. No I pretty much understand it as that too. I'm counterposing the Loving-What-Is with Arguing-With-What-Is and I'm saying that sometimes it's hard to discern the difference between the two of them. The thing is, all there is is what is. So the best approach is to just 'enjoy the ride,' which is just another way of saying 'accept' or love what is. 'What is' is a set that includes the argument. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Aug 7, 2012 12:34:48 GMT -5
"daddy, daddy, Teigan hit me." "daddy, daddy, Aedin hit me." What Daddy wants to say: "Well hit him back and establish your boundaries." Of course that would put me in the doghouse with mom. . Not to mention the future complaints from day care and school teachers about "improper behavior". 4 and 3 yos., no concept of boundaries yet. The hitting I'd advise would be along the lines of spanking "stop participating in that behavior". Daddy gets frustrated trying to talk things out rationally with 3 and 4 year olds. Out comes the Wrath of God to try and instill some fear and obedience. But that wrath is mostly toothless, and they are learning that. The youngest one is starting to realize that spankings are just temporary sensations. So I throw my hands up and tag mom in before mt. Vesuvious erupts and buries my two pompeians in hot lava. Nope, I don't have being a Dad mastered at all. Hehe. Neil Walsch (Conversations with God) put forward the idea that raising kids must be a community effort, and no parents can actually fulfill that responsibility alone. Makes a lot of sense to me but probly not in this society. Yes, makes a lot of sense to me too. He also says that the 'elders' have a much more significant role to play in the raising of children in 'enlightened societies'. Fancy doing some baby sitting E hehe? Appreciating your message there too Top. |
|
