The spiritual conversation is difficult, and therefore, skillful

What can I do?

Lee Quai Quat (and his tigers)

[Raziel]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

What can I do?

Lee Quai Quat (and his tigers)

Its done - no more responses promise

If I may say so, the bulk of posts on Page 50 should really be PMs. They simmer, but I don't quarrel, I'm upset-proof. I was a little frustrated at the loss of posts that seemed innocuous, didn't appear to break forum rules. But... I suppose the content, the problem with words as I saw it, upset some sensitive soul.

It pertained to spiritual conversation being difficult because words are limiting and the subject itself is so individual.

[Raziel]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

If I may say so, the bulk of posts on Page 50 should really be PMs. They simmer, but I don't quarrel, I'm upset-proof. I was a little frustrated at the loss of posts that seemed innocuous, didn't appear to break forum rules. But... I suppose the content, the problem with words as I saw it, upset some sensitive soul.

It pertained to spiritual conversation being difficult because words are limiting and the subject itself is so individual.

I understand the power play in the spiritual conversation unfortunately (having been one of 20 "Christian" kids at a majority Muslim school).

http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/sh...d.php?t=121439

It's never one size fits all yet many desperately cling to the idea that it must be to have a fair & peaceful world.

Its always on their terms of course.

Apologies for the break in transmission - back to the subject of banning the word you is it?

[A human Being]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

If I may say so, the bulk of posts on Page 50 should really be PMs. They simmer, but I don't quarrel, I'm upset-proof. I was a little frustrated at the loss of posts that seemed innocuous, didn't appear to break forum rules. But... I suppose the content, the problem with words as I saw it, upset some sensitive soul.

It pertained to spiritual conversation being difficult because words are limiting and the subject itself is so individual.

Tangential, but if you want to you can increase the number of posts per page (to a maximum of 40) by clicking on the following: User CP -> Edit Options [left-hand side, under Control Panel] -> Thread Display Options [third box down, second drop-down menu is 'Number of posts to show per page']

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by Raziel

Honestly ...

When we know where our own power lies, there is nothing any other person on earth can say. There is not a single question of ones morality that can undermine it.

A spiritually confident person will in no way require to dominate.

Dominance comes in many forms - one is language. I understand the true context of all of this insistence & word play but it is unfair for me to state it.

Living in the past is a reflective term best applied elsewhere, let's leave it at that perhaps.

"I shall do as I must Obiwan"
Qui-Gon Jinn.

And so shall Raziel.

Raziel, hello!

Cool. I'll take that as a yes. Moving on then
And no, you don't understand me or my inner workings...that's absurd.
Nor would I claim to know the same for you or anyone else here ...LOL...

Again, I'm going to have to remind you that you don't know me and regardless, you don't have the right to speak for me or who I am.


Anyway... :)

What we all have to keep in mind is that not everyone will see it as you do, or as I do, etc. You have your perspective and so does everyone else. For example, you may see it as words are ultimately irrelevant in a community forum and folks should take it on the chin and/or perhaps respond in kind, whichever. You may see this as a measure of spiritual robustness. That's fair and you are the arbiter of your perspective.

Others may think verbally respecting others and their respectfully posited topical opinions is centrally important, that attacks and name calling are inappropriate on a spiritual discussion forums -- and so they don't really hold to your measure of spiritual robustness in any aspect. Thus, for others, inclusivity and valuing others equally to the self/and self, to others is their bar for spiritual robustness. Their positions are equally valid.

In fact, courtesy and respect for individuals and their respectfully stated topical opinions are the general standards here. I don't want to be inaccurate on that point. But the bigger point is, it's not about just you or just me or just anyone.

It's about finding a way forward where you don't get to attack others or call them names, and I don't get to give you 50 rounds of back-&-forth to sort yourself whist I request you cease and desist with attacks and name calling. We all have to give and find a more measured way. Hearing all voices is a part of establishing or translating these rules of engagement in day-to-day activities.

So for myself, since I don't want threads closed if at all possible...

-I will have to limit myself to calling you on attacks and giving it just a few rounds of back & forth and then just leave it to the mods.

-And you will have to ...leave off attacks and name calling, it seems. OR a lot more threads are going to close, most likely, LOL. You decide for you, of course.

In a public discussion forum, it's a fact that rules of engagement are par for the course, and boundaries will need to be determined as boundary infringements or incursions occur via discourse and discussion.

This is all a part of the spiritual conversation, it seems

Peace & blessings
7L

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

If I may say so, the bulk of posts on Page 50 should really be PMs. They simmer, but I don't quarrel, I'm upset-proof. I was a little frustrated at the loss of posts that seemed innocuous, didn't appear to break forum rules. But... I suppose the content, the problem with words as I saw it, upset some sensitive soul.

It pertained to spiritual conversation being difficult because words are limiting and the subject itself is so individual.

Hey there Lorelyen. I understand what you're saying. But this is not about Raziel for me personally. I have had the same issue, on a few rare occasions, with a few folks in the past.

It's really not a personal thing for me at all. Although I can't speak for others. I think it's quite clear I harbour no rancour toward Raziel -- nor anyone else on the forums ---and I have no problem with any courteous exchange. Nor with a full range of difference on any topic -- even those where I have a clear opinion.

Thus PMs aren't really appropriate here from my end, though perhaps for some it would be their preferred route...and perhaps if my feelings were hurt or if I wanted to engage in a personal discussion, I would seek out that route as well.

However, IMO it's much more about negotiating boundaries, courtesy, and respect, i.e., how to apply the stated rules of engagement here on the forums in real-life situations. I.e., how to counter unacceptable behaviour whilst allowing for others to find their own feet. How to discuss what is and is not acceptable -- opinions vary but there are rules and they occasionally are egregiously infringed -- without getting threads closed. Etc.

As far as what upsets some folks...my guess is there are probably a range of things involved and it would depend on the person. Some may be offended by strong words or sensitive topics or outlier opinions. Others may be are offended by what to them appears to be an environment of hostility, where verbal attacks and name calling are permitted. Where folks are asked to stop and they persist or double down.

TBH, I am not sensitive to difference of opinions...though I understand it is important to state our opinions respectfully and courteously and to affirm other's right to their opinion. But I do get that moving the discussion to the personal object (where the other poster(s) become object of derision or attack or labeling) is not constructive.

Meaning, it does not tend to create an environment where all respectful voices feel welcomed...because many fear attack and do not seek confrontation, nor do they want to have to stand up to a bully simply to put in their thoughts. When we have to go to war for the right to speak unmolested without being attacked or labeled, then we're going to lose most folks, and that's the reality. Most forums are frankly rubbish regarding courtesy of exchange, LOL...and if we remove those general standards of courtesy, ethical consent and inclusion, then it's no longer SF.

IMO these logistic discussions about how to proceed are valuable, given that some posters are more sensitive and given that maintaining the spiritual integrity of SF is also critical, IMO. These logistical considerations are exactly what the spiritual discussion is about...one aspect of it, for certain. And that's exactly why I came back over to discuss a better way forward without compromising my position on verbal attacks and name calling.

And thanks again for your patience

Peace & blessings
7L

[Raziel]

A poster knows themselves surely?

All anyone would have to do is go back & highlight mentally or physically, specific personal stories shared to have some insight into anyone.

If a novelist does the same - unless the stories are fabrication - its classed as autobiographical.

I read very well therefore I remember specific admissions. I'd guess it's how journalists & history researchers do their jobs.

If a person has said knowledge, it's there & cannot be erased on a whim in support of the latest point as it is contextually pertinent.
It would be similar to John Doe claiming that he doesn't live in the past yet being very aware that he believes he vividly remembers troubling past lives. We might know of multiple failed relationships or a battle with addiction. It is contextually relevant to anyones reactions to things.

All anyone can do is look inwards as to why words effect them.

I'm comfortable doing so therefore I reject being admonished by any living soul who quite clearly isn't.

That includes but is not limited to Buddhists who aren't particularly peaceful of forgiving, Catholic priests who abuse or Muslim Imams who encourage Martyrdom.

This personality type quite clearly makes the spiritual conversation difficult.

.

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by Raziel

A poster knows themselves surely?

All anyone would have to do is go back & highlight mentally or physically, specific personal stories shared by a poster to have some insight into anyone.

If a novelist does the same - unless the stories are fabrication - its classed as autobiographical.

I read very well therefore I remember specific admissions. I'd guess it's how journalists & history researchers do their jobs.

If a person has said knowledge, it's there & cannot be erased on a whim in support of the latest point as it is contextually pertinent.

All anyone can do is look inwards.

Raziel - you speak for you and your perspective and I'll speak for me and my perspective.

You don't have "knowledge" of me and nor do I of you.
I don't know who you are and you don't know who I am.

If I had ever met you, I still would have no right to speak for you nor tell you (or whomever) who you were, nor what you stood for.
For example, I've met my father and I've met my boss, etc.,
-- but they have no right to speak for me or my perspective, nor do they "know" my inner thoughts and feelings (LOL).
Same for you or anyone.

Who you are, what you stand for, what you think or feel...all that is for you to say regarding yourself, and no one else.
And that is for me to say regarding myself, and no one else.
And same for anyone.

I take you at face value, I don't presume to "know" anything further, and I respect your right to speak for yourself and your opinions.
Likewise, I and everyone else on this forums reasonably expect that you extend this same courtesy to others.

Peace & blessings
7L

[Raziel]

If information is given anyone can quite clearly speak of that information after the fact.

No amount of chastisement will change that. We are bound by our own bindings.

Raziel is a free spirit - the chains are long gone.

Originally Posted by Raziel

All anyone can do is look inwards as to why words effect them.

That includes but is not limited to Buddhists who aren't particularly peaceful of forgiving, Catholic priests who abuse or Muslim Imams who encourage Martyrdom.

This personality type quite clearly makes the spiritual conversation difficult.

.