The spiritual conversation is difficult, and therefore, skillful

[Raziel]

Not agreeing with an ideology is not the same as not having introspection.

Prayer varies between differing belief systems yet the process is the same.

Surely the description of the trickster trying to convince is just another interpretation of lack of confidence, doubt or many other aspects of ourselves.

Overconfidence is often just as dangerous.

A lot of the rhetoric around enforcing ideological terms is essentially a "Gods chosen people" mentality.

I.e Those not using specific terminology are accused of not being capable of self reflection on a deeper level. Is this not a bad habit or repeat pattern itself?

Where is that self reflection again?

If things just are then by that logic self reflection & looking deeply inwards can also just be in those not subscribing to specific ideologies or using specific words.

"I can do what others cannot, because I say so" doesn't hold sway outside of an ideological bubble.

There is your trickster.

.

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by Gem

I have been better at starting threads recently, and I attempt to enlarge that space of inclusiveness in which no one is under the slightest obligation, but are free to say what cannot not be said.

Been busy with RL... not much forum time lately.

Yes I have noticed your threads have built a more expansive inclusiveness, quite naturally too.

RL been busy here too. Hope all is going well.

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

I sort of get the feeling this thread had run its course about 40 pages ago and it's not going to see many/if any more replies. Cat is gone now, Gem has unsubscribed and isn't really on SF much now, and Jyotir only responds to threads generally and not to individuals personally I have noticed. Raziel and myself have taken to discussing Metallica and it's like a bar room scene when 'last drinks' are called....meanwhile, I want to venture further into Taoist Cosmology and need an excuse to do so, but my Higher Self is grabbing my arm and dragging me out of this thread too now.

Please do so, Shivani! Whether here or elsewhere . There is certain wads that would apply to this very topic and really, the whole idea of Tao and Fung Shui, etc., is about finding "the way" to "live in harmony with your environment" -- and definitely including with others in your life.

Peace & blessings
7L

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by Gem

Well, we know the basic skill is mindful equanimity, and that can be the hardest of things when we endure the extremes of experience including the emotional contents which were caught up in us as traumas of the past, and the spiritual conversation keeps reminding us to return the attention to wherefrom it arises, which makes us 'pass through' all that stands in the way.

Hello Gem and too true. I find name calling and attacks and personal insults to be particularly troublesome as I feel they shut down mine and others' voices. I used to ignore them and laugh them off but I find that as I work through this and heal, I am actually less tolerant of it. I realise that is probably the normal, more healthy reaction...not the suppressed and abused reaction.

I know that I personally have experienced more name calling and attacks and outright labelling as unwanted and undesirable/unloved (my dad) during my childhood than many folks experience in many lifetimes, LOL. He only spoke to me to judge and criticise and to yell and attack my character literally daily. I never spoke back, not once. The judgment had already been rendered, LOL.

There was a close soul fam member I was acquainted with for several years and whom in many ways I considered to be a dear and good friend. Yet despite our deep soul resonance I was also mocked, dismissed, called various names and had many things said about my character flaws. There was a fair bit of cruelty and unkindness mixed in with the love. I engaged him from a place of love, respect, and courtesy and actually this produced a cold neutrality on his part for several years. I think in retrospect he wanted me to fight back and I didn't respond that way. I even asked him sometimes, hey mate, why don't you just try being kind to me, LOL?

There was never an explanation and I used to wonder where all the resentment and unkindness came from. But one day I suggested let's have some consistent mutual kindness and personal courtesies expressed in our communication or else let's just leave off. For a year or so, I felt that we were finally becoming true friends at last, despite that we'd shared deeply and personally on many things before from that prior weird, unmoored place of communication. We left off again after that year because lo and behold we were back to my unworthiness and inherent lack as a person and I realised this was a rut I was being cast back into and we'd not ever moved on from it. I had forgiven my own father continuously for this exact sort of message and now I needed time to process and forgive this same message from a friend and close soul family member. And after a handful of months, I did so freely and sincerely.

Only years later have I come to realise more fully what I didn't have time to dwell on or sort then. That he too was a victim of his own vicious and insidious verbal and emotional abuse via name calling and denigration of his person from certain of his family. And thus he related to me as best he could, in the only way he knew how to deal with others who wanted to get close to him as a person and as a friend. By attacking first and denigrating those who got too close, by designating them as forever flawed and as inherently unworthy somehow. What I am beginning to understand that this insidious and twisted message that I received from him, is in essence the same message he himself received through mocking and name calling...that at a deeper level, he was not fully accepted or worthy or ok as he was.

I had my way of dealing with verbal abuse, which was silence and not responding in kind (or later, denial &/or deflecting it with humour or discussion). And he had his way, which was to push others off, or to attack first, if others drew too near. I was the mute and the jokester and he was the feral one..LOL...but within a context of more or less civil dialogue.

So I come back to the hooponopono....and let it go in forgiveness and acceptance as soon as I am able...it can take it's own time but I stare it in the face (or the mirror) and I sit with the shame and the judgment received from those folks and I take it for what it is. Yes it may wound and scar me. But so what? The truth is, it doesn't make me unworthy and it doesn't mean my character is eternally flawed and lacking. It just means I've got some battle scars. As a result of sitting with and moving through these realisations, I am experiencing a profound level of contentment. I am ok with who I am, and even though verbal abuse is particularly caustic, I know that I will survive and however I am as a result of my experiences, well that is ok also and I will accept myself regardless I also accept others as they are regardless, whether or not they have hurt me in the past and whether or not they give a damn. Hooponopono...I have let it go and forgiven it, focusing instead on each now moment, where I and others may always choose to bring lovingkindness and equanimity to this time and place.

In these pages I have noted the arising of hard emotion such as annoyance and angst, and all this is a good opportunity to 'stay with it', rather than re-entering the reactive avoidance strategies which have always worked as distractions in the past.

It will continue along and those who reach the place where they can no longer confront the truth of themselves will discontinue because the turmoil starts to overwhelm the comforts we find easy. It's because the conversation requires going to a deeper level, unwrapping one layer to reveal the next, and we start letting out the Monster (references the film clips I posted earlier https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mjlM_RnsVE).

Yes, exactly...it proceeds to a deeper level. Personally, as a part of my own journey, I currently feel that I don't care to take extra name calling or attacks in silence, not without calling it out when I see it and requesting a cease and desist. I find the act of naming our experiences and sharing and affirming our mutual voices to be one of the most powerful, liberating and mentally and emotionally healing things we can do.

I also experienced some severe physical abuse as a child, and likewise, I never fought back. I will say that I always knew my mum was not in her right mind in these periods. And she did express love at other times. For me, and this is of course deeply personal and may vary, I was much more deeply scarred long-term by the hostile, cold, relentless verbal abuse of my father.

And so I understand the damage and brokenness that can arise from this sort of emotional and verbal abuse and what it can do to you -- and that for many, they don't even realise how deeply they've been damaged, nor how they in turn may be perpetrating it onto others. Interestingly, although I had forgiven my soul friend for what I used to affectionately call his mindless sword flailing or "thorn-in-paw" mode (cuts down all who approach within arms' length), I feel even more compassion now when I realise how he was belittled and judged. After all, I got the same thing growing up from my own father and I do understand that the effects are pervasive, deeply rooted, and long-lasting -- requiring great attention and perseverance on our part.

Even though we've both accepted and forgiven our fathers, I don't think my old friend has fully realised how his harsh relationship with his father had in turn affected how he behaved toward others who simply wanted to express love and kindness toward him. I know that I personally also have a hard time respecting gents who appear to mirror too many of my father's traits and tendencies, even aside from verbal attacks and name calling, and I'm aware of it and try to reasonably kerb it.

In my deep meditation, after several days of continuous persistence, I saw the 'thing' that parades as 'me', and it isn't stable. It's angry, panicky, deceptive, self-preserving at any cost. This is what in spiritual lexicon were term 'ego', and as long we are distracted, it presides as 'me' - but as long as we are consciously self-aware, it cannot take that position.

This thing I refer to as 'ego', and define quite specifically, needs to fool me into believing it is myself, so when we persist in continuing without faltering in our self awareness, the attention is turned directly to this ego, and it can not withstand our gaze. It can only 'rule the roost' if we are not watching it, under which circumstance, it operates by avoiding our conscious awareness (unconsciously). When we see the avoidance arising in ourselves, we see this thing in action, and it will try all sorts of tricks, throwing up all nature of psychological reactivity to distract us from seeing the whole illusion of ourselves.

Well said. Particularly the description of panicky and anxious is apt, IMO...perhaps a fairly universal reaction of the ego to whatever shines the light in its face and thus reveals its fear-based orientation. But you are so right...as soon as we become aware, then the fear can be acknowledged and countered or balanced.

I consciously encourage myself to sit with the fear as long as possible and I try to fully feel it and sort it, without pushing it down and losing the thread of it. Particularly fear of feeling my emotions fully which has been difficult the last few years due to finally dealing with deeper issues per dad and soul friend, plus the usual rubbish of life LOL. Feeling strong enough to feel my emotions more fully once more is a key part of healing and working through disassociation and trauma. As is naming verbal abuse and avoiding or managing situations so as to limit further experiences of it, where possible.

I had heard allusions in this thread about being honest, but when I talk about being truthful I'm talking about something very deep - that ability we have to destroy the self-illusion, delusion, and expose the trickster themselves, who thereafter can never resume the position of 'me' without being caught in the act.

So it is not for me to muse on existence. There is nobody who knows the answer to that mystery, it is just that we imagine spiritual masters who know ultimate answers, but no such answers exist, so we continue the story and say the finger is pointing at the moon, as if that makes it somehow valid. It's all just nonsense created to feed the one pretending to be 'me', and all I can say is the spiritual practice is to relentlessly and unceasingly return the attention to where it arises from: oneself.

So the conversation is the ongoing reminder to turn attention back toward its origin in self-awareness. Those who claim it's easy spat the dummy and left, but the ones who really mean it will continue, and although distracted for a time, will remember and resume the truthful way - be conscious of all their own mind is doing - without blame, without justification and other sorts of self-deception - for as physicist Richard Feynman said, "The first thing is, you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool".

Yes, agreed full stop. I am the easiest person to fool...and I am the one fooling myself, which makes it all the more insidious, LOL.

Re: spiritual masters, those transcendental fellow travellers/elder brothers I work with, they never claim to have the ultimate answers as in why we exist or have come into being, etc. They do talk a lot about being who you are and discussing obstructions and healing. They do talk about aspects of lovingkindness and equanimity, particularly as it relates to humanity or to you personally.

So IMO if or when humanity or certain of us ever might do this, IMO it has to be taken simply as one input or perspective among others, some of which may be more personally resonant with us than others.

Peace & blessings
7L

[Gem]

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

Hello Gem and too true. I find name calling and attacks and personal insults to be particularly troublesome as I feel they shut down mine and others' voices. I used to ignore them and laugh them off but I find that as I work through this and heal, I am actually less tolerant of it. I realise that is probably the normal, more healthy reaction...not the suppressed and abused reaction.

Well, I always discourage 'you language' as far possible - except for compliments.'You' can be used generically, though, so it's not always a personal reference.


As a rule of thumb, it is for any individual to speak for and of themselves, and other people really have no business doing so. If people really are so curious about each other, it's always better to inquire so as to hear it from the horses mouth (not that anyone is obligated to self disclose in that case, of course).


As you imply above, discrediting a person 'you' invalidates them personally, and hence their voice. It's not the same as discussion from contrary views. A contrary discussion is just topical, but when it turns to 'you that and you that', the person becomes the topic.

I said in the OP that although this subject regards the deepest parts of us, it isn't a topic about anyone, but of course people are free to speak about themselves if they want to.

In this way there is empowerment of a person rather than power over a person - and where name calling, personal assertions and derision is concerned, it's near enough always a power game. Naturally, when this become somewhat extreme we call it 'abuse' and it's common knowledge that abuse is basically a power trip.

There is a balance where people are people so all voices are equally valid, and the undue over-validation and under-validation that is attributed on unsound premises such as social position. It makes the spiritual discourse very complicated and convoluted at times.

To me it matters nothing if a person is monk, teacher, enlightened and so forth, mainly because the spiritual aspect of us has no identity attachment which can be constructed within a status quo - but as people we tend to entertain that delusion for the sake of our own self-orientation - where we fit in, basically.

In short, the derisive you language is a positioning strategy by means of invalidation of a person, and hence all that person says. The one making derisive assertions is invariably on a power trip that keeps others below them in the status quo.

As far as this conversation goes, we can regard all that as not only futile, but counterproductive to the spiritual project.

The psychological paradigm is where I imagine a 'you' against whom I orient 'myself', and the basic power play is, if I can make you behave as I have imagined your character would, I have influenced you into conforming into the way I imagined you to be. That's the power game in essence. If I can convince you that you are of relatively low worth, and you behave as such being convinced, that's my power - that influence.

In fact, I don;t have the slightest inclination to influence anyone in any way. I prefer people feel comfortable to be the way they are. I don;t expect people to be way spirichul or anything like that. I'm a person like anyone else, plenty of life issues to cope with and get over, and I want to be OK just the way I am, and not be 'not OK' because I'm not 'meeting the bar'.

If we were self aware we would already know the intent behind what we do and say, and it's obvious to anyone that derisive personal assertions are compelled by the intention to hurt the 'other', but the origin of the hurt is in that intent, which is arising with their own reaction and not yours.

In the Buddhist context it is said that the intent is the kamma. Volition shapes the thought which shapes the words and deeds. Most are somewhat careful in the expressed word and deed, but still the thought is wild, and people can be largely unaware of the intent, being distracted into believing that the 'cause' of mentalities is exterior to them. Hence the derisive personal remark is actually an expression of the speaker's underlying intent - which is their kamma - not yours.

When such a person succeeds in eliciting our adverse reaction, then our own intent sours and it becomes our kamma. This is why it is so wrong to disparage other folk. It is fine if a person has all their own ill intent and create own their kamma that way, because it's their life to do with as thay want - but when this is projected on another, it often elicits ill-intent in them too, which is bad kamma for them.

Essentially, then, the act of insult and derision is an attempt to keep people stuck in the 'rebirth cycle' (as the Buddhists term it) and prevent their liberation. In this way, it is completely counter to the spiritual project.

It is best if we are mutually supportive in our mutual empowerment, encouraging. Compliments and gratitude can go to the ego big time, so I thing these need to to be sparing for the most benefit - but the overall, more general appreciation of each other - much like we would appreciate a sunset - is extraordinarily positive. This appreciation is working at the vibes level and that's going deep in its benefits.

Of course, in speaking of the intent, we remain with the intent of loving kindness - the primal wish that all beings be happy - no matter what transgressions others subject us to. In the end it's our own intent arising in ourselves which governs the manifest outcomes of experience. It's LOA, in other words, but without the desires of acquirement - without a self-centre - but an overall general wish for the ultimate happiness of all beings.

I know that I personally have experienced more name calling and attacks and outright labelling as unwanted and undesirable/unloved (my dad) during my childhood than many folks experience in many lifetimes, LOL. He only spoke to me to judge and criticise and to yell and attack my character literally daily. I never spoke back, not once. The judgment had already been rendered, LOL.

There was a close soul fam member I was acquainted with for several years and whom in many ways I considered to be a dear and good friend. Yet despite our deep soul resonance I was also mocked, dismissed, called various names and had many things said about my character flaws. There was a fair bit of cruelty and unkindness mixed in with the love. I engaged him from a place of love, respect, and courtesy and actually this produced a cold neutrality on his part for several years. I think in retrospect he wanted me to fight back and I didn't respond that way. I even asked him sometimes, hey mate, why don't you just try being kind to me, LOL?

Yes, you can't 'make people change' but you can have powerful effects, but it's because the purity of intent is flowing there, already, yet without any desire to influence the other in any way. This makes the space available for change, opens that possibility, and what others do being completely their own prerogative is integral or endemic to such a space.

There was never an explanation and I used to wonder where all the resentment and unkindness came from. But one day I suggested let's have some consistent mutual kindness and personal courtesies expressed in our communication or else let's just leave off. For a year or so, I felt that we were finally becoming true friends at last, despite that we'd shared deeply and personally on many things before from that prior weird, unmoored place of communication. We left off again after that year because lo and behold we were back to my unworthiness and inherent lack as a person and I realised this was a rut I was being cast back into and we'd not ever moved on from it. I had forgiven my own father continuously for this exact sort of message and now I needed time to process and forgive this same message from a friend and close soul family member. And after a handful of months, I did so freely and sincerely.

Only years later have I come to realise more fully what I didn't have time to dwell on or sort then. That he too was a victim of his own vicious and insidious verbal and emotional abuse via name calling and denigration of his person from certain of his family.

Indeed, he has his own past life journey and his own lot in the healing, as all of us do, so it does become very difficult to judge, and easier to understand.

And thus he related to me as best he could, in the only way he knew how to deal with others who wanted to get close to him as a person and as a friend. By attacking first and denigrating those who got too close, by designating them as forever flawed and as inherently unworthy somehow. What I am beginning to understand that this insidious and twisted message that I received from him, is in essence the same message he himself received through mocking and name calling...that at a deeper level, he was not fully accepted or worthy or ok as he was.

I had my way of dealing with verbal abuse, which was silence and not responding in kind (or later, denial &/or deflecting it with humour or discussion). And he had his way, which was to push others off, or to attack first, if others drew too near. I was the mute and the jokester and he was the feral one..LOL...but within a context of more or less civil dialogue.

So I come back to the hooponopono....and let it go in forgiveness and acceptance as soon as I am able...it can take it's own time but I stare it in the face (or the mirror) and I sit with the shame and the judgment received from those folks and I take it for what it is. Yes it may wound and scar me. But so what? The truth is, it doesn't make me unworthy and it doesn't mean my character is eternally flawed and lacking. It just means I've got some battle scars.

Exactly right. And well said!

As a result of sitting with and moving through these realisations, I am experiencing a profound level of contentment. I am ok with who I am, and even though verbal abuse is particularly caustic, I know that I will survive and however I am as a result of my experiences, well that is ok also and I will accept myself regardless I also accept others as they are regardless, whether or not they have hurt me in the past and whether or not they give a damn. Hooponopono...I have let it go and forgiven it, focusing instead on each now moment, where I and others may always choose to bring lovingkindness and equanimity to this time and place.

Yes, as people we are shaped by past experience, and most of us have been deep wounded, it becomes the shape of us and we really have to be fine with that shape, though fair to say most of us harbour some degree of self-hatred (to use a strong term). We can rest in knowing that our self-worth judgments are mostly socially constructed and unexceptionally essentially delusional. In the truth of the universe, all things are seen with the utmost purity of love, and this comes through us peeps somehow, so when we are as true to ourselves as we can possibly be, that loving kindness, is the essence of nature.

Yes, exactly...it proceeds to a deeper level. Personally, as a part of my own journey, I currently feel that I don't care to take extra name calling or attacks in silence, not without calling it out when I see it and requesting a cease and desist. I find the act of naming our experiences and sharing and affirming our mutual voices to be one of the most powerful, liberating and mentally and emotionally healing things we can do.

I think clear boundaries need to be affirmed when it comes to name calling, more subtle insinuations, and similar manipulations. These arise from disharmonious vibes, so it is upon each of us to be sensitive within ourselves to the small disturbances in ourselves. If these agitations are not noticed until they are significant, we can be overwhelmed by them at that late stage - as these are only noticed as the harm is being done.

I also experienced some severe physical abuse as a child, and likewise, I never fought back. I will say that I always knew my mum was not in her right mind in these periods. And she did express love at other times. For me, and this is of course deeply personal and may vary, I was much more deeply scarred long-term by the hostile, cold, relentless verbal abuse of my father.

And so I understand the damage and brokenness that can arise from this sort of emotional and verbal abuse and what it can do to you -- and that for many, they don't even realise how deeply they've been damaged, nor how they in turn may be perpetrating it onto others. Interestingly, although I had forgiven my soul friend for what I used to affectionately call his mindless sword flailing or "thorn-in-paw" mode (cuts down all who approach within arms' length), I feel even more compassion now when I realise how he was belittled and judged. After all, I got the same thing growing up from my own father and I do understand that the effects are pervasive, deeply rooted, and long-lasting -- requiring great attention and perseverance on our part.

Even though we've both accepted and forgiven our fathers, I don't think my old friend has fully realised how his harsh relationship with his father had in turn affected how he behaved toward others who simply wanted to express love and kindness toward him. I know that I personally also have a hard time respecting gents who appear to mirror too many of my father's traits and tendencies, even aside from verbal attacks and name calling, and I'm aware of it and try to reasonably kerb it.

Well said. Particularly the description of panicky and anxious is apt, IMO...perhaps a fairly universal reaction of the ego to whatever shines the light in its face and thus reveals its fear-based orientation. But you are so right...as soon as we become aware, then the fear can be acknowledged and countered or balanced.

I consciously encourage myself to sit with the fear as long as possible and I try to fully feel it and sort it, without pushing it down and losing the thread of it. Particularly fear of feeling my emotions fully which has been difficult the last few years due to finally dealing with deeper issues per dad and soul friend, plus the usual rubbish of life LOL. Feeling strong enough to feel my emotions more fully once more is a key part of healing and working through disassociation and trauma. As is naming verbal abuse and avoiding or managing situations so as to limit further experiences of it, where possible.

At first when the old emotional content starts becoming conscious to us, we aren't strong enough for it, so we go into strong reactions which keeps the mind from going to depth. That is a problem with unstable equanimity, but we get stronger and can start to keep 'ourselves' still in increasingly intense emotional storms - there is a huge turmoil in there, but we ourselves remain undisturbed - and this allows the old emotion to enter the conscious awareness fully and deeply, where it starts to dissolve having been illuminated by the greater conscious awareness. This means our 'work' is only the stability and solidity of our mindful equanimiity, for that stability of balance enables the passing of it all. It is the skill from which all else follows.

Yes, agreed full stop. I am the easiest person to fool...and I am the one fooling myself, which makes it all the more insidious, LOL.

Yes, the honesty is something that operates with knowing or without knowing, but never arrives at any conclusions. The truth which unconditional of knowledge.

Re: spiritual masters, those transcendental fellow travellers/elder brothers I work with, they never claim to have the ultimate answers as in why we exist or have come into being, etc.

That's good. No one knows it so they call it 'mysterious' or 'miraculous'.

They do talk a lot about being who you are and discussing obstructions and healing. They do talk about aspects of lovingkindness and equanimity, particularly as it relates to humanity or to you personally.

Yes, we have many teachers who are deeply insightful and ingenious, but still everything has to be tested against oneself, and not believed on authority. Of course they are worthy of being heard and considered - but that applies to everyone.

What I always say is, if one has an especially high respect for the teacher, that means they don't have utmost respect for the novices. One should respect the novice the same as one would the teacher, Buddha, Jesus etc. - IE utmost respect.

So IMO if or when humanity or certain of us ever might do this, IMO it has to be taken simply as one input or perspective among others, some of which may be more personally resonant with us than others.

Peace & blessings
7L

Your post reminded my of my favorite Ani Di Franko song - "Angry Anymore" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gICTRaF7_Q

[Raziel]

I'm going to add to the topic & not reply to anyone specific in the recent points made.

Continuity is important as is context.

Not everyone is going to have a problem with the word you - on an internet forum it is merely a way to identify.

"You claim"
"you propose"

Dropping the word entirely & replacing with "the claim" "the proposition" still highlights the individual who made a statement - however for those just joining the conversation (after all it's an open conversation) it requires trawling through lines or potential pages of dialogue to gain context.

I may well be offended by the word "Caucasian" but it's a known identifier & common language known to many.
That is my problem, the entire dictionary isn't there to cater to me personally.

The words of a stranger directed towards an internet avatar are not personal - it's childish to even try to establish that it is.

I have been called all sorts on this forum - directly & indirectly - I simply attempt to correct the false statements.

Often people pretend that they are being attacked personally when their ideology comes into question.


It has all happened before:

Use the word citizen instead of Mr or Mrs or else be punished in France.
Use the word Comrade instead of friend in China or Russia or else suffer the same - it's club member mentality.

In our club we reject said word - those who use it are not the same as us.

You as a language term is in no way near to the physical finger pointing & scolding that is being presented.

The language is being swayed towards a certain ideology - hardly respectful of those who do not subscribe yet still seek, discover & share.

Two phrases come to mind:

"Those in glass houses should not throw stones"
(those who often accuse others should perhaps look at their own actions first)


"sticks & stones may brake bones but names will never hurt thee"
(Call a man a catfish head & it means diddly squat unless he is indeed)

.
Personally I have seen one poster who refuses to bury the hatchet in the name of greater understanding - despite the hypocrisy of those actions that's not a bad ratio. It's a shame to take offence where likely it is not.

It would be a shame to mentally tut at a poster giving critical perspective or insight simply for using a term that is - lets be honest - everyday language.


.

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by Gem

Well, I always discourage 'you language' as far possible - except for compliments.'You' can be used generically, though, so it's not always a personal reference.

As a rule of thumb, it is for any individual to speak for and of themselves, and other people really have no business doing so. If people really are so curious about each other, it's always better to inquire so as to hear it from the horses mouth (not that anyone is obligated to self disclose in that case, of course).

As you imply above, discrediting a person 'you' invalidates them personally, and hence their voice. It's not the same as discussion from contrary views. A contrary discussion is just topical, but when it turns to 'you that and you that', the person becomes the topic.

Hello there Gem.
I agree. I do sometimes use 'you' and 'they' in the generic sense when discussing at the level of culture and society and I really try to not go much below that level unless I am speaking for myself. For me, it keeps things much clearer -- there is the societal structure and its cultural effects, and there are individuals and groups of individuals within that structure and culture.

Thus we all have our own thoughts on what it means to experience this society and this culture and we can each speak to that. But it's very important IMO that we each be able to speak for ourselves and not for other individuals.

I said in the OP that although this subject regards the deepest parts of us, it isn't a topic about anyone, but of course people are free to speak about themselves if they want to.

In this way there is empowerment of a person rather than power over a person - and where name calling, personal assertions and derision is concerned, it's near enough always a power game. Naturally, when this become somewhat extreme we call it 'abuse' and it's common knowledge that abuse is basically a power trip.

Yes verbal and emotional abuse is a power game or a power trip. Most of all it centres around telling another who they are/what they feel or think, whether or not they are allowed to exist, and if so, how they are allowed to do so. What's scary to realise is that this sort of abuse -- physical or emotional -- quite aptly describes life for a fair portion of humanity in our dark and sordid past, with amoral strength and unchecked power disposing of any and all lives deemed unfit, on their whims. Whilst lording their brutality over the remainder, who lived in fear.

Yes it's interesting to me how the universal and personal aspects of the spiritual conversation are mixed and interwoven within each of us, and it's up to each of us to decide where the balance and the emphasis is.

For me, I have been suddenly immersed the backwash of shame and feelings of being burdensome and unworthy -- this toxic stew of rubbish which was lying around somewhere waiting to be fully acknowledged. And now I feel as if I cannot stomach even one more message like this...I have been filled to overflowing and I feel ill and disgusted and emotionally done with it. I would not be able to tolerate it ever again, not in this lifetime. Yet I also feel a great peace and clarity in this realisation.

There is a balance where people are people so all voices are equally valid, and the undue over-validation and under-validation that is attributed on unsound premises such as social position. It makes the spiritual discourse very complicated and convoluted at times.

To me it matters nothing if a person is monk, teacher, enlightened and so forth, mainly because the spiritual aspect of us has no identity attachment which can be constructed within a status quo - but as people we tend to entertain that delusion for the sake of our own self-orientation - where we fit in, basically.

There is much here. I particularly noted the identify attachment as self-delusion...and I see there are both individual and collective level "agreements" or buy-ins regarding these delusions. Some are purely logistic and descriptive but there is normally much more. IMO at least in part it has to do with how fluid and open to change our notions of identity are. If more rigid and fixed in our mindset or outlook, we would be much more likely to attach to certain notions of identity as somehow ultimately true.

In short, the derisive you language is a positioning strategy by means of invalidation of a person, and hence all that person says. The one making derisive assertions is invariably on a power trip that keeps others below them in the status quo.

As far as this conversation goes, we can regard all that as not only futile, but counterproductive to the spiritual project.

The psychological paradigm is where I imagine a 'you' against whom I orient 'myself', and the basic power play is, if I can make you behave as I have imagined your character would, I have influenced you into conforming into the way I imagined you to be. That's the power game in essence. If I can convince you that you are of relatively low worth, and you behave as such being convinced, that's my power - that influence.

Yes, agreed on all counts. Perhaps I cannot even make you behave as I label you and dictate you to be, but perhaps simply in withholding love and acceptance, I can actively assist in your devaluation of yourself. Particularly if I am say your dad (or mum), or a beloved (soul) friend whose opinion you normally would treasure. If I hold these positions of great weight in your eyes and in your heart, I can wound you by telling you you're not valued or accepted as you are. Even if you know intellectually that I am being cruel and unfair...simply by dint of my emotional proximity and weight, I can inflict an outsized wound. Because even if you feel you are ok with the rest of the world, you know that when it comes to ME, you are unworthy and I will "never" say otherwise.

In fact, I don;t have the slightest inclination to influence anyone in any way. I prefer people feel comfortable to be the way they are. I don;t expect people to be way spirichul or anything like that. I'm a person like anyone else, plenty of life issues to cope with and get over, and I want to be OK just the way I am, and not be 'not OK' because I'm not 'meeting the bar'.

If we were self aware we would already know the intent behind what we do and say, and it's obvious to anyone that derisive personal assertions are compelled by the intention to hurt the 'other', but the origin of the hurt is in that intent, which is arising with their own reaction and not yours.

In the Buddhist context it is said that the intent is the kamma. Volition shapes the thought which shapes the words and deeds. Most are somewhat careful in the expressed word and deed, but still the thought is wild, and people can be largely unaware of the intent, being distracted into believing that the 'cause' of mentalities is exterior to them. Hence the derisive personal remark is actually an expression of the speaker's underlying intent - which is their kamma - not yours.

This is very true and yet can be difficult to keep in mind. Disparaging or abusive actions by others are not your fault; you did not cause or deserve them. Others took their own decisions to disparage you, of their own free will. And you have the right to be accepted as you are...and not to be deemed intrinsically unworthy because others have arbitrarily judged your humanity to be of a lesser thing than their own. You being everyone.

When such a person succeeds in eliciting our adverse reaction, then our own intent sours and it becomes our kamma. This is why it is so wrong to disparage other folk. It is fine if a person has all their own ill intent and create own their kamma that way, because it's their life to do with as thay want - but when this is projected on another, it often elicits ill-intent in them too, which is bad kamma for them.

Essentially, then, the act of insult and derision is an attempt to keep people stuck in the 'rebirth cycle' (as the Buddhists term it) and prevent their liberation. In this way, it is completely counter to the spiritual project.

It is best if we are mutually supportive in our mutual empowerment, encouraging. Compliments and gratitude can go to the ego big time, so I thing these need to to be sparing for the most benefit - but the overall, more general appreciation of each other - much like we would appreciate a sunset - is extraordinarily positive. This appreciation is working at the vibes level and that's going deep in its benefits.

Of course, in speaking of the intent, we remain with the intent of loving kindness - the primal wish that all beings be happy - no matter what transgressions others subject us to. In the end it's our own intent arising in ourselves which governs the manifest outcomes of experience. It's LOA, in other words, but without the desires of acquirement - without a self-centre - but an overall general wish for the ultimate happiness of all beings.

There are many core truths here. IMO what you've said here gets to the heart of the spiritual project, and thus the human project.
Which is, for one, that ill intent tends to generate more ill intent and no one wins. As I also noted, severe trauma can result even if ill intent is not met in kind. There is no good outcome, even if not apparent to the disparager (who may feel a rush from inflicting pain, or who may now feel "in control").

Also, that disparagement, derision, and insults are counterproductive to right-aligned behaviour such as mutual support and encouragement, from a place of lovingkindness and equanimity. And that right-aligned behaviour in lovingkindness and equanimity is a "good", both an individual good and a collective good.

Yes, you can't 'make people change' but you can have powerful effects, but it's because the purity of intent is flowing there, already, yet without any desire to influence the other in any way. This makes the space available for change, opens that possibility, and what others do being completely their own prerogative is integral or endemic to such a space.

Indeed, he has his own past life journey and his own lot in the healing, as all of us do, so it does become very difficult to judge, and easier to understand.

Exactly right. And well said!

I very much agree that it is critical to allow for everyone to be as they are in each now moment, which may be meaningfully different than earlier now moments. This is critical to allow for true freedom of being and of expression and for growth and change, which are among the human rights of all people.

For my dear soul friend, you said it very well. For my dear soul friend, I feel much love and I wish him only love, joy, and happiness despite some prior misunderstandings and obstructions to acceptance of one another simply as we are. It would be a wonderful thing to one day meet further down the river and see each other in the simple light of lovingkindness and friendship. Such that we could provide one another that mutual support and encouragement whilst just accepting one another as we are...as beloved friends, as equals, and whilst finally free of all filters and obstructions.

Yes, as people we are shaped by past experience, and most of us have been deep wounded, it becomes the shape of us and we really have to be fine with that shape, though fair to say most of us harbour some degree of self-hatred (to use a strong term). We can rest in knowing that our self-worth judgments are mostly socially constructed and unexceptionally essentially delusional. In the truth of the universe, all things are seen with the utmost purity of love, and this comes through us peeps somehow, so when we are as true to ourselves as we can possibly be, that loving kindness, is the essence of nature.

It is a beautiful and powerful truth to realise that no matter that we will find ourselves somewhat battered and scarred as souls, that nonetheless we are still fundamentally ok and acceptable and worthy as we are. And that our true nature of lovingkindness remains untouched at its core. These are powerful messages and it is a great service IMO to affirm these truths to one another. This is a wonderful example IMO of that mutual support and encouragement that we can provide to one another. And I think most of us need to hear this message, and to hear it in within a circle of belonging, where we can truly accept and believe that these messages are for us, too. For each of us.

I think clear boundaries need to be affirmed when it comes to name calling, more subtle insinuations, and similar manipulations. These arise from disharmonious vibes, so it is upon each of us to be sensitive within ourselves to the small disturbances in ourselves. If these agitations are not noticed until they are significant, we can be overwhelmed by them at that late stage - as these are only noticed as the harm is being done.

At first when the old emotional content starts becoming conscious to us, we aren't strong enough for it, so we go into strong reactions which keeps the mind from going to depth. That is a problem with unstable equanimity, but we get stronger and can start to keep 'ourselves' still in increasingly intense emotional storms - there is a huge turmoil in there, but we ourselves remain undisturbed - and this allows the old emotion to enter the conscious awareness fully and deeply, where it starts to dissolve having been illuminated by the greater conscious awareness. This means our 'work' is only the stability and solidity of our mindful equanimiity, for that stability of balance enables the passing of it all. It is the skill from which all else follows.

Yes, the honesty is something that operates with knowing or without knowing, but never arrives at any conclusions. The truth which unconditional of knowledge.

The emotional fallout of working through our issues can be overwhelming, and I've been dealing with that. There is also the unexpected clarity and healing that has come from naming the obstructions, both internal and external. We all need to find the words, both alone and together, to deal with these obstructions to our work and to our journey. For myself, in naming and standing up to the verbal obstructions, I have also realised how to draw my boundaries regarding the messages that came with them all my life (you are unworthy or subpar, you are shameful, you are burdensome for existing, you are unloved, etc).

This is a great thing, and is truly liberating...or will be, once those boundaries are consistently implemented. I have just recently learnt that I can say NO I do not accept the slander/the abuse and also NO I do not accept the messages that accompany the disparagement. I do not accept them on principle, and nor will I accept them in future.

That's good. No one knows it so they call it 'mysterious' or 'miraculous'.

LOL They say only Source knows (why x and not y, or why x is what it is, or why is it x and y came into being?)....

Yes, we have many teachers who are deeply insightful and ingenious, but still everything has to be tested against oneself, and not believed on authority. Of course they are worthy of being heard and considered - but that applies to everyone.

What I always say is, if one has an especially high respect for the teacher, that means they don't have utmost respect for the novices. One should respect the novice the same as one would the teacher, Buddha, Jesus etc. - IE utmost respect.

I agree we all deserve the utmost respect. I agree we all should treat one another with the utmost respect.

In all seriousness...I probably am borderline in my use of humour or dry wit at times. I do need to keep in mind that it is easy enough to appear disrespectful.

Your post reminded my of my favorite Ani Di Franko song - "Angry Anymore" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gICTRaF7_Q

A very nice song - and thanks for sharing!

Peace & blessings
7L

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Raziel

I'm going to add to the topic & not reply to anyone specific in the recent points made.

Continuity is important as is context.

Not everyone is going to have a problem with the word you - on an internet forum it is merely a way to identify.

"You claim"
"you propose"

In that case the subject is the claim or the proposal, not the person.

Dropping the word entirely & replacing with "the claim" "the proposition" still highlights the individual who made a statement - however for those just joining the conversation (after all it's an open conversation) it requires trawling through lines or potential pages of dialogue to gain context.

Exactly. And this goes to show the "The claim", "The proposition" is the subject. The one referred to as 'you' is not actually the subject in this case.

I may well be offended by the word "Caucasian" but it's a known identifier & common language known to many.
That is my problem, the entire dictionary isn't there to cater to me personally.

The words of a stranger directed towards an internet avatar are not personal - it's childish to even try to establish that it is.

I have been called all sorts on this forum - directly & indirectly - I simply attempt to correct the false statements.

Often people pretend that they are being attacked personally when their ideology comes into question.


It has all happened before:

Use the word citizen instead of Mr or Mrs or else be punished in France.
Use the word Comrade instead of friend in China or Russia or else suffer the same - it's club member mentality.

In our club we reject said word - those who use it are not the same as us.

You as a language term is in no way near to the physical finger pointing & scolding that is being presented.

The language is being swayed towards a certain ideology - hardly respectful of those who do not subscribe yet still seek, discover & share.

Two phrases come to mind:

"Those in glass houses should not throw stones"
(those who often accuse others should perhaps look at their own actions first)

That's a good saying.

"sticks & stones may brake bones but names will never hurt thee"

(Call a man a catfish head & it means diddly squat unless he is indeed)

That's quite obviously not true. People are hurt by verbal abuse, and by 'the names' in social narratives. I still like the saying, though.

Personally I have seen one poster who refuses to bury the hatchet in the name of greater understanding - despite the hypocrisy of those actions that's not a bad ratio. It's a shame to take offence where likely it is not.

It would be a shame to mentally tut at a poster giving critical perspective or insight simply for using a term that is - lets be honest - everyday language.

It's often the case that the one who asserts 'you this or you that' does so with the intention of offending the other, so the crux of what I was saying is the intent.

In your example of someone making a 'you statement' about you, and you then correct their error, in that case you can only reply meaningfully from the defensive position you were manipulated into by their initial assertion. In this case, you become the topic, the subject, not because you just volunteered to self-disclose, but because you were prompted by some sort of accusation. Thus you can only speak for and of yourself in the context your accuser set for you - in context with their accusation.

In short, they make the personal assertion, this creates the defensive position, which you fill when you rebuke and correct them. You play the part which they created.

Nothing personal, and I'm just speaking generally or hypothetically using your example because this is the general and typical way in which the game operates.

Now we go to the beginning and query, why dd they make the personal assertion in the first place, and why is it invalid? When we see why they did so, and why it is invalid, we don't do it anymore ourselves because it would be idiotic to do something which is inherently irrational.

[Raziel]

Originally Posted by Gem

That's quite obviously not true. People are hurt by verbal abuse, and by 'the names' in social narratives. I still like the saying, though.



It's often the case that the one who asserts 'you this or you that' does so with the intention of offending the other, so the crux of what I was saying is the intent.

In your example of someone making a 'you statement' about you, and you then correct their error, in that case you can only reply meaningfully from the defensive position you were manipulated into by their initial assertion. In this case, you become the topic, the subject, not because you just volunteered to self-disclose, but because you were prompted by some sort of accusation. Thus you can only speak for and of yourself in the context your accuser set for you - in context with their accusation.

In short, they make the personal assertion, this creates the defensive position, which you fill when you rebuke and correct them. You play the part which they created.


Now we go to the beginning and query, why dd they make the personal assertion in the first place, and why is it invalid? When we see why they did so, and why it is invalid, we don't do it anymore ourselves because it would be idiotic to do something which is inherently irrational.

Verbal statements don't hurt they offend - a war of words causes no harm until someone enacts the physical.

If one turned the other cheek, chose not to be moved by words they would become nothing.

The same goes for inspiration - ignore the things said & nothing materialises.


Correction is not the same as taking offence either. I might correct someone hoping that a more tailored statement might clear up any confusion. Often a strawman emerges, waving & saying "no no I'm over here" at times diffuses conflict arising via misunderstanding.

I'm not trying to convince here - merely point out a learned mentality via ideology.

Often posters are trying so desperately to live life through the lenses of Buddhist ideals, Christian or Islamic teaching that they lose the ability to communicate on forums without insisting that others agree to specific terminology.

Equanimity is a prime example - calm or composed are everyday words - it has become speil, carsalesman like jargon.

Say something out of fear, bias & judgement but finish with we must all act with Equanimity & all of those sins are forgiven.
You, me or I are ways of communicating focus during conversation nothing more.

Those attacking the few as a way of defeating the many are the real finger pointers, accusers & antagonists. It isn't honestly the use of any given word that is hurting, it the possibility that an ideology that has had so much time invested in it could possibly not have all the answers.

That's why the common IMO abbreviation is irrelevant - it should be obvious to all but the over sensitive.

They should by their own admission look inwards to see why being acknowledged is translated into the feeling of personal malice.

.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Raziel

Verbal statements don't hurt they offend - a war of words causes no harm until someone enacts the physical.

There's a lot of evidence of people being harmed by verbal abuse, gossip/slander and so forth. It sometimes leads to physical harm, like suicide, eating disorders etc.

If one turned the other cheek, chose not to be moved by words they would become nothing.

The same goes for inspiration - ignore the things said & nothing materialises.


Correction is not the same as taking offence either. I might correct someone hoping that a more tailored statement might clear up any confusion. Often a strawman emerges, waving & saying "no no I'm over here" at times diffuses conflict arising via misunderstanding.

I'm not trying to convince here - merely point out a learned mentality via ideology.

Often posters are trying so desperately to live life through the lenses of Buddhist ideals, Christian or Islamic teaching that they lose the ability to communicate on forums without insisting that others agree to specific terminology.

It does happen, but these are basically cultural lexicon and epistemology but there various ways of understanding 'the way the world is', so various paradigms in which it can be expressed.

Equanimity is a prime example - calm or composed are everyday words - it has become speil, carsalesman like jargon.

Equanimity is good enough, like 'balance', 'stability', and a lot of other terms like you also mention.

Say something out of fear, bias & judgement but finish with we must all act with Equanimity & all of those sins are forgiven.
You, me or I are ways of communicating focus during conversation nothing more.

There's a difference between talking from different views and denigrating a person. Sometimes people conflate a contrary view with a personal affront, but these are not the same thing at all.

Those attacking the few as a way of defeating the many are the real finger pointers, accusers & antagonists. It isn't honestly the use of any given word that is hurting, it the possibility that an ideology that has had so much time invested in it could possibly not have all the answers.

This seems to conflate the contrary view with the personal remark. Two different things. The contrary view doesn't make anyone the subject of discussion. The personal remark does.

That's why the common IMO abbreviation is irrelevant - it should be obvious to all but the over sensitive.

They should by their own admission look inwards to see why being acknowledged is translated into the feeling of personal malice.

.

Exactly.

If we take it from the standpoint of intent, then we might see how an accuser, name caller, insinuator harbours the intent to hurt the accused feelings, and that will to hurt is malice. It very often succeeds, as we know that children who were subjected to a rearing environment of negative personal remarks (like you're stupid, you're worthless, and similar slurs), adopt it into their self narrative, which brings on low self-esteem.

In my case, being a forum nerd, there are numerous times when someone attacks me personally. This isn't the same as them disagreeing or having a totally contrary view. People disagree all the time and see things totally differently to me. The attack is when they start the personal assertions, derision, insults, insinuations and undermining my integrity. I used to take the defensive position and refute and correct them as your example expressed, but then I realised how I was manipulated into the defensive self-justifying role by them. After I realised that, I stopped refuting, correcting and self justifying. I basically reply without any self-reference at all. This is because I am the one who decides to talk about myself, when I do, what I disclose, how much I disclose, if anything. That's why I have voice. I'm the one who gets to say, and no one else has that right. Now, that is my power, but it's not a power of influence or coercion. It's the power of self-determination.

All I mean is you get speak for and of yourself, and no one else has any right to do so, and more than that, you can if an when you wish to, but you don't have to - it is entirely your own prerogative. This is your right to Yes and No, which is the fundamental ethic of consent.