|
|
Post by tzujanli on Mar 10, 2013 18:31:38 GMT -5
Greetings.. What I have said is that God brought me to my knees and ripped the darkness from my heart. Of course I bring that here with me, though I'm not sure if it's in the way you mean. Laughter is here because Laughter is needed for what Laughter is. Same for Enigma. Can't argue with a word of that. Of course I bring that here with me, though I'm not sure if it's in the way you mean. Ultimately yes, that's what I meant. Implicit in the question of course is a sort of accusation that this colors your interactions here on the forum. It simply came to mind at this point -- I guess it comes down to what this "coming empty" business means in the end. Perhaps what was needed for Laughter to be Laughter was to serve some red meat to the dogs of war to given them energy for the battle.  Hi Laughter: This is the same piece of 'poetry' that Phil posts from time to time to use as justification for his 'way' of interacting.. he used to post it at SF, too.. but, if 'poetry' is justification we're in a bunch of trouble, there is 'poetry' about stuff that i will not repeat.. I wish there were no battle, the solution is simple, unless.. unless there is fear of the result, whatever that result might be.. i sense that even the conclusion of our 'dance' is fearful for E.. he imagines me as an enemy, a 'cause' for his Martyrdom.. i am not his enemy, he is.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 10, 2013 18:37:39 GMT -5
The thought to report the posts must have followed some sense of something....the sense that the people you were reporting were contravening forum rules in some way and also the sense that some kind of action from the moderator as a response is appropriate. Why else report them? An 'I don't know' answer to that is an unwillingness to look at the motivation. ... keep the whole context in mind ... it was directly after an abrupt public warning from Peter that carried with it no indication that this warning was solicited by anyone but Peter ... I imagine that the reports were more a way to facilitate some discussion between E and the mod rather than any serious attempt to get Arisha banned or whatever. Even so, the thought to report MUST have arisen with a sense that forum rules have been contravened, and that there should be some action taken as a response. Some sense of 'injustice' or 'inappropriateness'. Why else report? Its not the first time E has reported posts either. |
|
|
|
Post by topology on Mar 10, 2013 18:37:46 GMT -5
Back up a few paces cowboy.  The thought to report posts did not occur in a vacuum. If you really can't see this, then This is precisely where your blind spot exists. Prior to the thought about reporting posts, there was a 'feeling' which arose in conjunction with a thought about the post(s) of Arisha's that you read. So, you really cannot connect at all with a sense of "why" you wanted to report all those posts?  If so E, this explains so much. If your ability to 'see' does not extend to the thoughts/feelings behind behaviors, then clearly, you are completely unaware in terms of how and why you do what you do. This disconnect is what happens when folks who are still very much experiencing egoic need, become convinced that they have transcended the personal; A refusal to acknowledge thoughts, feelings and behaviors that are very much still based upon attachment to personal identity and storyline. The interesting thing is, none of these things are problems in & of themselves, so long as we can see them. But if we are blind to them, we are capable of behaving in ways that hurt others without even being the merest bit suspicious of the fact that we might be doing so. No, you're right. All I have to go on is your words and my observations of your actions here. IN the same way though E, you don't "really know" anything about anyone here either. I guess I just cannot imagine not being able to see the thoughts/feelings that arose behind an urge to report a series of (8!!) posts to Peter. And as such, it seems as though you are avoiding admitting that you were affected in some way by those posts. From my vantage point, it'd just be easier to say; "yeah, sure I felt a little angry there as things appeared to be unfair and I wanted to prove my point"....or "I was trying to be funny".....or "I was high/drunk and I accidentally hit the report button." ;D And it's fun...I mean interesting how it wasn't too long ago that E was wonderin' out loud about someone else being under the influence. Maybe there wasn't so much a sense of E's of unfairness over the posts he reported as it was an intent to manipulate, even if the reasoning was just to have a little fun. ^ ^ ^ That's just me having a little fun.  (I've always liked the way you think, Figs.) From this perspective, I've come across a wide range of people and personalities to know that some people might present as "under the influence" but they're just being their quirky minded selves. I did think it was odd to leap to that conclusion, but then again I've met enough people to know that there are those that will leap to that conclusion automatically. It's a genuine suspicion on their part. Not a manipulation. I think its fair to say that Mountain Goat's personality, manner of interaction, the way his mind moves, that it is rather rare and takes some getting used to before it stops making someone feel like asking "What the hell is this guy on?" |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 10, 2013 18:53:41 GMT -5
... keep the whole context in mind ... it was directly after an abrupt public warning from Peter that carried with it no indication that this warning was solicited by anyone but Peter ... I imagine that the reports were more a way to facilitate some discussion between E and the mod rather than any serious attempt to get Arisha banned or whatever.
I offer you a gentle point of respectful disagreement on that idea Mr. Temp. Some sense of 'injustice' or 'inappropriateness'. Why else report? I know I know ... I put up something about "walks like a duck..." etc... but I looked at that idea when it came to mind and to be perfectly honest, I can't be certain of what he was thinking ... he might have just having some sarcastic fun saying to Pete: "oh yeah! ... see! see! ... wow ... great job pal!". It's all a safari man. ... and I need the bullets for my own giraffes! Its not the first time E has reported posts either. Yeah well the villagers and the pitchforks and the torches and all that you know! |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Mar 10, 2013 18:56:19 GMT -5
And it's fun...I mean interesting how it wasn't too long ago that E was wonderin' out loud about someone else being under the influence. Maybe there wasn't so much a sense of E's of unfairness over the posts he reported as it was an intent to manipulate, even if the reasoning was just to have a little fun. ^ ^ ^ That's just me having a little fun. (I've always liked the way you think, Figs.) From this perspective, I've come across a wide range of people and personalities to know that some people might present as "under the influence" but they're just being their quirky minded selves. I did think it was odd to leap to that conclusion, but then again I've met enough people to know that there are those that will leap to that conclusion automatically. It's a genuine suspicion on their part. Not a manipulation. I think its fair to say that Mountain Goat's personality, manner of interaction, the way his mind moves, that it is rather rare and takes some getting used to before it stops making someone feel like asking "What the hell is this guy on?" We best not get into this too deep, Top. After all... ;D M-G and I've been in contact for a long time - It never crossed my mind that he's all that unusual. Plus, I think that being on stage (on the open forums) can either bring out the performer or make some go into their shells. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2013 19:08:09 GMT -5
Back up a few paces cowboy. The thought to report posts did not occur in a vacuum. If you really can't see this, then This is precisely where your blind spot exists. Prior to the thought about reporting posts, there was a 'feeling' which arose in conjunction with a thought about the post(s) of Arisha's that you read. So, you really cannot connect at all with a sense of "why" you wanted to report all those posts? If so E, this explains so much. If your ability to 'see' does not extend to the thoughts/feelings behind behaviors, then clearly, you are completely unaware in terms of how and why you do what you do. This disconnect is what happens when folks who are still very much experiencing egoic need, become convinced that they have transcended the personal; A refusal to acknowledge thoughts, feelings and behaviors that are very much still based upon attachment to personal identity and storyline. The interesting thing is, none of these things are problems in & of themselves, so long as we can see them. But if we are blind to them, we are capable of behaving in ways that hurt others without even being the merest bit suspicious of the fact that we might be doing so. No, you're right. All I have to go on is your words and my observations of your actions here. IN the same way though E, you don't "really know" anything about anyone here either. I guess I just cannot imagine not being able to see the thoughts/feelings that arose behind an urge to report a series of (8!!) posts to Peter. And as such, it seems as though you are avoiding admitting that you were affected in some way by those posts. From my vantage point, it'd just be easier to say; "yeah, sure I felt a little angry there as things appeared to be unfair and I wanted to prove my point"....or "I was trying to be funny".....or "I was high/drunk and I accidentally hit the report button." ;D And it's fun...I mean interesting how it wasn't too long ago that E was wonderin' out loud about someone else being under the influence. Maybe there wasn't so much a sense of E's of unfairness over the posts he reported as it was an intent to manipulate, even if the reasoning was just to have a little fun. ^ ^ ^ That's just me having a little fun. (I've always liked the way you think, Figs.) hello Silver Belle........the sentiment is mutual. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 10, 2013 19:08:25 GMT -5
Even so, the thought to report MUST have arisen with a sense that forum rules have been contravened, and that there should be some action taken as a response.
I offer you a gentle point of respectful disagreement on that idea Mr. Temp. I know I know ... I put up something about "walks like a duck..." etc... but I looked at that idea when it came to mind and to be perfectly honest, I can't be certain of what he was thinking ... he might have just having some sarcastic fun saying to Pete: "oh yeah! ... see! see! ... wow ... great job pal!". It's all a safari man. ... and I need the bullets for my own giraffes! Its not the first time E has reported posts either. Yeah well the villagers and the pitchforks and the torches and all that you know! Whatever the exact motive, the thought must have come with a sense that forum rules had been broken. There wouldn't be a report made otherwise, unless Enigma is reporting posts totally randomly, and it doesn't seem like he is. Your explanation that it may be some kind of sarcastic fun is possible, but doesn't ring true to me, and even if it is, the thought to report the posts still came with a sense of something. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 10, 2013 19:09:54 GMT -5
Greetings.. Can't argue with a word of that. Ultimately yes, that's what I meant. Implicit in the question of course is a sort of accusation that this colors your interactions here on the forum. It simply came to mind at this point -- I guess it comes down to what this "coming empty" business means in the end. Perhaps what was needed for Laughter to be Laughter was to serve some red meat to the dogs of war to given them energy for the battle. Hi Laughter: This is the same piece of 'poetry' that Phil posts from time to time to use as justification for his 'way' of interacting.. he used to post it at SF, too.. but, if 'poetry' is justification we're in a bunch of trouble, there is 'poetry' about stuff that i will not repeat.. I wish there were no battle, the solution is simple, unless.. unless there is fear of the result, whatever that result might be.. i sense that even the conclusion of our 'dance' is fearful for E.. he imagines me as an enemy, a 'cause' for his Martyrdom.. i am not his enemy, he is.. Be well.. i am not his enemy, he is.. Well of course, in general, and in the abstract, there's no retort to be had to what you say here Bob, because in the end, the enemy is only within -- very hard of course to project this realization onto every real-world situation that we can imagine of course, but that doesn't devalue it's currency in my book. And especially in the context of what Phil points up to us -- this is a message board for Christ's sake. Noone is actually going to harm anyone else here ... the joke I was going to make in your reponse to top about it being illegal to send letterbombs notwithstanding of course . Phil does make overt reference to you as the enemy but Phil is Phil and he says alot of things for effect -- most of what he does is simply to comment on what you've written to and about him and add some dramatic flair to it for the sake of comedic provocation. You can't be certain whether or not he does actually consider you an enemy or not. Not by what he writes here. Have you come to the actual conclusion that Phil has made you the enemy? Have you turned yourself into a false-false-enemy by making this assumption? This is a completely open and sincere question for you Bob, really man ... I imagine alot less these days than I used to but still the treasure chest if quite full, so if you were to answer "yes" to either of those I would not think any less of you ... no shame in it man. I'll be the first to admit that it's fun sometimes to do this, to build a straw man to fling rotten apples at, but deep down inside, do you really think that there's a human being hiding out up there in rural Oregon who seriously dislikes you? |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 10, 2013 19:12:28 GMT -5
From this perspective, I've come across a wide range of people and personalities to know that some people might present as "under the influence" but they're just being their quirky minded selves. I did think it was odd to leap to that conclusion, but then again I've met enough people to know that there are those that will leap to that conclusion automatically. It's a genuine suspicion on their part. Not a manipulation. I think its fair to say that Mountain Goat's personality, manner of interaction, the way his mind moves, that it is rather rare and takes some getting used to before it stops making someone feel like asking "What the hell is this guy on?" We best not get into this too deep, Top. After all... ;D M-G and I've been in contact for a long time - It never crossed my mind that he's all that unusual. Plus, I think that being on stage (on the open forums) can either bring out the performer or make some go into their shells. I do not find it unusual that you do not find Mr. Goat to be unusual ... but of course, the fact that you correspond with me is proof enough of that predilection to begin with! |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Mar 10, 2013 19:16:55 GMT -5
We best not get into this too deep, Top. After all... ;D M-G and I've been in contact for a long time - It never crossed my mind that he's all that unusual. Plus, I think that being on stage (on the open forums) can either bring out the performer or make some go into their shells. I do not find it unusual that you do not find Mr. Goat to be unusual ... but of course, the fact that you correspond with me is proof enough of that predilection to begin with!  |
|
|
|
Post by silver on Mar 10, 2013 19:19:19 GMT -5
(I've always liked the way you think, Figs.) hello Silver Belle........the sentiment is mutual. ;D I like my new nickname. Sweet.  |
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Mar 10, 2013 19:28:03 GMT -5
Haffiz knows what Love is. Listen to him.: It happens all the time in heaven, and some day it will begin to happen again on earth... that men and women who are married, and men and men who are lovers, and women and women who give each other light, often will get down on their knees and while so tenderly holding their lover's hand, with tears in their eyes, will sincerely speak, saying, "My dear, how can I be more loving to you; how can I be more kind?" |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2013 19:45:16 GMT -5
Going forward, if there is anyone that feels like I am not coming empty to them, you have my permission to *thwack* me with the zen stick. [/size][/quote] Welcome back topology, may you do well for yourself and others in your new path, the marriage breakup one.
Been there, terribly painful, but if one remains open and aware, much can be learned from the experience.
I acknowledge your willingness to allow me to hit you, but i do not see any value in violence against others.
If i had a zen stick i would find use for it as a walking stick when i walk on the beach.Though i accept your reasoning why and your desire to apologise, for me it is not necessary as i was not offended by your conduct. Again, i am not going to hit you if you fail to live up to your own expectations, especially since i dont agree with your new process.Thanks for that, now i know not to read ACIM as i don't rez with the author's theory of forgiveness
that is based on his new definition of the term, even though a commonly accepted definition has been around for ages.
Nor is forgiveness about forgetting. Forgiveness is about pardoning the wrongdoer, via the awesomeness of love.
I see ACIM author's theory bypasses the love element of the act of forgiveness.
For if there was never a wrongdoing, then one doesn't have to evoke love to forgive the other.
If wrongdoing does not exist, then why have you separated from your wife. <--- that's not a question i require an answer to. Much like Dory from Finding Nemo, she totally forgot everything because she has a 2 second memory span.
If you don't retain some image of another in memory, you will not recognise them the next time you see them.
Holding onto an images of people is not the problem, holding onto incorrect information about them is.
And it's not that hard to ask a person to correct any mistakes you have made about them. Enigma told me the other day that when he talks to me, it's like he's talking to a child.
He was not subconsciously telling me he viewed me this way, he consciously told me.
Nor did i see any direct or indirect statements that he wanted me to be childish.
You can't encourage an unconscious person. A person has to be conscious to be able to be enlivened by what another is saying to them.
Though it does seem to me that what you are saying explains why you and enigma claim silver was blackmailing.I for one will not help you to be an empty person.
I don't have anything against mannequins, but i am not going to help a person become one.
If you have an incorrect image of me in your mindtank, then yes, i may lovingly bring this issue to your attention.
But i am not going to help you be totally empty because that's just illogical and unnecessary.
If you have an incorrect image of me, and i present the correct information about me, and you then take that info in,
you have not become empty, you have simply updated your image to the correct one.
Images aren't a problem, incorrect ones are. It's only subliminal if the other lacks awareness.
So then the problem is not stored images, the problem is low self awareness.
I definately do not agree with your grouping. You know, just like the sesame street song of,
"Which one of these is not like the others, which one of these just doesn't belong"
"Broken or unworthy or damaged"...the one that doesn't belong is "unworthy."
If i see someone struggling in life because a part of them is broken, damaged, dysfunctioning or wounded, this does not automatically mean i think they are unworthy.
If the reality is that they are partially broken, damaged, dysfunctioning or wounded, i will not lie to them and say they are whole.
I will interact with them as they actually are, but i will not condemn them for being partially broken, damaged, dysfunctioning or wounded.
I will not devalue them because they are imperfect and they will know i do not devalue them even though
we can openly discuss thier partial broken, damaged, dysfunctioning or wounded parts they have acquired due to the harshness that can occur in life.
I will love them as they are, and if they are willing we can lovingly work together to fix whatever done broke inside without any need to condemn.I will confront you, but not because you are not following your new process,
but simply because i find your new process counter beneficial.
If i see you telling someone who is partially broken, that they are not, i will confront you about lying to them.EDIT: the awesomeness |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 10, 2013 20:07:39 GMT -5
What I have said is that God brought me to my knees and ripped the darkness from my heart. Of course I bring that here with me, though I'm not sure if it's in the way you mean. Laughter is here because Laughter is needed for what Laughter is. Same for Enigma. Can't argue with a word of that. Of course I bring that here with me, though I'm not sure if it's in the way you mean. Ultimately yes, that's what I meant. Implicit in the question of course is a sort of accusation that this colors your interactions here on the forum. It simply came to mind at this point -- I guess it comes down to what this "coming empty" business means in the end. Perhaps what was needed for Laughter to be Laughter was to serve some red meat to the dogs of war to given them energy for the battle. Well, yeah, we would have to say that the personal vector is always the same in the form of temperament, talents, interests and such, and deleting those qualities isn't really what 'coming empty' is about, which is more like personal agendas, needs, fears, expectations. My 'path' has been marked with periods of intensity. That's just who I am. I can be intense. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 10, 2013 20:16:24 GMT -5
Yeah. Right, and the forum 'monster' will still be held accountable, and it's okay. I'm not big on higher purpose as it seems to imply a prior plan, but there is some sense to the idea that the impersonal movement of life itself is not without perfection and beauty. Maybe the higher purpose of Life "IS" happiness. What manifests from that purpose cannot not be perfection and beauty. Perhaps the purpose of human existence, which is all suffering, is a necessary outcome for Life to realize it's purpose. But I don't know... I'd say God is playing pretty fast and loose here. Plans and purpose and the like come out of fear and God's a pretty cool cat. |
|
