I'm feeling unwelcome here, post deleted

[luke wilson]

Archaea, sometimes if you feel something, I think it's important to ask yourself if that feeling is appropriate at that point in time and why. You need to ask yourself why you are feeling a particular emotion at a particular time and if it's correct (that you should be feeling that specific emotion at that time). The strength and validity of that feeling will help you know if maybe something else has been triggered that is expressing itself at that moment in time.

I always think people who don't have our best interest at heart have an advantage over us as they put us in states where they know we are uncomfortable with the emotions that will arise. Take the people who poisoned you, clearly you are someone who in real life isn't confrontational, so they put you in a position where you probably felt violated (a correct feeling) and you had to be confrontational but you are averse to expressing such emotions. They put you in a position of facing emotions you were uncomfortable with. Instead of justifying that you felt feeling confrontational emotions wasn't the right thing to do, instead you should acknowledge as you have now, that it's just an uncomfortable step for you. Maybe not if at that second, but at some point you should have let the person who did it know that it wasn't a cool thing to do, either by telling him (verbally or via a message) or by all together avoiding that person or group of people (as they clearly don't have your best interest at heart - poisoning is literally criminal behaviour) or by even calling the police on them.

It's up to you to read the situation and see what a valid response would be, maybe you didn't call the cops as these were gang members (you say other criminals were involved?) and that would put you in more danger, so maybe what you do is be grateful you survived and stop associating with criminal elements?

Also, I'm a big believer that nearly everything we learn is useful to us in one way or another, even those things that you think may not be useful e.g. for you having displaced emotions towards Laura. First of all, as stated above, when you feel this arise in you, ask yourself, is this valid in this situation? Why is it valid? What has Laura really done? For example, in that situation with the other member, Laura hasn't done anything at all, the person was angry and annoyed just because he was, in the end he put it down to needing proof and demanding it from Laura.

But you had something useful really to add, you and the person had a connection of some sort, due to your life experiences which has given rise in both of you, the same type of issues and this is why you felt triggered. But instead of approaching from your point of view, you were in a good position to elaborate the situation to the other person using that 'trigger' or 'connection' you felt and literally using yourself as a launch pad (as you know exactly where the person is coming from as you have that same grounding in you). You could have taken most of what you just said here and applied it to the other person...

I think that after spending a lot of my life suppressing emotions, specifically my anger, my sub-conscious needs to find a way to express itself. [....] This caused a transference of my suppressed emotions onto the forum, and since Laura is the main character here, a whole series of internal narratives and projections were created revolving around her.

I can see this rationally because some of the things that irked me regarding Laura are things that I couldn't care less about if it were someone else. However, these projections and narratives aren't based on intellectual energy, but emotional energy. Until these emotions are resolved, I believe these projections and narratives will continue to be generated, if not with this forum and Laura as the focus, then someone else.

In the situation, you'd have a supreme advantage, because your words would carry such a charge that they'll leave a mark behind that will be like a program acting in the background like a virus (a good type in this case!), by virtue of essentially being able to 'be one' with the situation the other person is facing (you can go in, combine, and apply force to pull them out) i.e. even if that person doesn't overcome their issue now, the process would have been set in motion.

You felt that connection and it was a strong and valid connection, you just approached it inappropriately because you skipped some basic steps at the beginning e.g. are these feelings connected to Laura/Forum or are they connected to something larger that I'm projecting onto Laura/Forum as this is a safe environment for them to be expressed?

Archaea, as you explore some of your dynamics and discover some things that you may classify as holding you prisoner in real life that you project onto a virtual environment (due to the relative safety of this environment) you'll probably find quite a lot to work with and probably really struggle to cross the thresholds you want to cross i.e. change yourself to what you want to become, but that doesn't mean that everything that you classify as holding you back can't be useful, if you just attain some level of dis-identification from YOU and the PROGRAMS. Accept that the programs rule but also accept they ARENT you. I think this is key. You'll literally separate into 2 within yourself, one that watches and one that acts and every now and again, this can be really useful. It can be especially useful when you run into a doppelganger as it were. ;)

 

[Esote]

...
Reflection/introspection is a good thing. It takes time and solitude.

But do keep in mind that "giving" is ultimately the true means to spiritual growth & attainment. One will always be limited, if the focus is confined to simply "work on self."

That part is necessary ... but not sufficient.

It's as basic as STS in contrast to STO. We truly grow only through the pursuit of compassionate service to others. And we work on ourselves -- in order to be able to help others ... in the most appropriate way possible. (I understand this more clearly now.)

That is how the C's have described their ongoing endeavor. It's a very important distinction.

I could be wrong.

FWIW.

Thank you for this sitting !

This is essential, and short (of words, not of meaning of course).

It's more or less difficult for non-English native-speaking members to read through long posts.

And going to the core of the Work without much words when possible is pretty appropriate, as far as I am concerned...

 

[Joe]

Cross posting this from the "hit a wall" topic because I think it is relevant.

One very common area that many people get stuck on is the belief "life" has thwarted their desires or what they wanted for themselves, and therefore life "owes" them something, so they sit back and wait/demand that life provide the goods. This is a pretty bad route to take, a) because it leads to parasitism and stagnation and b) because it is not objectively true. Life is not there to serve anyone. It provides opportunities for learning and growth. If you do not understand that and seize those opportunities, then you are effectively saying to life that you are not interested in participating. This very often leads to further troubles, which entrenches the belief that life has given us a crappy deal, and on down it goes.

 

[Archaea]

What I was intending to communicate in the above quote was a possibility that if we weren't talking to ourselves so much, there'd be no internal dialog to derail us. Our response would show a unified movement between perceiving and responding and that would be more natural and less risky for self-importance to become a factor. If the self-importance did become a factor, we'd be able to benefit from correcting something quicker and with less pain to our sense of ourself. But this is just my view ATM, and I don't think I'm saying it right.

Seth says something similar in the magical approach, he says that our bodies respond to our thoughts. So if we believe that we're going to make a mistake in our actions, our body will respond to that and make a mistake. However, if we change our beliefs and have no doubt that we won't make any mistakes, then our body won't make any mistakes. I think that's similar to what you're saying.

I may be misunderstanding what you mean by "internally considerate" but I would think the opposite would be the case. With me, I think a reaction of anger or whatever would have been too fast to be mediated with internal considering the way I understand that concept. It would be the internal considering that would prevent the reaction to being poisoned; basically, a mental scenario created to come between "I" and the actual situation: my thoughts concerning "him and his possible reactions" and my possible reactions to his imagined reactions. That's the looping as I see it, and to me, that's internal considering.

I see what you're saying. I think in my case anger might be a reaction that I have after the event is over, my initial reaction might be shock or fear usually, but at those specific times I was either more concerned with my ego and self-image or with the physical feelings. I'm not sure though, I might need to think about that some more.

While in the comfort of your own home and privacy, why not use a text editor or take paper and pencil and write out a list of the things you think are wrong with other people? Then, line by line, ask yourself if that could apply to you? If you balk at the very idea or even at one of the items, that's an emotional reaction that's possibly useful. If you find this exercise is too disagreeable to work through, then write out reasons why each item cannot possibly have any connection to you, but then you'll have to write out what the reference is that you are comparing someone to in order to see them (or something about them) as wrong and why you disapprove so strongly of whatever it is they've said or done.

I could give it a go I suppose. What do I do if I feel silly?

In the case of poisoning, we are not talking about being uncomfortable because we are wrong and like to be right. We are talking about a clear physical threat. The appropriate response in the presence of physical threat is protective action. If someone is chased by a tiger, one runs or tries to fight. There is no anger or fear involved in that moment - at least not in the sense we normally describe such emotions. There is just action - fight or flight. The third possible response is freeze. It is very common in the presence of threat. If escape or fighting are not viable options, nature has endowed creatures with the freeze response which lessens the pain of mortal injury and death. Sometimes, if the prey acts dead, the predator may let it go or reduce its own alertness, providing a small chance of escape.

That's what I think too, I still think that getting angry wouldn't have been helpful.

What I'm curious about, is why he didn't think of calling the cops? Twice?

That's a good question. For the first time it happened, I think the answer is ego, I thought I could just tough it out. What I didn't mention was that when we were riding the bikes and I had to stop and take a break, there were peopl connection and it was a strong and valid connection, you just approached it inappropriately because you skipped some basic steps at the beginning e.g. are these feelings connected to Laura/Forum or are they connected to something larger that I'm projecting onto Laura/Forum as this is a safe environment for them to be expressed? e riding past on bikes and horses, I was just laying there thirsty as all hell saying hello to people as they walked past on their way to my spew.

The second time I was too busy spewing endlessly, and by the time I was finished I just wanted to go to bed. After a certain amount of time, if I try to accuse someone of poisoning me they can just deny it, I have no proof. Also I would need to go to hospital and since I wasn't bleeding out I would have had to wait for a while, until I was told there was nothing wrong with me. OSIT.

Maybe I'm justifying a bit there. maybe it's because I figured I'd just let them do whatever they wanted or it'd get worse. I don't know.

I always think people who don't have our best interest at heart have an advantage over us as they put us in states where they know we are uncomfortable with the emotions that will arise. Take the people who poisoned you, clearly you are someone who in real life isn't confrontational, so they put you in a position where you probably felt violated (a correct feeling) and you had to be confrontational but you are averse to expressing such emotions. They put you in a position of facing emotions you were uncomfortable with. Instead of justifying that you felt feeling confrontational emotions wasn't the right thing to do, instead you should acknowledge as you have now, that it's just an uncomfortable step for you. Maybe not if at that second, but at some point you should have let the person who did it know that it wasn't a cool thing to do, either by telling him (verbally or via a message) or by all together avoiding that person or group of people (as they clearly don't have your best interest at heart - poisoning is literally criminal behaviour) or by even calling the police on them.

It's up to you to read the situation and see what a valid response would be, maybe you didn't call the cops as these were gang members (you say other criminals were involved?) and that would put you in more danger, so maybe what you do is be grateful you survived and stop associating with criminal elements?

I think you're right about what they were doing, maybe they thought I wouldn't do anything about it so I was a safe target. I've stopped associating with them, but I'm not sure I've completely resolved the anger. Also they weren't gang members, we're all middle class children with good upbringings. After reading some of the Seth material I think they may have been looking for some drama in their lives or something... I really don't know.

Also, I'm a big believer that nearly everything we learn is useful to us in one way or another, even those things that you think may not be useful e.g. for you having displaced emotions towards Laura. First of all, as stated above, when you feel this arise in you, ask yourself, is this valid in this situation? Why is it valid? What has Laura really done? For example, in that situation with the other member, Laura hasn't done anything at all, the person was angry and annoyed just because he was, in the end he put it down to needing proof and demanding it from Laura.

Well, I think all emotions are valid in themselves, thinking that an emotion isn't valid leads to putting up emotional barriers, which the P's said was bad for some reason. I understand what you're saying though, I need to try to gain an objective perception of what's actually happening internally and externally in order to be externally considerate. Somewhat ironically I suppose, I think the best way to do this is to network/communicate, which is weird I think, it seems to be a contradiction/paradox.

You felt that connection and it was a strong and valid connection, you just approached it inappropriately because you skipped some basic steps at the beginning e.g. are these feelings connected to Laura/Forum or are they connected to something larger that I'm projecting onto Laura/Forum as this is a safe environment for them to be expressed?

This might be a little hard to discuss since I don't believe you've read my deleted post. The reason it was deleted is that the admins and mods were worried that it would make the situation worse. I don't know if it actually would have but that wasn't my intention, my intention was to offer some understanding so the person involved wouldn't feel like they were being ganged up on by everybody.

I have a problem with covert antagonisms, however, I don't know if they affected my deleted post... I might need to reread this thread.

 

[sitting]

After reading some of the Seth material I think they may have been looking for some drama in their lives or something... I really don't know.

Hi Archaea,

From what I can see, the only relevance of the Seth material to your current predicament -- concerns inner beliefs. Your own and no one elses at this point. Your references to Seth are a bit off track, in my opinion. It's important to have precise & accurate issue identification.

"Covert antagonism" IS a big deal. And it was clearly stated by C's. To you and to others.
(I was one.)

If dealt with properly, it may lead to an eventual untangling of much of what's troubling you. (It certainly has helped me a great deal ... even if much remains to be done.)

I admire the way you've addressed these issues subsequent to the post deletion. It takes courage to be open, honest, and sincere. We all can feel it when we see it. It's a different level of discourse entirely. And it does represent a means to help others as well (as they witness your travails.) So thank you.

I could be wrong.

FWIW.

 

[Buddy]

What I was intending to communicate in the above quote was a possibility that if we weren't talking to ourselves so much, there'd be no internal dialog to derail us. Our response would show a unified movement between perceiving and responding and that would be more natural and less risky for self-importance to become a factor. If the self-importance did become a factor, we'd be able to benefit from correcting something quicker and with less pain to our sense of our-self. But this is just my view ATM, and I don't think I'm saying it right.

Seth says something similar in the magical approach, he says that our bodies respond to our thoughts. So if we believe that we're going to make a mistake in our actions, our body will respond to that and make a mistake. However, if we change our beliefs and have no doubt that we won't make any mistakes, then our body won't make any mistakes. I think that's similar to what you're saying.

I haven't read that Seth reference, so I can't map my reply to Seth's ideas. I think the main thing I was trying to say is that without the self-important "I"'s input, or without the interference of thinking patterns that preempt and modify what would be more natural responses, our behavior would be more appropriate to circumstances as they present themselves. That's all. There seems to be some strict behavior inhibitions going on with you, though, because it appears you inhibit both, thought and act, in your own defense while being willing to come to another's aid, as you perceive it. But maybe that's not entirely true. You seem to defend yourself by refusing to think or do anything IRL that might appear to acknowledge or to show knowledge of someone's harmful intent towards you.

I could also be misreading any or all of this, so please feel free to correct anything you see as not right.

While in the comfort of your own home and privacy, why not use a text editor or take paper and pencil and write out a list of the things you think are wrong with other people? Then, line by line, ask yourself if that could apply to you? If you balk at the very idea or even at one of the items, that's an emotional reaction that's possibly useful. If you find this exercise is too disagreeable to work through, then write out reasons why each item cannot possibly have any connection to you, but then you'll have to write out what the reference is that you are comparing someone to in order to see them (or something about them) as wrong and why you disapprove so strongly of whatever it is they've said or done.

I could give it a go I suppose. What do I do if I feel silly?

That possibility never occured to me so I don't know. Perhaps I'm suggesting a way to realize if you're projecting onto other people or if you really do know why someone has said or done something "wrong" by your estimation and where the rules you're using to determine this comes from. Most likely this exercise simply falls under the heading "know yourself" and if there's an associated feeling of 'silly', well...we can allow that we may sometimes live with feeling silly, no?

Maybe I'm justifying a bit there. maybe it's because I figured I'd just let them do whatever they wanted or it'd get worse. I don't know.

That reads like someone living under the domination of a tyrant or petty tyrant, even if circumstances don't actually merit such a description.

[quote author=luke wilson]You felt that connection and it was a strong and valid connection, you just approached it inappropriately because you skipped some basic steps at the beginning e.g. are these feelings connected to Laura/Forum or are they connected to something larger that I'm projecting onto Laura/Forum as this is a safe environment for them to be expressed?

This might be a little hard to discuss since I don't believe you've read my deleted post. The reason it was deleted is that the admins and mods were worried that it would make the situation worse. I don't know if it actually would have but that wasn't my intention, my intention was to offer some understanding so the person involved wouldn't feel like they were being ganged up on by everybody.[/quote]

Correct me if I'm off, but I gather you made a supportive post in a thread where someone was undergoing a mirroring process led by Admin and SuperMods? That's a no no anyway, regardless of who would have posted. I don't know if what I've gathered about what you are saying is correct, so I don't know how much to explain here. Maybe it will be sufficient to mention that I made a similar mistake once, inserting a reply on a mirroring thread that could be interpreted as supportive. I got burned just a tad and learned something in no uncertain terms: that it was an interruption that could have a detrimental effect on the recipient and throw all that effort being focused by others onto the garbage pile.

It's also the case that even Admins and SuperMods learn by doing on here while working with us, and so if you were injecting counter-productive material on a thread where a mirroring is going on, then maybe someone has simply learned to watch for this possibility and catch it before any damage is done. Again, I don't know, so I may be overloading the point, but you may have simply taken that personally on your own initiative.

As for whatever other complaints you might have against anyone: I don't know what they are or that it's any of my business and I'm not asking to know, but you do have options here for expressing grievances - even journaling to express them in writing as a way of getting it out so you can get a better look at it, whatever it is.

 

[Joe]

What I didn't mention was that when we were riding the bikes and I had to stop and take a break, there were peopl connection and it was a strong and valid connection, you just approached it inappropriately because you skipped some basic steps at the beginning e.g. are these feelings connected to Laura/Forum or are they connected to something larger that I'm projecting onto Laura/Forum as this is a safe environment for them to be expressed? e riding past on bikes and horses, I was just laying there thirsty as all hell saying hello to people as they walked past on their way to my spew.

Hi Archaea, did this paragraph get a bit mixed up? Not sure what you are saying here.

 

[Buddy]

Joe, I'm not wanting to speak for Archaea, but I figured it out earlier, so if it helps save you time, here's my suggestion:

That's a good question. For the first time it happened, I think the answer is ego, I thought I could just tough it out. What I didn't mention was that when we were riding the bikes and I had to stop and take a break, there were peopl connection and it was a strong and valid connection, you just approached it inappropriately because you skipped some basic steps at the beginning e.g. are these feelings connected to Laura/Forum or are they connected to something larger that I'm projecting onto Laura/Forum as this is a safe environment for them to be expressed? e riding past on bikes and horses, I was just laying there thirsty as all hell saying hello to people as they walked past on their way to my spew.

Strike out the bolded portion which comes from luke wilson's next-to-last paragraph and combine what's left. I think it'll make more sense then.

Here's my version:

That's a good question. For the first time it happened, I think the answer is ego, I thought I could just tough it out. What I didn't mention was that when we were riding the bikes and I had to stop and take a break, there were people riding past on bikes and horses, I was just laying there thirsty as all hell saying hello to people as they walked past on their way to my spew.

 

[Joe]

Thanks. That was some serious mixing and matching there!

 

[Archaea]

From what I can see, the only relevance of the Seth material to your current predicament -- concerns inner beliefs. Your own and no one elses at this point. Your references to Seth are a bit off track, in my opinion. It's important to have precise & accurate issue identification.

I think you're right.

"Covert antagonism" IS a big deal. And it was clearly stated by C's. To you and to others.
(I was one.)

If dealt with properly, it may lead to an eventual untangling of much of what's troubling you. (It certainly has helped me a great deal ... even if much remains to be done.)

I admire the way you've addressed these issues subsequent to the post deletion. It takes courage to be open, honest, and sincere. We all can feel it when we see it. It's a different level of discourse entirely. And it does represent a means to help others as well (as they witness your travails.) So thank you.

I wonder how many people have these covert antagonisms, and whether or not the causes are all the same? In the descriptions of the 4th way work stuff, are there references to these kinds of problems and if so, how common are they?

Also, you're welcome ;) and thank you too.

I haven't read that Seth reference, so I can't map my reply to Seth's ideas. I think the main thing I was trying to say is that without the self-important "I"'s input, or without the interference of thinking patterns that preempt and modify what would be more natural responses, our behavior would be more appropriate to circumstances as they present themselves. That's all.

That makes sense to me. Don Juan said that our self importance is the reason why we spend most of our lives being offended by the deeds and misdeeds of others. Maybe this comes back to what obyvatel said regarding learning at a young age, perhaps we're rewarded for being inhibited and punished in some way for not being inhibited?

There seems to be some strict behavior inhibitions going on with you, though, because it appears you inhibit both, thought and act, in your own defense while being willing to come to another's aid, as you perceive it. But maybe that's not entirely true. You seem to defend yourself by refusing to think or do anything IRL that might appear to acknowledge or to show knowledge of someone's harmful intent towards you.

I don't know, you might be right, but in my head a lot of what I'm concerned about is other people's harmful intentions toward me, this might be due to inward focusing, however. At work, sometimes I see people open a drink or something, have a little bit and put it in the fridge. When they do that I think, geez they have a lot of faith in other people not to try and poison them.

That possibility never occured to me so I don't know. Perhaps I'm suggesting a way to realize if you're projecting onto other people or if you really do know why someone has said or done something "wrong" by your estimation and where the rules you're using to determine this comes from. Most likely this exercise simply falls under the heading "know yourself" and if there's an associated feeling of 'silly', well...we can allow that we may sometimes live with feeling silly, no?

Yeah we can allow ourselves to feel silly, just more inhibitions I guess.

Correct me if I'm off, but I gather you made a supportive post in a thread where someone was undergoing a mirroring process led by Admin and SuperMods? That's a no no anyway, regardless of who would have posted. I don't know if what I've gathered about what you are saying is correct, so I don't know how much to explain here. Maybe it will be sufficient to mention that I made a similar mistake once, inserting a reply on a mirroring thread that could be interpreted as supportive. I got burned just a tad and learned something in no uncertain terms: that it was an interruption that could have a detrimental effect on the recipient and throw all that effort being focused by others onto the garbage pile.

Why are supportive posts a no no? It's hard to discuss what the content of my post was since it was deleted, but I think coming at someone with directly countering views in such a situation isn't going to be very effective, what I think will happen is that the person undergoing the mirroring process will go on the defensive and will eventually just leave. I think this has happened on this forum before, and the only reason it didn't happen with edgitarra was because Andromeda offered some understanding and not just another counter-view, i.e. it was a supportive post. OSIT.

As for whatever other complaints you might have against anyone: I don't know what they are or that it's any of my business and I'm not asking to know, but you do have options here for expressing grievances - even journaling to express them in writing as a way of getting it out so you can get a better look at it, whatever it is.

What I think the best thing to do is if I read something which I don't agree with then I should state my problems clearly and politely on the same thread. If I let it linger in my brain, the content and context of what I read which I disagree with might change and get twisted, and from there become fuel for projections and narratives.

Hi Archaea, did this paragraph get a bit mixed up? Not sure what you are saying here.

BAH! I must've accidentally cut and paste after I proof-read it.

 

[luke wilson]

Some things to think about regarding the example you gave of the drink. I don't know what to call it, recognition of an unsafe environment or paranoia...

- is the environment safe?
- any prior histories?
- does it have the flavor of paranoia?
- is it a reflection of past personal experiences? I.e. Your own experience of being poisoned.

If you are in any situation where you feel threatened or not safe, do a quick analysis in your head to determine validity... Just a thought...

 

[Archaea]

Some things to think about regarding the example you gave of the drink. I don't know what to call it, recognition of an unsafe environment or paranoia...

- is the environment safe?
- any prior histories?
- does it have the flavor of paranoia?
- is it a reflection of past personal experiences? I.e. Your own experience of being poisoned.

If you are in any situation where you feel threatened or not safe, do a quick analysis in your head to determine validity... Just a thought...

Probably a fair bit of paranoia, but I'd rather not take the risk no matter how silly it seems. Sometimes I get anxiety after eating something if I feel there's even a small chance it could have been tampered with, so nowadays I figure even if there's nothing wrong with it, I won't eat it anyway. I don't want the bad feelings.

 

[Mr. Premise]

Some things to think about regarding the example you gave of the drink. I don't know what to call it, recognition of an unsafe environment or paranoia...

- is the environment safe?
- any prior histories?
- does it have the flavor of paranoia?
- is it a reflection of past personal experiences? I.e. Your own experience of being poisoned.

If you are in any situation where you feel threatened or not safe, do a quick analysis in your head to determine validity... Just a thought...

Probably a fair bit of paranoia, but I'd rather not take the risk no matter how silly it seems. Sometimes I get anxiety after eating something if I feel there's even a small chance it could have been tampered with, so nowadays I figure even if there's nothing wrong with it, I won't eat it anyway. I don't want the bad feelings.

Well, given that you WERE poisoned, it's understandable to be wary of that happening again.