A questionable statement in A New Earth

This is the place to post whatever questions you have related to the teachings of Eckhart Tolle. The rest of us will do whatever we can to help you achieve a better understanding :)
LifeNow
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 7:42 am

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by LifeNow » Thu Aug 21, 2014 7:53 am

I think you had it right with your first post of this thread, smileyjen. That's what I'm doing too, and it has helped me immensely. Your last two posts sort of seems to be your wanting to convince/remind/confirm to yourself, and the pain in your life, that everything that happens, happens in equilibrium. I also say this because you mention the word (equilibrium) so many times...the image of equilibrium as an airy-fairy state of things came into my mind, with an image of you (I don't know what you look like) dancing within it. Bleary-eyed; or 'half-closed' eyes.

I also got the image that some of those who endorse (in mind and action) ET's statement that I initially quoted, and the idea of an equilibrium whose purpose or meaning is far, far greater than we can understand...also exist with their eyes like this.

Eckhart himself looks like this in some of his youtube videos and google photos (not all), and if you google images of Greg Larsen, you'll see what I mean. I'm don't think that's what a healthy human being is supposed to look like. This is not the case, however, in his photo on the back cover of the paperback PoN.

Again, I readily must say that Eckhart's teachings - pretty much everything in ANE except for the statement I quoted - have helped me. I realized everything upsetting, monstrous, horrific and horrifying in me make up a pain-body and ego (also influenced by OCD). I thank Eckhart in large part for that.

I also have to say that I have experienced what he meant by the true forgiveness and newness (without mental analysis) that come with Awareness/Witnessing. Brief, but it still occurred, and I have to practice becoming this more, because it is amazing and it is Love.

To quote you again, smileyjen, where you wrote "Creation doesn't care whether the Silverback or the young one is leading the group, or how they do that, or if an elephant came in and took over, or if the whole forest is decimated and the population all killed."

The Creation you describe here is heartless/uncaring. You can replace this decimation and killing with the horrific events of the past and happening today. To say that Creation doesn't care about all of those almost unspeakably horrific happenings is one thing, but to accept that that is the Creation that exists and to live Life by it is dangerous and must be addressed immediately.

I accept that there is creation and destruction of form. That's fine and we know this. It is the how of this creation and destruction of some of these forms that I have a serious problem with. There is a major, major difference between dissolution and destruction.

WebWanderer, you speak about consciousness (I take it to mean Presence/Being) growing and evolving. From my understanding of Eckhart's initial explanations of it - before he wrote the statement that is the cause of this thread - consciousness is timeless, ever-present and already perfect: the "goodness that is already in you", as Eckhart writes. Something that has those qualities does not need to 'grow'.

You mentioned that the ego contributes to the evolution of consciousness. I disagree strongly. I think the ego instead causes us to become more aware of the consciousness already There, as has been said by another member of this thread. According to ET, it's the same Consciousness that Jesus, Buddha and other 'rare and precious' beings were.

So I have to say that there was a 'fall' from grace. I don't know what caused it. WW, it's not a matter of the ego negatively judging what it doesn't like or understand - that's not the point. The point is there is right and wrong. Pedophilia is wrong. Murder is wrong. Seal-clubbing, slavery, abuse, rape - all wrong. There are many, many other examples that I won't point out but that everyone here knows.

If we didn't fall, but leapt, as you say WW, then we leapt off a very high cliff into hideous madness. Fall or leap, we have to pick ourselves up and work to make things right.
Your last line, WW, was more true.

We cannot take "there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so" as a blanket statement. There are good things and bad things; there is right and there is wrong. This is not judgment, it's common sense. And we must use it to build A New Earth.

User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6851
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by Webwanderer » Thu Aug 21, 2014 4:34 pm

LifeNow wrote:So I have to say that there was a 'fall' from grace. I don't know what caused it. WW, it's not a matter of the ego negatively judging what it doesn't like or understand - that's not the point. The point is there is right and wrong. Pedophilia is wrong. Murder is wrong. Seal-clubbing, slavery, abuse, rape - all wrong. There are many, many other examples that I won't point out but that everyone here knows.
From the ego perspective there is certainly right and wrong - even though those values often vary from ego to ego. From the eternal perspective however, that of our greater being, there is less a perspective of right and wrong, and more a dream of imagining and exploring worlds of experience.

Do you judge your own dreams so harshly as adjudicating yourself, or the characters you created in your mind, wrong for some dream crime? Should you and they be condemned and held accountable in the greater understanding for their imagined offenses? Is there not often a message in your dreams that can assist us in our waking consciousness? Can you not see a similar potential to a greatly expanded consciousness that is your true nature when the awakening from the dream of human experience surely comes?

The great spiritual teachers of our human history have told us to 'judge not'. Did they miss the right and wrong context that you refer to, or could they be speaking from a greater perspective that is inclusive of all human experience?
If we didn't fall, but leapt, as you say WW, then we leapt off a very high cliff into hideous madness.
Well, maybe. But 'hideous madness' itself seems a judgment from a limited perspective. No doubt a case can be made for your point from that perspective. But if there is a greater perspective that sees beyond the short term nature of a human lifespan, could there not be value in any and all experience?

Consider, all the 'victims' and 'perpetrators' may be working together to create an exploratory drama somewhat like the actors and producers of a Hollywood movie. While blood is shed and wrongs seemingly are committed, it's all for the creation of experience for the audience. Actors play their roles, but they are not in essence who those roles suggest. While the audience feels deeply for the events and characters unfolding, once the movie concludes, there is love and appreciation for all participants.
We cannot take "there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so" as a blanket statement.
Again, maybe. But there is indeed a great deal of truth in this statement, so discounting it completely is equally unwise. What then can we glean from the intended context of this pointer and make use of it's lesson? If making a distinction between right and wrong makes us smaller and less inclusive in our conscious being, then maybe there is a more productive way in which to view life conditions in general. That perspective is available to those who would explore our greater beingness.

Life is far more beautiful as seen from the greater reality. And as life in all expressions is vibratory in nature, we contribute to the greater well-being in this world by perceiving life from a more loving and inclusive vibration than one of emotional judgment and separation. We as individuals may not be able to stop the wars and starvation in the world, but we can (and do) contribute to the quality of energy that feeds its consciousness. Clarity on this distinction can bring immediate positive change to individual lives as well as sweeten the general life energy of the world at large.

WW

LifeNow
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 7:42 am

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by LifeNow » Thu Aug 21, 2014 8:49 pm

A "dream of imagining and exploring worlds of experience". That sounds almost magical, and adventurous. Tell the boy or girl sexually molested by a priest or parent if the abuser was 'exploring a world of experience'. Or the girls who were violently raped then hanged from a tree, if the perpetrators were 'exploring a world of experience'.

I am disgusted and shocked to read that "the 'victims' and 'perpetrators' may be working together to create an exploratory drama somewhat like...a Hollywood movie". Are you mad, WW?

I don't know if it is a dream, but I know there are a lot of traumatizing nightmares.

I have had visions of awakening consciousness both in life 'dreams' and in sleep ones.

Eckhart himself uses the words "insanity" and "madness" many times - these are judgments, and they are correct. Some 'experiences' have no value, only serve to remind us about right and wrong and the insanity of some humans.

We can contribute to the greater well-being in this world from a more loving and inclusive vibration, indeed, but emotions should stem from that. And more importantly, action. This is when we as individuals may be able to contribute to the stopping of the wars, starvation and evil in the world.

User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6851
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by Webwanderer » Thu Aug 21, 2014 10:21 pm

LifeNow wrote:Are you mad, WW?
No doubt some would think so. It's okay though, I'm well familiar with the outrage. It comes from an as yet inability to clearly consider a greater reality. But that's why I point to it. When one can get free of such limitations of perspective, the anger and outrage quickly subside. That awakening of course happens at the time of our physical death by design when most of us simply wake up to a greater perspective.

But one can also gain a measure of that greater understanding while yet focused in this human form. It's available to those who are open to it. It flows from our true nature. All the great teachers know it. Many a dedicated student as well. Then of course, there are the ever growing numbers of NDE'rs who have their own direct experience to draw on. So it's not just me that's gone mad. I'm in pretty good company. Here's wishing us all greater clarity regardless of where it leads.

Our seeming differences here are mostly about context. It almost always is in such matters. You are focused on ego perspectives and point out the obvious. (It's a perspective I understand well. I spent several years in law enforcement as an investigator of the crimes you cite. One of my specialties was crimes against children - rapes, abuse and murder. I've seen first hand many of the events that outrage you.)

In the not so obvious context, I am referring to a larger, more fundamental perspective that includes, but is not limited to, the human experience. Life goes on after all the pain and suffering of human life is left behind. Consider, consciousness and being was also equally vibrant and alive before our birth in human form. There is a larger reality that ultimately takes precedence over the human perspective. It is in that larger reality that clarity presides.

Consider also that human life exists for only a few short years, Consciousness is timeless.

WW

LifeNow
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 7:42 am

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by LifeNow » Fri Aug 22, 2014 2:50 am

I know consciousness is timeless. I know also, according to ET, that consciousness and being were also equally vibrant and alive before our birth in human form.

Thus the reason I posed the question earlier: if consciousness/Being/Presence is timeless and perfect (as ET says), why does it need to evolve?

I read A New Earth first and most of it helped me immensely. I will always be grateful for that. But considering it was the book after PON, I think the questionable statement I quoted in my first post was egoic on ET's part.

Even the photo at the back of ANE is a little egoic - he's looking away from the camera!

I thought, WW, that you are possibly taking/accepting the perspective you have to help you dull the horrific and terrible events that you had witnessed in your law enforcement experience.

User avatar
smiileyjen101
Posts: 3799
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 3:44 am

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by smiileyjen101 » Fri Aug 22, 2014 3:05 am

LifeNow wrote:
Are you mad, WW?
mwhahahaha!! Webby is one of the most sane people I know :lol:
Webby said: Life goes on after all the pain and suffering of human life is left behind.
I know you meant this in form and out of form Webby, but I'd apply it to in form completely as well.

Yes we can experience pain and suffering (in life), but life does also (physically, blood & bones & emotions and thoughts) go on 'after' and outside of - separate to - the pain and suffering as well. (eg like me and my friend in fits of giggles on the steps of the chapel at my son's funeral). One cannot deny life in all its gory glory.

This is the 'equilibrium' I speak of LifeNow - it's not some Get Out of Jail Free card.
Life still does go on during and after intense experiences at odds with our expectations.
Wailing at the moon or the sun for rising or wanting the world to stop turning when your world view has collapsed is fine if that's how you want to spend your precious moments, no choice is wrong, it just brings a different experience.

But, you do not have to and it will not matter to the moon or the sun if you do or you don't. The world will not stop turning as it is because we wish it to, no matter how desperately or passionately we might wish it to. When we tire or exhaust our ranting and railing against what is, we might even appreciate that it didn't.

If one is aware that their perspective is one tiny, minute aspect in myopic viewing, one can experience and simultaneously notice and respond more fleetingly to the elements of horror and beauty in all the different perspectives, and in the sun and the moon still rising - life still going on regardless of your 'personal' perspective of it.

Try it as an exercise - stop the world from turning as it is .... let me know how you go :wink:
Some 'experiences' have no value, only serve to remind us about right and wrong and the insanity of some humans.
Wow, sorry LifeNow, I didn't realise you still think you're the CEO of the universe. I used to, I gave that role up because I'm really crap at it. :wink: To be serious, I realised I created more suffering for myself and for others with that attitude.

Have you ever sat with a child sexual predator and listened to their story? I have, and I'm guessing Webby has too.

Have you ever had a loved one commit an offence or contribute to a tragedy, and been willing to understand the elements that led to the actions and not condemn them? I have.

In egoic judgement one thinks in terms of 'excuses', in awareness one accepts that there are different perspectives, all built one moment at a time in experience and responses to those experiences. In judgement one operates in levels of pity or condemnation, delineating who is 'victim' who is 'perpetrator', in awareness one appreciates learning about aspects one previously had no idea factored into events unfolding and those labels become less clear, less fitting.

One might think of the easier examples - one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. It doesn't 'excuse' the act, it just explains that one cannot with any accuracy judge the path of any other.

Have you ever had to face someone whose choices one after the other after the other, in combination with another's choices one after the other after the other - both in individual and myopic levels of awareness, capacity and willingness, brought them to a particular place and time of meeting in disastrous consequence?
I have. It's complex to unravel it all. Much easier to judge and condemn I agree.

It is not easy I admit, sometimes that little Hitler in me still wants to tell them and the universe at large how things 'should be', rather than seek to truly understand each of those little choices that led to that particular point that 'allowed' those particular outcomes.

It takes a level of wisdom - and wisdom (Traci Harding) - "is knowledge, gained in experience, and implemented in love".

Love (for me & more originally, Don Miguel Ruiz) is the equilibrium of gratitude and generosity. One may express love in gratitude or in generosity, but the wide universe of love, is all of the elements of both gratitude and generosity in perfect harmony. In the midst of it, with just our individual perspective, or looking on it from our particular point from which we're viewing, we can think we have the whole story, but we don't. Not here.

Webby mentioned NDE, and as you've read my blog you will be aware that I experienced this state of awareness of the equilibrium in perpetual motion. It's gob-smacking totally individual-mind blowing :wink:
This is when we as individuals may be able to contribute to the stopping of the wars, starvation and evil in the world.
There's is no other time but now.

Healer, heal thy self, and heal your world-view with your being.

Stop making enemy of others, situations or events.
Stop only dishing out your love and compassion to those you 'judge' worthy. We are all worthy.
Stop feeding the sense of separation that holds you apart from all life, it will not break you, it will make you.
Your last two posts sort of seems to be your wanting to convince/remind/confirm to yourself, and the pain in your life, that everything that happens, happens in equilibrium. I also say this because you mention the word (equilibrium) so many times...the image of equilibrium as an airy-fairy state of things came into my mind, with an image of you (I don't know what you look like) dancing within it. Bleary-eyed; or 'half-closed' eyes.
Gee I'm glad you chose to stop just short of thinking you know my awareness, capacity and willingness to embrace life and express and experience all the aspects of it, just because you've read one of my blog posts and some comments here :wink:

Like everybody else, I look like lots of different things at different moments - saint and sinner, pacifist and warrior (I think the warrior's cute :wink: but it scares the shit out of some folks ), clown and serious scientist, mother, daughter, sister, aunty, friend, lover, confidante, agitator, granny ---- you would have gotten a hoot out of watching me 'bum bounce' and playing in absolute joy with my 2 year old grand-daughter on her trampoline - on Sunday, which was also in my awareness the anniversary of my son's death, where the parts of my heart that are and always will be his, were tingling. Life doesn't stop being multi-dimensional. Life doesn't ever stop, but not even in physical form, life does not stop being multi-dimensional. I could have chosen to mope around and bemoan my sadness on the noticing of the date - I did acknowledge that I still carry sadness, I'm grateful that it no longer debilitates me as it used to, well not as frequently anyway, and I carry it gladly - it lets me know a) that I'm fully dimensionally alive, and b) that my son once touched my heart physically and emotionally and never again will that love leave me. That purely known & experienced 'gratitude and generosity' knows no bounds and no end. It just is, in the fabric of me.

That you and I have 'touched' in moments also can never be undone. It just is. But respectful discourse accepts that we have perceptions, not perceived truths about each other's lives and perspectives.

Can you see that you peeked over a fence and already are judging what things 'might be', outside of your own awareness? The grass might look greener or even might look disgusting to your eyes, but its not your home, it's not what you are familiar with and have learned to be in harmony with through your own experiences one moment at a time.

Your succinct compassion at some point --- some moment of choice in awareness or not --- fell into ....what is that.....is it pity? is it excusing me? Is it doubting that I'm being honest with you? Did I somehow lose my credibility and sanity like you thought Webby had?

Do you seriously think you know enough to even imagine what I look like? I guarantee you would be shocked and surprised - in any moment of actually being in my presence.

I once had a locum doctor completely crack me up laughing, he'd read my horrendous medical file - that I and the others involved had only experienced one moment at a time, and here he was trying to play catch up and was more than a little overwhelmed.

When I first walked in his face was sad and serious, his shoulders were slumped, arms limp on the desk and he looked tired and beaten. I smiled and introduced myself and because I was concerned by his demeanour - asked him how he was. Immediately he straightened up and said "OH you don't look bad at all!"... to which I laughed ---"Gee, thanks, I think" :wink: ...

He went on to say, "You look nothing like I imagined. from reading your file.. I thought you'd be all haggard and beaten ... you look fine. You're doing really well!"

I always was - he just imagined the rest.

So then I knew why he had been holding the pose and the face that he had when I opened the door. I laughed and immediately he laughed at himself too. I never was those things - he only interpreted information on a page, translated it into - I don't really know - others he might have met, how he might feel himself with those experiences.. I really don't know. I just know the 'proof', the 'reality' was not at all how he imagined, and that's okay too.

We forget elements of this when we judge - we forget that everyone lives their life one moment at a time. No one is born and says .. I'm going to be a mass murderer when I grow up, or I think I'd like to be raped and murdered. It's not like that - we create our lives, one moment at a time responding to stimuli, interpreting, translating, responding and sometimes making mistakes, or being confined by our capacity and living within those confines. We all do this. It just is.

Equilibrium might be airy fairy to you and I can appreciate that within our different awareness, capacity and willingness. But it's pretty solid for me. I can also appreciate that Webby having analytically and forensically unpacked 'incidents' will have a pretty solid understanding of it too.

I know that everything happens in equilibrium and that every thing is inside - not one thing excised or outside - from equilibrium because I experienced the gory/glory of it and now cannot now be unaware of it. I don't just believe it, or dream it or imagine it or fall to it in anguish or sorrow or blind faith or hope - I know it in experience. And it's a damn sight harder and messier to straddle than myopic ignorance. But, it's all good.

I have no excuses, and no longer need them, not for me or for anyone else. It is what it is in this moment.

I dance when I dance, I roar when I roar, I laugh when others might think I should cry and I cry when others might think I should laugh. I sleep soundly knowing I have lived the moments of my day. I bless every tear, fart, snort, giggle, appreciation and offence, knowing this is all life.

There is no thing else.
Our rights start deep within our humanity; they end where another's begin~~ SmileyJen

karmarider
Posts: 2141
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:00 pm
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by karmarider » Fri Aug 22, 2014 5:44 am

LifeNow wrote:Are you mad, WW?
I just got home from a spiritual discussion group where someone who is in the middle of intense grief was outraged at another person who suggested that we co-create our reality.

And I must admit there was a time when I felt the same way. I had trouble accepting that children call starvation and sexual abuse and terminal illnesses to themselves.

I think possibly because we believe that if we are not outraged we condone. The mind must believe in the polarity of good and evil; otherwise all is lost.

In a sense, it is madness. That consciousness takes it so far that it can call darkness upon the light is outrageous.

User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6851
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by Webwanderer » Fri Aug 22, 2014 5:55 am

LifeNow wrote: Thus the reason I posed the question earlier: if consciousness/Being/Presence is timeless and perfect (as ET says), why does it need to evolve?
Who says perfection is static? Energy/vibration/life is constantly in motion. Where would you imagine it might go in an eternal timeless existence? Is the journey not equally perfect as is the consciousness that travels it. 'More' is an essential aspect of life. What would life be without new experience and the knowledge/wisdom that comes with it. One of beauty's most endearing quality is its uniqueness. And with each unique experience we add to our own uniqueness - and that is beautiful in its perfection.
I thought, WW, that you are possibly taking/accepting the perspective you have to help you dull the horrific and terrible events that you had witnessed in your law enforcement experience.
Considering your perspective as you've stated it, I understand why you might think so. It is not the case however. Don't get me wrong, it was certainly challenging. For the most part I held no venom for perpetrators. Even then (decades ago now) I could sense a greater reality where life events made more sense than it did to the human eye. A more inclusive perspective helped me a lot. Because the perps could sense that I genuinely held no anger towards them for their acts, they were willing to talk to me. And as any good criminal investigator knows, as long as your suspect will talk to you they will eventually admit their 'responsibility'.
smiileyjen101 wrote:
Webby said: Life goes on after all the pain and suffering of human life is left behind.
I know you meant this in form and out of form Webby, but I'd apply it to in form completely as well.
In fairness, I was more specifically referring to 'out of form', but your point is well taken and equally true. Considering some people do not get over some things while still in form however, I didn't want to get too far afield from the greater point that awakening brings clarity to all experience.

WW

LifeNow
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 7:42 am

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by LifeNow » Fri Aug 22, 2014 8:38 am

Smileyjen, thanks for responding. My extending of sincere feeling to you was/is not out of pity or excusing you. It was real. Where you wrote of your son in your last post moved me.

I would like to learn more of your NDE.


****

To address your post:

"Hitler", where you used it, is not the right example to use in that context - it is only shock value. "Gandhi", "Martin Luther King", "Craig Keilburger" would have been more apt words to use. And they wished passionately to change what they perceived to be "what is", took action and some of it worked, and the effects are evident.

The sun and moon don't rise, as you know, these are only human-made concepts.

It is the Earth that is turning, not the world. They are two different things. And trying to stop the Earth from turning now, would be futile. However, the world we can work toward changing for the better. This is one of the things I am trying to say. We can recognize what externally is, sure...but we must not bask in it.

"There's is no other time but now.
Healer, heal thy self, and heal your world-view with your being." Amen, smileyjen.

I agree that there are little choices upon choices that 'bring' two individuals/nations to a particular place and time of meeting in disastrous consequence. However, when the physical act is done, there is 'victim' and there is 'perpetrator'. Emotionally-charged beliefs that fuel these choices may be hard to shake, but at some point - the perpetrator must take a step back, detach from believing his or her own hype, and say "This is insane. I cannot and must not do this."

WebWanderer, it was good to see that the perps opened up to you eventually. Would your approach have been the same if the victim was 'your' child, parent, sibling, partner? This sounds hostile, and I don't necessarily intend it to be.
smiileyjen101 wrote:One might think of the easier examples - one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. It doesn't 'excuse' the act, it just explains that one cannot with any accuracy judge the path of any other.
That statement does excuse the act, in my view. My outrage had reacted to seeing it on TV as two concepts at war with each other. The concepts themselves have to be questioned. This may take a long time - or not.
smiileyjen101 wrote: Can you see that you peeked over a fence and already are judging what things 'might be', outside of your own awareness? The grass might look greener or even might look disgusting to your eyes, but its not your home, it's not what you are familiar with and have learned to be in harmony with through your own experiences one moment at a time.
That is the benefit of objective perspective.

WW, I must correct myself: Eckhart, to my knowledge of ANE, never literally said consciousness is 'perfect'. But it can be understood that way: "timeless", "goodness", "true love" and "true forgiveness" are the words chosen to describe Being/Consciousness. I feel like I'm using these wonderful qualities as mere tools to drive home my point to you, and this is not right. But those are descriptions of "perfection", which I accepted - until I read the questionable statement that is the reason for starting this thread.

Don't mind the madness and insanity or evil for now: I don't think my/the question of why a timeless consciousness that is of these qualities needs to evolve has been answered. Nor has there been any displayed acknowledgment about the observation of Eckhart and Greg Larsen's eyelids in relation to their eyes.

I won't do this for long. Please wrap up further comments.

User avatar
smiileyjen101
Posts: 3799
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 3:44 am

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by smiileyjen101 » Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:19 am

I think you've done well to not be overwhelmed already LifeNow.
LIfeNow said: "Hitler", where you used it, is not the right example to use in that context - it is only shock value. "Gandhi", "Martin Luther King", "Craig Keilburger" would have been more apt words to use. And they wished passionately to change what they perceived to be "what is", took action and some of it worked, and the effects are evident.
I appreciate the perspective and respect your interpreting these things in your own way. At the same time I'm pretty sure I know what I meant to say and intend, and ummm nup, little Hitler was what I meant. I can do a pretty mean impression of Gandhi in some situations too :wink: but no seriously I'm as capable as anyone to want to mass the armies and take out the enemies and make the world my perfect little den of non-offence as anyone. Thankfully it rarely lasts longer than a fart before I realise the stench of it, but it does happen :wink: So it genuinely was honesty, and not shock value when I used it in that context, Gandhi's way as you suggest is a little different. Even though my perception is different to your perception there is a difference in my perception between the two ways of being.
The sun and moon don't rise, as you know, these are only human-made concepts.
Point taken. Doesn't stop me howling at them, or bitching at them on some days and sitting watching them in wonder on others. :wink:
However, the world we can work toward changing for the better.
There is only ever now. If not now, then when? is a rhetorical question.
We can recognize what externally is, sure...but we must not bask in it.
I think I'm saying the same thing. ...if one is not 'basking in it', how then can one take offence at it?
Would your approach have been the same if the victim was 'your' child, parent, sibling, partner? This sounds hostile, and I don't necessarily intend it to be.
I know this question was directed at Webby, but I can put my hand up and say...'Yep' - what makes 'your' 'my' 'anyone's' child - parent- sibling - partner more precious, more deserving of love and compassion and understanding than anyone else's? (I'll give you a hint... if you need it .... perspective)
However, when the physical act is done, there is 'victim' and there is 'perpetrator'. Emotionally-charged beliefs that fuel these choices may be hard to shake, but at some point - the perpetrator must take a step back, detach from believing his or her own hype, and say "This is insane. I cannot and must not do this."
This is a common perception that creates suffering. You're assuming that the 'perpetrator' is operating within the same awareness and capacity range as someone else and that if they were only willing......

News break...... some are not aware, some are not capable and some are not willing, all mixed up and intertwined together.

Where then is the 'objective perspective', Ghandi - Martin Luther King 'solution'?

There's more about my nde in this post and in other topics in the 'Beyond the Physical' section. You'll see that a huge point of change in awareness for me centred around seeing the 'whole truth' of an incident that previously had kept me enchained in suffering and misery, having no idea that I was the only one creating it and holding it to me. I do hope you enjoy the read. It goes all over the place, but there might be some gems in there.
http://eckhart-tolle-forum.inner-growth ... =47&t=8712


...............
Karmarider said: I just got home from a spiritual discussion group where someone who is in the middle of intense grief was outraged at another person who suggested that we co-create our reality.
Ah, straddling the divides calm man. The 'nuances' do become acute don't they.

Interesting though that you didn't say that someone upset someone else - nice attribution of perspectives there.
Our rights start deep within our humanity; they end where another's begin~~ SmileyJen

User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6851
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by Webwanderer » Fri Aug 22, 2014 5:50 pm

LifeNow wrote:WebWanderer, it was good to see that the perps opened up to you eventually. Would your approach have been the same if the victim was 'your' child, parent, sibling, partner? This sounds hostile, and I don't necessarily intend it to be.
I don't take it as hostile at all. It's a fair question. My answer is probably not. Because it would be more personal, I would likely be too distracted to maintain the necessary quality of engagement to encourage a dialog. No legal system would allow it anyway. Healing my family, and my own consciousness, would likely take priority.

That said, hatred and anger toward a perpetrator does nothing to them. It does however, negatively effect the one hating and angry - whether it's me or someone else. Anger can be helpful, but only as a transition up from despair on the way back through many emotional levels on the return to clarity.

Perpetrators are essentially souls, like all of us are, only perceiving through a severely mixed up view of life. Knowing that however, doesn't mean I wouldn't do all I could to expose the truth of what happened and allow the justice system to act accordingly as many a confessing perp found out.

WW

LifeNow
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 7:42 am

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by LifeNow » Sat Aug 23, 2014 8:57 pm

Hi again smileyjen.

to want to put an end to a disastrous consequence involving two very unconscious individuals - or groups - is not Hitler-esque. It's wanting to do the right thing.

The objective perspective is knowing what has to be done to stop the madness - then healing, through understanding, can happen.
smiileyjen101 wrote: I think I'm saying the same thing. ...if one is not 'basking in it', how then can one take offence at it?
If one is not 'basking' in it, of course one can take offense at it !

On one hand smileyjen, I see you writing about "is-ness" and "equilibrium" and realizing the choices upon choices that a person goes through to end up doing what they do.
On the other hand, you seem to agree with my position that we can work toward making changes to the world.

Thank you for pointing me toward your thread on your nde. I am eager to read it.
Webwanderer wrote:Perpetrators are essentially souls, like all of us are, only perceiving through a severely mixed up view of life. Knowing that however, doesn't mean I wouldn't do all I could to expose the truth of what happened and allow the justice system to act accordingly as many a confessing perp found out.
Isn't that contradictory? The justice system, while it may consider the causes of this mixed up view of life, is in its decisions does not seem to be as spiritually compassionate and accommodating as you are. How can you, as a soul, know something spiritually yet aid a system that compromises this with another soul? Or, the form of another soul? I guess regardless of our perceptions, we all have to cater to the external practices of society. Is that what you meant?

And again:
LifeNow wrote:Don't mind the madness and insanity or evil for now: I don't think my/the question of why a timeless consciousness that is of these qualities needs to evolve has been answered. Nor has there been any displayed acknowledgment about the observation of Eckhart and Greg Larsen's eyelids in relation to their eyes.

User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6851
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by Webwanderer » Sat Aug 23, 2014 9:50 pm

LifeNow wrote:The objective perspective is knowing what has to be done to stop the madness
'Objective perspective' is an oxymoron.
Isn't that contradictory? The justice system, while it may consider the causes of this mixed up view of life, is in its decisions does not seem to be as spiritually compassionate and accommodating as you are. How can you, as a soul, know something spiritually yet aid a system that compromises this with another soul? Or, the form of another soul? I guess regardless of our perceptions, we all have to cater to the external practices of society. Is that what you meant?
Life in this human form has unique qualities for experience. I'm not here to judge the system of human existence, just to participate in whatever ways seem most appropriate at any given time. Appropriate of course, is relative to perspective which changes with experience over time - hopefully for the better.

I don't think my/the question of why a timeless consciousness that is of these qualities needs to evolve has been answered.
Or maybe you simply didn't like the answer and rejected it.

WW

User avatar
smiileyjen101
Posts: 3799
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 3:44 am

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by smiileyjen101 » Sun Aug 24, 2014 3:43 am

I don't think my/the question of why a timeless consciousness that is of these qualities needs to evolve has been answered.
How is your consciousness evolving if not by experience?
Our rights start deep within our humanity; they end where another's begin~~ SmileyJen

LifeNow
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 7:42 am

Re: A questionable statement in A New Earth

Post by LifeNow » Sun Aug 24, 2014 4:18 am

Awareness of Consciousness evolves through experience - not The capital-C Consciousness itself. The latter is what I am referring to in the question I posed.

Look - never mind. But I see you're doing that already. :wink:

Post Reply