Phil said: But Jen I said it several times, I just say what I see and I stick to facts ... when I see ego at work I just expose it ... and egos won't like that of course ... but I don't consider this as a "mission" ... is it a "mission" to see things as they are ?
You yourself know Phil, we don't see things as they are, we see things as we are
And none of us are this perfect or clinical / robotic as to stick to 'facts', you and all of us express opinions, and at times those opinions are expressed in frustration in either lack of understanding or lack of acceptance, rather than curiously seeking to understand that which we haven't grasped.
When that occurs the underlying energies say more than the words used, even in this medium. Sincerity yes, I see that, but not selfless, not egoless and not in a way that promotes higher understanding.
Your 'sword' analogy is being played out literally across our world (always has been), do you see it promoting more or less awareness, and more or less suffering?
Mindfulness is not 'empty', nor still, nor quiet imho, especially in a discussion forum where we ummm discuss stuff
it is richly full of all the different perceiving and interpreting of stimuli.
Can you accept that as 'it is what it is' and rather than stifle, participate within it as it is .... to ask your own question... Well, why make a problem of that anyway ?
Which is the bed of the question I asked earlier - why do you seek to stifle discussion, as if you've found a short cut but are unwilling to share it in a way that others can absorb and be persuaded by?
I realise this will already be 'too verbose' in your opinion (it's not a universal fact - merely your perception), so accept it, --- you won't change it - you absolutely may choose to remove your attention from it. These the only three 'sane' responses, according to ET.
The (hugely ironic) thing that I see is that there is value in your thinking... yup you respond through thoughts just like all the rest of us, the difficulty that people have in getting on the same wave length is your delivery (exactly what you highlight about my posts) - yours comes across as curt and judgemental, and yes, even egotistical and controlling.
The higher almost hilarious aspect in instant karma sense, is that the discussion that Danny and I were having in the other thread about the three elements of effective communication - ethos, pathos, and logos, - that you deemed superfluous and too hard to filter into your awareness, are exactly the elements that are often missing in your responses and where the confusions arise.
I'm not saying you should, or have to include them in your awareness, but it would do no harm if you chose to. Blockages to awareness and to communing in harmony (which doesn't mean always agreeing, but respecting differences) are not just ego. To see it so is to describe your own world, and to assume that it is others' world as well.
Just my million dollars worth, cos you are worth far more than two cents to me
I don't share lengthy posts for my own (or my ego's) sake, I share them because they are what arises in mindfulness in communing fully, openly, authentically with others. If something irritates me I explore it knowing that the irritation is coming from within me, not from outside, and if something is of no interest to me then I just pass it by, I don't see a need to limit the expressing or interests that others are exploring, that would be making enemy, obstacle or means to an end of it, and behaving a little like the CEO of the universe.
Clouded, there is no need to even see this as 'drama' and feed those elements of it, we grow in ever widening circles, Phil and I (and me and many others) have disagreed robustly on ideas when we have each been willing to, at times beyond my capacity and I am grateful for it. (Re) Balance will occur in relating, give and take on all sides - if you push a thing too far in one direction it will rebound and come back to you - just 'is'.