The spiritual conversation is difficult, and therefore, skillful

[Raziel]

Originally Posted by Gem

That's not true and it's utterly ridiculous to suggest I or anyone else here proposed it.

The discussion was on 'you language' in the form of insult and accusation, and there are several times I said things like 'compliments can be encouraging' and 'of course we we use the word 'you' at times'. As I have already repeated several times, the central issue is the intent behind making the person the subject of discussion.

We then find there is rarely cause to make any particular person the subject, and if we really were interested in them, we'd just ask them about themselves.

It was also said that a one can make themselves the subject when and if they choose to, and articulate themselves in their own way. This is giving voice, which is a basic fundamental of empowerment. When people are accused and insulted in response to the things they say, they are very likely to become reluctant to speak their mind. This is in effect stripping them of voice and that's fundamentally disempowering.


When this nuance of context is there, we can't ignore the real meaning and say a ban on the word you was proposed, because given the meaning of 'you language' in the context it has been discussed thoughtfully and intelligently doesn't even nearly imply banning the word you.

Meh,

The intention of the word you in the addressing of individuals during conversation was.

Originally Posted by Gem

'You' is near-enough always used in verbal abusing a person.
It's more like pointing out the mechanism of victimisation.

Of course we all use 'you' in conversation. I allude to the intent behind personally directed remarks. This is why it isn't a actually any sort of rule-set, but rather, something that requires honest self-awareness.

The offended party deems "certain" language as attacking therefore all hell breaks loose. We have weaved in & out of this all already.

I feel that the undercurrent here is a person feeling attacked.

Using the word you when pointing out their own words or actions, their beliefs as members of certain organisations etc is a criticism of the ideals that they hold dear to them yet it is often taken personally.

My position within the thread has always been in the same vein of: if indeed "we cannot speak for others" we cannot speak of their intentions either - this gets lost once emotional defence kicks in.

"No your wrong" means the same as "that's totally incorrect" but the hyper sensitive feel less slighted as they seem to think that "they" are not part of the counterpoint since the word "your" was removed ..

Of course they are part of any point counter to their own & it's proven by them allowing it to becoming personal to them. If we truly own our words why would they harm us as a counterpoint?

There is the proposal for banning - a reaction insisting that we only use anothers approved words - not as utterly ridiculous as a one line claim might appear.

.

[Raziel]

Originally Posted by happy soul

Raziel,

I get what you're saying, but when it comes down to it, love is love.

You said that 'you pay for someone's refusal to question why your words have an effect on them.'

Yet if you're unkind, you ARE partially responsible for the pain they feel. Their reaction is THEIR choice, but your treatment of them is yours.

If I did something terrible or violent to another, and it caused them great pain, I am indeed partially responsible for their pain. That's an extreme example, but my point is that the view that others' reaction to our treatment of them is entirely not our responsibility is false.

It's tempting to want the freedom and right to behave and treat others as we please, to be free to 'be ourselves', but again, love is love, and attack, attack. Truth, truth. It's best to love.

I understand that we all have our own way, and we want to believe and feel that we're justified and right. But it's not given us to define the nature of love.

Be open to the possibility that, even though you're a good guy and a decent person, you may not be fully living up to your potential for love. I don't mean that as a judgement, but sometimes our ways are less than ideal.

Most people, including me, need to really 'find out what love is' more deeply and clearly.

Be the best you can be. Love is the answer.

What is misunderstood here is why I raise any objections.

Victims are just that & often need support or encouragement - no question about it.

But what about those who claim offence or victim status as a way of manipulation, a way of silencing criticism.

Scientology is well known for persuing those who are critical of its activities. Campaigns of harassment under the moral banner of being the victim of slurs.

I remember seeing a BBC reporter shout himself horse at the hypocrisy of an advocate.

Intent is a two way street yet those claiming to be "doing it for the children" are often usurping good intentions. Look at the patriot act in the USA.

Once things are based on feelings not facts - we are all in metaphorical orange jumpsuits.

Many peaceful people honestly believe that a one world religion solves all problems - imagine one day however that a tyrant assumes control of it ...

Where do you run to?

Presuming intent is not a licence to dictate.

Am I honestly not coming from a place of love?

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by naturesflow

I notice you have a very "global" way of thinking 7 ...

YES...I do! And thank you for noticing.

When you or others note this, which I do feel is true and representative of me (7L) then I feel heard and seen. It's a pretty nice feeling, I'll freely admit

I also very much appreciate your thoughtful focus and responses, in general.
So here's some affirmation and hugs right back atcha!

Peace & blessings
7L

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

Maybe this is just another subjective reality check, but in my honest opinion (for what it is worth), those who resort to name-calling teach us a very important lesson; viz-a-viz, not to associate pure Consciousness with either the mind or the body.

In my previous post, I just gave a rather 'tongue-in-cheek' retort, but the reason you seem to be bothered by recent comments is that you are still associating Self with gender...with a social role...and not with your true Self, the 'You' that you really are.

To be hurt by attacks of race, gender, religious beliefs and whatever else means that you still refer to yourself by the label that is being attacked and when you rise above it, you'll see that there's a part of you (if not all of you) that no words can reach...nobody else can ever touch it.

I was reminded of it again last night when I watched a documentary about Tantra and Lord Narayana (Vishnu) was referred to as 'The Supreme God of the Whole Universe" and Lord Shiva was described as being only a "minor God" or a "Demiurge" and I felt the hairs on the back of my neck start to bristle and I started growling and this was followed by another documentary about the Orion Constellation and Lord Shiva was called "Satan", straight out...suffice to say, I deleted both documentaries off my playlist entirely out of sheer disgust and threw a huge tantrum.

What followed was me just crying hysterically...in tears from midnight to 6am...6 hours of non-stop tears in front of my altar statues and pictures of Lord Shiva and I was going; "no matter what anybody else says You are, I know You are the Supreme God...You are Brahman...pure Consciousness...and You've stolen my heart, so what else can I do?...and if I have to go to Hell for loving/worshiping You, I do so gladly and I know You are not lying to me, making me only 'believe' You are God due to the way You turn me inside-out with love and make me feel like this...make me bathe Your feet with my tears always...and I also know it's not 'wrong'...this bliss I feel cannot be 'wrong' because You're above all duality of right/wrong...good/bad...God/Satan...dark/light...only those who don't love You say such things because they don't know...they don't see You like I do...they don't understand...and not that I understand much, mind you..." and on and on and on it went like this...for 6 hours...with me basically saying: "Darshan Do Shiv Shankar Bhole Darshan Do..." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbX5m6z8vSM

I learned though and felt the extent of how much He loves me despite what anybody else has to say about it...I learned a great lesson.

Shivani, hello there!

First, I want to say that I've read over time of your experiences, and I think you and several others here could qualify for sainthood (or partial sainthood, which should be a new category, IMO, hahaha ). I cannot take back the abuse and harms that you and so many of us here and elsewhere have suffered, but I wish that I could, certainly the worst of them. You don't deserve abuse and name-calling, in any form, and I'm very glad that YOU know that. It still doesn't really make it more pleasant, but you ameliorate the worst of the damage by detaching and by loving the self, for yourself. And that is a beautiful thing

Second, I just want to say that, although I don't necessarily agree with all of the details you propose here, what I do completely resonate with is the general theme of overall detachment from ego. This is what I refer to as equanimity. Developing a strength or reservoir of equanimity is absolutely necessary on our path, I completely agree. And it's hard to say where humanity is weaker on the whole, but it may well be equanimity is even less well developed than lovingkindness.

Now...I realise you don't really know me of course, but in truth, I developed a fair piece of equanimity from early childhood...perhaps for reasons very similar to you. So, believe me when I tell you there is no emotional "hurt" in me from anything Raziel (or whomever) has said. That is not the reason I am calling him or whomever out. And that is not the reason my analytical mind has observed and noted a pattern to his behaviour, or whomever's. Like you, perhaps I am not the norm in my relatively strong focus on equanimity, it's possible. Though many on SF can no doubt also relate.

Also, as Naturesflow pointed out, I do have a global way of seeing most things and do not tend to see the source of all ills as being within the individual. We live in community with cultural norms and worldviews, all of which are pervasive in shaping our individual humanity. Additionally, the context of our lives also has an impact, and to a large degree is beyond our control, particularly when younger.

Personal emotion has nothing to do with it. Aside from perhaps a very low-level, fleeting annoyance on a few occasions, due to really over the top insults (as in, really? LOL). Mostly, I feel some compassion for him and for others who engage in this, but that doesn't mean I don't need to draw reasonable boundaries and inform when they've been abrogated or transgressed.

This is purely coming from a place of equanimity, which I understand very clearly to be valuing the highest good of others equally to the self AND valuing the highest good of the self equally to others. In order to actually do that, it seems to me we then have to come back to lovingkindness and its application or manifestation. I.e., we then have to integrate and balance these two positive aspects of authentic love in our lives.

But I do feel a larger sense of global emotion, which is also an individual experience for me, in that I am aware when I feel something is misaligned.
There is a desire, broadly, for right-alignment that we often call justice...and this is why I speak out. On principal. We could also call this a desire for authentic love manifested on the ground. Does my wiring and my experience of global emotion make it better? I don't think so. It's just who I am. And I've been this way as long as I can remember, since before I could speak much really. I also think we may move more into this experience as we walk our paths, at least to some degree. And I also feel this aspect of our global humanity -- Equanimity -- has really begun to come to the fore as we come into the new Age (when the March equinox point moves out of the constellation Pisces and into the constellation Aquarius...under dispute but certainly underway).

Personally, as I think on it, I also feel that whilst emotional range and flavours on different things may vary, someone who feels "hurt" because of misalignment (say, being attacked) and someone who feels a sense of imbalance or who feels the "misalignment" are all getting at the same thing and coming from the same place. It's simply IMO that my reaction is perceived as less emotional and perhaps it is easier and less stressful for me, as an individual.

Very thoughtful response Shivani and thank you for your contributions and for the opportunity to discuss this in a bit more depth ...I think it's very interesting, really!

Peace & blessings
7L

[Raziel]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

Maybe this is just another subjective reality check, but in my honest opinion (for what it is worth), those who resort to name-calling teach us a very important lesson; viz-a-viz, not to associate pure Consciousness with either the mind or the body.

In my previous post, I just gave a rather 'tongue-in-cheek' retort, but the reason you seem to be bothered by recent comments is that you are still associating Self with gender...with a social role...and not with your true Self, the 'You' that you really are.

To be hurt by attacks of race, gender, religious beliefs and whatever else means that you still refer to yourself by the label that is being attacked and when you rise above it, you'll see that there's a part of you (if not all of you) that no words can reach...nobody else can ever touch it.

I learned though and felt the extent of how much He loves me despite what anybody else has to say about it...I learned a great lesson.

Gotta love the hypocrisy in "spirituality".

Over & over & over a posters name is dropped via example - but thats ok nobody call that out.

Over & over & over their intention is spoken of without proof - yet it is accepted by all.

Think my way or else I'll continue to name drop you in every part of conversation. We speak for victims everywhere .. just incase we ever consider ourselves "victims" & can't cope ourselves.

Dude I rejected peer pressure 27 years ago ...

~

All the while who is practising the restraint by none response ...?

~

Lucky for me, I'm cool with me ...

The old phrase "it takes two to tango" comes to mind - I'd add to it that the music stopped playing along time ago & I'm already in the bar!

.

[7luminaries]

Raziel, I will certainly address you directly, and with courtesy. This is same and no different to how I would address anyone else on the forums.
If you can do the same for me, then I have no further issue with you. I cannot of course speak for others.

If now or in future you do not address me directly and with courtesy, then I will bring the matter to your attention and ask you to stop, so that you can choose how you prefer to respond.
I will always give you the opportunity to make amends and choose the way of courtesy and kindness going forward. Before taking it to the next level, LOL.

That is what I can do and will do. What you can do and will do is your choice.

Peace & blessings
7L

[Raziel]

... double post

.

[Raziel]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

the more one retaliates or even 'points it out to them', the more they are going to keep doing it because they have been 'negatively acknowledged' which is the same as being 'acknowledged' either way it goes. For some people, being noticed in a negative way/light is better than being ignored and/or being 'invisible' or not being acknowledged or responded to at all...and that's why they do it and continue doing it when they see it 'gets results'...no matter what the results are because they have made a difference in some way.

In the end, and as harsh as it sounds, everybody's 'personal reality' is totally subjective...whether another agrees with it or not...whether another reacts/takes offence or not...isn't going to change anything unless the other wants/allows it.

'.

I can totally relate to this one.

It's a perceived power play that we are often not credited as being able to spot from a mile away .

.

[happy soul]

Originally Posted by Raziel

What is misunderstood here is why I raise any objections.

Victims are just that & often need support or encouragement - no question about it.

But what about those who claim offence or victim status as a way of manipulation, a way of silencing criticism.

Scientology is well known for persuing those who are critical of its activities. Campaigns of harassment under the moral banner of being the victim of slurs.

I remember seeing a BBC reporter shout himself horse at the hypocrisy of an advocate.

Intent is a two way street yet those claiming to be "doing it for the children" are often usurping good intentions. Look at the patriot act in the USA.

Once things are based on feelings not facts - we are all in metaphorical orange jumpsuits.

Many peaceful people honestly believe that a one world religion solves all problems - imagine one day however that a tyrant assumes control of it ...

Where do you run to?

Presuming intent is not a licence to dictate.

Am I honestly not coming from a place of love?

It's been said that truth is simple, and yet it's also been said that it's 'incomprehensibly complex'.

I feel that every choice is born either of love, or fear. It's wise to choose love, unwise to choose fear. That's simple.

A form of defense is to obscure the simplicity of truth and love, as a matter of self-justification or vindication.

For the most part, the individual will defend EGO, in order to KEEP it and avoid its demise.

That's OKAY. Ego and the forms of fear are healed through self-forgiveness. We should accept ourselves completely, and in that utter self-acceptance/love/forgiveness there is healing and conflict resolution.

You didn't ask for my help, yet I do see your need, and I sincerely want to be of service because that's my idea of love.

You know, you're completely innocent - no one is really 'guilty'.

I just feel that once we truly feel good about our innocence and worth, once we feel SECURE with our blamelessness, the way to love is open, and we can see far more clearly.

Everyone is doing their best.

The verdict: NOT GUILTY!

[Raziel]

Originally Posted by happy soul

It's been said that truth is simple, and yet it's also been said that it's 'incomprehensibly complex'.

I feel that every choice is born either of love, or fear. It's wise to choose love, unwise to choose fear. That's simple.

A form of defense is to obscure the simplicity of truth and love, as a matter of self-justification or vindication.

For the most part, the individual will defend EGO, in order to KEEP it and avoid its demise.

That's OKAY. Ego and the forms of fear are healed through self-forgiveness. We should accept ourselves completely, and in that utter self-acceptance/love/forgiveness there is healing and conflict resolution.

You didn't ask for my help, yet I do see your need, and I sincerely want to be of service because that's my idea of love.

You know, you're completely innocent - no one is really 'guilty'.

I just feel that once we truly feel good about our innocence and worth, once we feel SECURE with our blamelessness, the way to love is open, and we can see far more clearly.

Everyone is doing their best.

The verdict: NOT GUILTY!

This thread is not about RAZIEL & I'd direct further conversation to the more spiritual points raised.

My name should never have been used - especially so often - but what is done is done.


Your compassion is completely appreciated however Happy - it really is.

.