|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 3, 2013 15:40:10 GMT -5
When you say 'your ideas about love is not what Love really is', should actually read ' all ideas about Love is not what Love really is'. That would then exclude you from 'thinking' that you know what Love really is...  Yes, all ideas. That's why I don't have all sorts of ideas about Love that Mr Goat seems to think I'm trying to convert peeps too. If you didn't have all sorts of ideas about love, why do you speak of 'Love'? Seems to me that to distinguish between 'love' and 'Love' IS to have ideas about 'love'. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 3, 2013 15:43:22 GMT -5
Yes, all ideas. That's why I don't have all sorts of ideas about Love that Mr Goat seems to think I'm trying to convert peeps too. If you didn't have all sorts of ideas about love, why do you speak of 'Love'? Seems to me that to distinguish between 'love' and 'Love' IS to have ideas about 'love'. Replace 'Love' with 'God' and see if it makes more sense. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2013 15:55:59 GMT -5
When you say 'your ideas about love is not what Love really is', should actually read ' all ideas about Love is not what Love really is'. That would then exclude you from 'thinking' that you know what Love really is... Yes, all ideas. That's why I don't have all sorts of ideas about Love that Mr Goat seems to think I'm trying to convert peeps too. I think he will now... |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 3, 2013 16:03:51 GMT -5
If you didn't have all sorts of ideas about love, why do you speak of 'Love'? Seems to me that to distinguish between 'love' and 'Love' IS to have ideas about 'love'. Replace 'Love' with 'God' and see if it makes more sense. Okay. Hmmm. I did literally replace the word and it didn't make much sense in the context of what I asked, but I have read between the lines a bit and I think I see what you are saying. However, still seems to me that you have an idea about 'love'....perhaps that 'love' is inherently personal? (as compared to an impersonal God). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2013 16:12:18 GMT -5
Yes, all ideas. That's why I don't have all sorts of ideas about Love that Mr Goat seems to think I'm trying to convert peeps too. If you didn't have all sorts of ideas about love, why do you speak of 'Love'? Seems to me that to distinguish between 'love' and 'Love' IS to have ideas about 'love'. It doesn't matter what ideas I have 'about' Love. Love can't be grasped. And yet we can 'see', that's all there is. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 3, 2013 16:30:23 GMT -5
If you didn't have all sorts of ideas about love, why do you speak of 'Love'? Seems to me that to distinguish between 'love' and 'Love' IS to have ideas about 'love'. It doesn't matter what ideas I have 'about' Love. Love can't be grasped. And yet we can 'see', that's all there is. To clarify trf, are you also distinguishing between love and Love? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 4, 2013 3:25:25 GMT -5
Yes, all ideas. That's why I don't have all sorts of ideas about Love that Mr Goat seems to think I'm trying to convert peeps too. I think he will now... .....what? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 4, 2013 3:30:24 GMT -5
Replace 'Love' with 'God' and see if it makes more sense. Okay. Hmmm. I did literally replace the word and it didn't make much sense in the context of what I asked, but I have read between the lines a bit and I think I see what you are saying. However, still seems to me that you have an idea about 'love'....perhaps that 'love' is inherently personal? (as compared to an impersonal God). The love that most folks know is a reflection, something unknown that has been named. It cannot be named, and so what is that? An idea about a beautiful reflection. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 4, 2013 3:44:54 GMT -5
Okay. Hmmm. I did literally replace the word and it didn't make much sense in the context of what I asked, but I have read between the lines a bit and I think I see what you are saying. However, still seems to me that you have an idea about 'love'....perhaps that 'love' is inherently personal? (as compared to an impersonal God). The love that most folks know is a reflection, something unknown that has been named. It cannot be named, and so what is that? An idea about a beautiful reflection. I'm struggling to follow you, but it does seem that you have an idea about 'love'. Can you spell out for me what your idea about 'love' is, that makes you distinguish it from 'Love'? Here is my idea about love.....love is the essence of life. Without love, there is no life. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Feb 4, 2013 6:34:29 GMT -5
Greetings..
According to what i have read since visiting and joining ST is that the majority of people aren't expressing their dislike of their curtain being pulled back,
but the way it is done.
(Granted, some of the deliveries from them are harsh thus not helping the situation. But hey, that's where love shines via forgiveness)
Intuitive call to add this to the post.
How awesome is love via forgiveness?
Well, 18 years ago me missus left me and shacked up with another guy fairly quickly.
2 year down the road, me still in severe inner pain from the breakup, she gave birth to their child.
I was still in 'wanting her back' mode and her having a kid to another man severely tested my resolve.
I chose love(forgiveness) and visited her in hospital, and boy was she surprised to see me there.
One of the scariest and hardest things i have done in my life.
Not the actual visit, but the inner journey to reach a state of being to choose to vist.
I asked if i could hold her child, she wept and said yes.
I held this child and felt love for him and her.
I said to her, i still love her, and i am willing to love(accept) this child as if it were my own,
in whatever capacity of relationship i would have with him seeing as i was not the actual father.
She later declined and years later i divorced her.
Love experiences like that helped change me to become the beautiful awesome person that i am today....true story.
Anyways...back to the main topic...
According to what i have read since visiting and joining ST is that the majority of people aren't expressing their dislike of their curtain being pulled back,
but the way it is done.
I think an apt street vernacular is 'bedside manner'.
Two doctors may have near identical skill levels, knowledge, expertise etc, but if one is insensitive, the patients will simply go to the other for help.
I am currently walking with someone, enjoying our time together and offering my help if i can provide it.
I do this whenever my intuition gives me the go ahead, cus there's so many to help and my time is limited.
Using your words, i am confident that this person is willingly examining deep behind thier curtain,
and they welcome and appreciate my efforts and the journey they are embarking on.
I found my self examination to be a most painful and scary experience, i was sensitive to the slightest bump or sudden exposure.
But with a little compassionate guidance, i slowly got the hang of it and hazzah,
i was into it courageously, passionately and willingly, regardless of what horrors might be discovered, and i found some humdingers along the way.
In my early explorations, if i came across someone with your "bedside manner",
i would recoil back into my safe secure self created matrix castle for long long time...oh long long time.
Now, near complete healing, i don't even feel i twinge of discomfort from the constant derogative remarks you aren't aware you express.
I see people here have been waving their arms at you to get your attention regarding your approach style,
but you just don't seem interested in exploring this or are convinced it's not part of the interaction problem.
Instead, as what i see is a clear example, you claim silver is the only problem in the interaction, that she is using blackmail. This story would be relevant if i knew why Anonsage stopped posting.I'm guessing he stopped posting because he saw that no matter how good his 'bedside manner' was, there were going to be many who would not understand, not be receptive and would be hateful toward him. It's easy to say the problem is that the approach is wrong, and back it up with evidence of personal encounters where our good, loving bedside manner resulted in positive change, but really it didn't. I've got oodles of those stories too, many from online interactions, but what I've come to see is that my bedside manner has very little to do with it. How prone one is to insight and change is a function of how conscious and sincere they are. Whether the one communicating with this person is seen as loving and insightful or judgmental and condescending is determined almost entirely by the listener, and the interaction unfolds from that perception. Whether the approach is blunt or gentle makes surprisingly little difference. Haters are gonna hate. Here's the deal.. you spend your time telling those that don't agree with you that they are wrong, you do this with the 'blunt instrument' of judgment and mockery, and.. when the judged and mocked reply in kind, they are further judged as haters.. try to understand your own words, bolded and underlined.. it seems that you simply don't like what you see in the mirror.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 4, 2013 11:55:05 GMT -5
when the judged and mocked reply in kind, they are further judged as haters.. try to understand your own words, bolded and underlined.. it seems that you simply don't like what you see in the mirror..
Be well.. Tzu', I'm not saying that enigma's never done what you accuse him of here but can you see in this instance why he hasn't? Did you read the context of his statement there? -- enigma wasn't speaking of people who hated enigma, he was speaking of people who hated "Anonsage". |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 4, 2013 12:04:20 GMT -5
Greetings.. I'm guessing he stopped posting because he saw that no matter how good his 'bedside manner' was, there were going to be many who would not understand, not be receptive and would be hateful toward him. It's easy to say the problem is that the approach is wrong, and back it up with evidence of personal encounters where our good, loving bedside manner resulted in positive change, but really it didn't. I've got oodles of those stories too, many from online interactions, but what I've come to see is that my bedside manner has very little to do with it. How prone one is to insight and change is a function of how conscious and sincere they are. Whether the one communicating with this person is seen as loving and insightful or judgmental and condescending is determined almost entirely by the listener, and the interaction unfolds from that perception. Whether the approach is blunt or gentle makes surprisingly little difference. Haters are gonna hate. Here's the deal.. you spend your time telling those that don't agree with you that they are wrong, you do this with the 'blunt instrument' of judgment and mockery, and.. when the judged and mocked reply in kind, they are further judged as haters.. try to understand your own words, bolded and underlined.. it seems that you simply don't like what you see in the mirror.. Be well.. I know how it seems to you. Like I say, haters are gonna hate. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 4, 2013 12:05:04 GMT -5
ok ... nevermind Tzu'!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2013 12:41:50 GMT -5
It doesn't matter what ideas I have 'about' Love. Love can't be grasped. And yet we can 'see', that's all there is. To clarify trf, are you also distinguishing between love and Love? No because whether it's love or Love, they are both still 'thoughts' about Reality. I'm really distinguishing between 'thought' and 'seeing'. Between seeking the dualist 'idea' of Love and 'seeing' that we have never been separate from Reality. The thought of separation or lack is never actually directly experienced in the moment. It's not that there are two things there, me and not me. The Reality that I'm 'not' naming as Love, is to highlight the difference between what we 'think' is Love and what is actually so. It can't be grasped by the mind, only seen. That is why I'm not naming it Love, even though what I'm calling not two, is actually all there is. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2013 16:11:33 GMT -5
I know what I read, but I needed some clarification from the author. Your amazingly defensive about it - and offensive towards me, making wild accusations about something I never said! go back and read it, it's only a page away. I never said what you accused me of saying. You don't know what you read. I'm not being defensive or offensive to you. Not making accusations, just saying what happened. Not talking about anything you said. Go back and read what he said, then read your post and see if you can figure out where your question to James came from. (Hint: I just told you where it came from)
Up to page 23 and still haven't come across the beginning of the 'blackmail' incident.
Anyways...regarding this exchange...
To me, it seems illogical to say to silver she doesn't know what she read.
Silver is expressing her interpretation of what she read, and her interpretation is you appear to her as defensive to her words and your words are offensive to her.
So it seems illogical to claim silver did not see these things considering she just expressed she did see them.
It's a completely different matter if you expressed her interpretation does not match your interpretation that you see you are not defensive or were offensive.
If the interpretations are different, even though each is convinced they saw what they saw,
perhaps some type of productive discussion could occur to find out why the interpretations are different.
But if one or both hold onto to a conclusion that their own interpretation is the truth of the matter, then i don't see any productive discussion occuring.
For it has been my experiences that a person who knows they are right, has no interest in exploring an issue that they regard they already know the truth about.
The deduction is that when a person knows they are right, they must be logically concluding the other, with a different opinion, must be wrong.
There is no desire for exploration of the other interpretation when a person thinks they are right.
So enigma, what if silver finds some of the things you say offensive, is it worth exploring because she sees it, or is she simply wrong in her ability to see and you are right.
Considering a few others also have said you come across as offensive, it seems something worth exploring.
To me, the issue of offensiveness can be from what is said to how it is said and add, how the listener processes the info given.
That the issue of there being an offense involves two people, so both parties must be examined to see if where the actual problem lies.
It may be just in one, or it may be spread out amongst the two.
But like i said before, the one who thinks they are right, will not examine, and if they did, the examination may be filtered through the "I am right" filter.
Because i am well aware of the communication glitch that is 'everyone interprets',
and even though when not rushing, i take a lot of time composing my words, i still come across people who are offended by them.
If communication is still open i will ask them to clarify and if they do and i can then understand what word or phrase offends them
and i will attempt to find another way to express myself.
In those situations i do not bother with who's interpretation is correct or not. I will adapt to the other's world view, so as not to offend.
I can talk really blue language to both my kids and we have a jolly good time as we explore the depths of reality, and with other people,
although still exploring at the same depth, i know any use of blue language will offend them and they have shut up shop and have stopped listening to me.
Thats a responsibility i choose to take on in interactions, regardless of whether i judge the other is right or wrong in their interpretation.
And in doing so i have developed a mad skill of being able to have open friendly conversations with a wide spectrum of people types.
I willfully and joyfully can meet people where they are at, and we both end up enjoying the interaction, and i get to share what i felt was important for them.
|
|
