Intelligence, Awareness and the Internal Compass

And then there is the aspect of creating reality, at least to some degree. Just who is the dreamer? Who is dreaming your dreams? Not as simple a question as it sounds.

To what extent can a created reality be objective? I do recall the C’s speaking of this aspect in a positive light. Where 4D will be more of a home where we get to arrange the pillows more than here in 3D.

People look for objectivity in order to navigate their lives and make predictions about outcomes and pitfalls but there are always wildcards in the game.

Part of the objective landscape is that there is a strong undercurrent of subjectivity flowing in all directions which makes it more than tricky to say “this IS the way it is”. I think the best we can say is “this is how it appears to me to be”. Given the element of doubt that there should be about how things REALLY are, (if there even IS such a thing as absolute objectivity in a universe of created worlds) the question becomes: upon what am I basing my actions and choices? An inner listening hears spoken inner thoughts and feels an inner feeling. But is it a learned response to past experience or real creative generative thinking? Or, more appropriately, a real accessing of an authentic essence that somehow “knows”? And so the circle comes back to the original title of this thread.

How the hell do we do that? (Know which way our inner compass is pointing and heed that direction) Certainly we do it at various times. But the pitfalls and cross currents are legion. Anybody ever 2nd guess the inner compass? Of course. How do we distinguish our true inner compass from the noise inherent in our human machine?

Thanks so much for this thread idea.
 
I’ve always noticed the difference in book smart vs gym bro people being their street smart awareness. The book smart people I know are very intelligent but also very naive when it comes to reality, they tend to have a “everyone is good at heart mentality.” Street smart people tend to question authority and question other people’s motives.

As far as JBP goes I think he could learn a lot from his wife Tammy and her train of thinking. He’s very internalized and it might do him some good to shut up and let her lead a conversation or two. I listened to her interview with her daughter Mikhaila, and WOW. If there was ever someone who grasped the STO concept without being aware of it it’s her.
 
I am reminded of an exercise I read in a book once, the point of which was to discover your 'core beliefs' about reality.

The exercise was basically an introspective one, in which you're supposed to choose a belief you hold (any belief) and keep asking "why do I believe that?" for every answer the mind gives. I remember that it doesn't take many questions before you end up with statements like "it feels like", "it seems like" or "that's what I've learned" or "that's what I've been told". Apart from resorting to "I know it's like that", it's hard to pinpoint a 'core belief' and truly feel like you've come to a solid, infallible foundation when it comes to even simple 'beliefs' such as "I am a human being" or "water is wet".

Our senses easily deceive us and our mechanical minds are constantly filling in the gaps in our perception without our conscious input.

Belief seems to be a key point in this discussion, and I recall the C's also mention that our greatest power to alter reality lies within the belief center.

As we're talking about seeing reality as it is, it's interesting to ponder the saying "seeing is believing" which might as well be flipped to "believing is seeing". Things keep unfolding in our field of awareness and we kind of automatically attach/overlay a cause & effect schema onto our experience to help us navigate life. We have the freedom to impose whatever meaning we want on the events happening in our lives, but are all the meanings we impose purely subjective?

I personally do this all the time; attach a kind of 'cause and effect chain' to some event happening in my day, telling myself "aah, this happened because of that happening earlier, and I had that random thought this morning which also pointed to this". Of course there's no way for me to know if these metaphysical mind exercises have any validity to them at all, but I find myself trying to play 'reality detective' and sometimes the insights or conclusions I arrive at seem to make perfect sense, but then again, that might also just be wishful thinking.

BHelmet said:
How do we distinguish our true inner compass from the noise inherent in our human machine?
Click to expand...
This is something that I hope more people chime in on, as I think it's one of our main keys for getting out of this mess. If we only could find that inner space of conviction and certainty that we know to be right, and that simply rests in the background of our awareness as a feeling of rightness, and remain in that state, akin to remaining in a flow state, I believe our future selves would bridge the gap in a relatively short time. It's remaining on the narrow path for any significant amount of time that is the hardest. I think most of us here can with relative ease 'tune in' to our true inner compass, but we quickly get pulled back under into the above mentioned "noise inherent in our human machine" and just start floating along in an unconscious manner again. This is where self-remembering also comes into play.

BHelmet said:
Given the element of doubt that there should be about how things REALLY are, (if there even IS such a thing as absolute objectivity in a universe of created worlds) the question becomes: upon what am I basing my actions and choices? An inner listening hears spoken inner thoughts and feels an inner feeling. But is it a learned response to past experience or real creative generative thinking? Or, more appropriately, a real accessing of an authentic essence that somehow “knows”? And so the circle comes back to the original title of this thread.
Click to expand...
I've started asking DCM/future self to "show me the way, and I will walk it".

If my future self is able to drop some hints into my reality of which way to go, then great. But I'm also weary about the 4dSTS aspect which seems to be more than dropping hints. How can we learn to differentiate a level of manipulation we can't even understand the mechanics of from our own divine intuition?

Alejo said:
But I think that seeing reality as objectively as possible requires a conscious effort to question it and to see it, much like it happens down here, and since as above so below, I daresay that it's a continual effort to not fall into complacency, however tempting.
Click to expand...
Maybe this line of inquiry would be something we could slip into the next session with the C's? Is their vantage point permitting them to 'see all' without having to go through a 'question-answer process'?
 
MatiaS said:
Maybe this line of inquiry would be something we could slip into the next session with the C's? Is their vantage point permitting them to 'see all' without having to go through a 'question-answer process'?
Click to expand...
I daresay we could probably answer that ourselves, or at least attempt to do so. Because questioning reality is a form of interacting with it, questioning it with the intention of seeing the truth and the humility to accept it, in a non anticipatory manner, is one of the ways to interact with reality, but not the only one I think.

I think that the C's can see everything in a way that in our current condition looks very different. For instance, question-answer is a linear form of interacting with reality which implies the passage of time, which to them isn't a thing per se... so questioning reality might look entirely different if the passage of time isn't a factor.

But even then, I would say that the focus of interacting with reality, the same way we would "question it" remains. Defined in another way, questioning reality is a form of perception in a non-anticipatory manner with the aim of seeing the truth of any given situation, be it internal reality or the external universe. It's using previously assimilated information to attempt to learn new one, but again, what I just said implies the passage of time, so it might be really inaccurate when trying to describe how the C's could interact with reality.

But I still think that there might be a form of "question-answer", the difference is the C's see a lot more, and accept the answers instead of attempting to impose themselves on them, if that makes any sense.
 
Thanks for the interesting discussion. My two cents .A superficial observation, I well understand the metaphor ( and more) of the suffering inherent in weightlifting, but let me remind you that ironman is the stuff of long-muscled exanguious triathletes, and that it has a lot to do with endurance. And that endurance IS the challenge. Second superficial observation, I think it's a matter of different territory maps. We all know that a territory map is not the territory, even more so from a multidimensional perspective. Does the accuracy of the map depend on awareness? We can say yes, we can say that we are all "differently aware" cartographers and that personal territory maps represent EACH of us very well, but in any case they are NOT THE territory. And this is and this is another challenge. Third surface observation: external consideration. Which I consider the equivalent of merging, And related to realm border crossing. Another challange again..
 
Hmm. And we seem to apply the inner map or look to the inner map for guidance on those external outer unmapped territories. Anyway, I like the map metaphor. Of course the inner map is the hardest one to be objective about, or so the thinking goes.

Oracle Delphi sez: know thyself and to thine own self be true; which seems to imply that it IS possible (to know thyself) albeit with a hell of a lot of work as we all must know by now.

And I think that is where networking factors in. Sometimes (always?) we all need input from outside our personal bubble to really get our bearings straight as far as knowing who we really might be.
 
Alejo said:
I think that the C's can see everything in a way that in our current condition looks very different. For instance, question-answer is a linear form of interacting with reality which implies the passage of time, which to them isn't a thing per se... so questioning reality might look entirely different if the passage of time isn't a factor.
Click to expand...
The time factor is something our 3D minds definitely struggle with. Time seems so fundamental to our existence, it's hard to conceptualize how true timeless existence is experienced. Still a non-linear cause and effect model should apply, one would think, since doing one thing will lead to another thing, even in a timeless state. Even though 'all is happening at once', the focus of awareness zooms in on a particular sector of 'the all' and experiences/observes that in a more intense way than the rest of 'the all' which is not focused upon.

I'm reminded of something I believe the C's said also (and this might not be an accurate quote but it's how I remember it); that in 6D, if one entity/thought-form (Cs: "all that exists is thought-forms") wishes to communicate something to another, the communication happens by projection into the lower densities.

So let's say I'm a 6D thought-form, and I wish to communicate and explore together with you, another 6D thought-form, the idea of "justice". We would together project a dream into 3d, a timeless packet of information, that unpacks itself into linear time through an incarnation (or many), where the overarching archetypal theme to be explored would be "justice". Maybe we would take turns incarnating as different characters such as: "victim", "perpetrator", "savior" etc.. Also simultaneously we are filling in as secondary characters in other peoples' dreams, playing supporting roles in the dreams of everybody we interact with. We might be completely unconscious during these incarnations of the fact that we're supposed to be exploring the idea of "justice", but our 6D selves are in a manner of speaking "looking over us", assimilating the data and experience that we gain through being incarnated in time.

For 6D all of those lifetimes happen simultaneously. There's been some intriguing sessions where the C's almost seem to be bubbling with joy over the topic of "you are us in the future", and the difficulty Laura and co. are having with understanding it from their viewpoint (the "past").

Perhaps they perceive the Now-moment with crystal clear clarity, and the surrounding infinite soup of potential as a tapestry of higher order cause and effect logic ala: "if THIS, then THAT, and if THAT, then THIS, and if THIS, then THAT, but if THAT, then THIS". Everything is connected as the "butterfly effect", and that's why everything outside the directly perceivable Now is only unknowable potential, until a certain inner orientation (STO polarization?) is crystallized in the 'wave reading consciousness unit', allowing it to see wider and broader and deeper into the 'unknowable', thus expanding the depth and width of the Now-moment.
BHelmet said:
Sometimes (always?) we all need input from outside our personal bubble to really get our bearings straight as far as knowing who we really might be.
Click to expand...
I am reminded by Strangers to Ourselves where Wilson speaks of the interesting point that other people can more easily spot our intrinsic unconscious patterns than we can ourselves. Whereas we ourselves are more aware of our extrinsic, more superficial motivations. We need each other to point out our blind spots.
 
Last edited:
I think there is a very down to earth and practical approach to dealing with the unknown and uncertainty about our perception of reality. I ask myself - how does acting in accordance with my current perception help me and others around me, and how does it make things worse? If you turn out to be wrong, but the results are positive overall, then what has been lost by acting in that way? Of course, this is assuming you have put in enough effort and gathered enough knowledge. The input of others will be necessary. This way you can determine the accuracy of your assessment, and see as clearly as possible what the results are. What more can you do?
 
MatiaS said:
The time factor is something our 3D minds definitely struggle with. Time seems so fundamental to our existence, it's hard to conceptualize how true timeless existence is experienced. Still a non-linear cause and effect model should apply, one would think, since doing one thing will lead to another thing, even in a timeless state. Even though 'all is happening at once', the focus of awareness zooms in on a particular sector of 'the all' and experiences/observes that in a more intense way than the rest of 'the all' which is not focused upon.
Click to expand...
And then, in that sense, even at higher levels of awareness, there would be a form of questioning reality, only it might look different than what we understand the dynamic to be.

And what changes is the focus or the response to the answers provided by reality.

In terms of the inner compass, I think JBP discussed something similar at some point, when he spoke about the values that people held at the highest levels, and that it would work as their god, so to speak. And so, I believe that one's inner compass should point, or does point, to these highest values that one conceives and one chooses to align oneself with. It's not always positive, but people's priorities (or god) are visible in their behavior.

This inner compass might be pointing at different things at different moments in one's life, one's priorities change as one grows and learns. And as such, it might not be a firm and solid thing, not always it may move and shift depending on the situation, and so perhaps this inner compass is something one ought to choose daily to aim at.

Things like truth, honesty, trustworthiness, order and so on.. might be ideals that one can conceive one time and attempt to aim at them, but it's really a daily choice to continue to keep one's compass aligned at them.. and allowing for enough flexibility when it may become evident that what one thought was honesty or truth or anything else, might've been misplaced or wrong.
 
Objectivity is essential for the free and harmonious human being. The more unpurified and disharmonious you are, the less objective you will be. Objectivity means truth. Subjectivity means colored truth, half-truth at best, complete untruth in many cases. Contrary to a conscious lie, subjectivity results in unconscious or unintended untruth. All this emanates from the emotional level of one’s being. As you do the purification work, you will first find the untruth that exists in the depths of your soul. After the untruth is ousted, you will be able to plant truth within yourself. Only a path of stringent self-search will make such discoveries and the ensuing change possible. But this additional angle from which to view the process as a whole, and yourself in particular, will help you to advance a step further.

Let us first take the common phenomenon that what you see as a grave fault in others you often do not see in yourself. It makes no difference whether the fault is exactly the same or whether it has a slightly different and modified form. Your objection to the faults you observe in others may even be correct. Yet, you are in half-truth when you judge others and fail to see where you also deviate from what is right and good in a similar way. Furthermore, the fault of the other may coexist with good qualities you yourself do not possess. Thus your judgment is colored, for you concentrate your objection on one sore point, while you leave out of sight many other facets that would complete the picture. So, my dear friends, whenever you resent their faults, please ask yourself: “Don’t I, perhaps in a different way, have a similar fault? And doesn’t the person whom I judge so harshly have some good qualities that I lack?” Then think of the good qualities the other possesses and you lack. Remember also to ask yourself whether you do not have faults that the person you judge and resent does not have. This will help you to assess your anger at other people’s faults more objectively. And, if by chance the outcome of the evaluation turns out to be that your faults are indeed so much less than the other’s, and your qualities so much superior, that is an even greater reason to cultivate your tolerance and understanding. If you do so, you are indeed in a higher state of development, which means, above all, the obligation to be understanding and forgiving. If you lack that ability, all your superior qualities, your lesser faults mean nothing! But if you make serious endeavors in that direction, your objectivity will grow. You will thus definitely have more peace, and that which now bothers you so very much will cease to upset you.

Whenever you are upset about another person’s faults, there must be something in you that is not right either. Again, if you truly wish to find out what is in you, an insight will come. You should not be concerned with the fact that the other person may be so obviously in the wrong, so much more wrong than you are. Try to find the little grain of imperfection in yourself instead of concentrating on the mountain in the other. For it is your own unhealthy grain of untruth that robs you of peace and never the mountain of wrong in the other person!

There is another form of extreme subjectivity that comes from the same root although it manifests in a very different way. Many human beings are very severe with those who make them feel unloved and criticized, or at least insecure. Their severity is a defense. If you rest secure in your value, you will not feel insecure and you will therefore develop a natural tolerance. But most of you are still so insecure that you resort to such defective defensive measures. This behavior falls into the same category as blindly idealizing the person in whose love you feel secure. In such cases you do not see the very trends you most strenuously object to in someone else. That is dangerous too, especially because this tendency lends itself extremely well to deceiving yourself into believing that your idealization is love and tolerance. You try to convince yourself that you are tolerant and good when you close your eyes to the faults of those you love because they love you. That is not true loving. True love can see reality. If you are ready to love in the most vital and mature way, you will not try to close your eyes to the faults of the loved one, but will do the opposite.

If you do close your eyes persistently, it is for two reasons. One is pride: the one you have chosen as your loved one and the one who has chosen you as the loved one must not have faults which you do not consider acceptable. Oh, you may admit to some faults in the other, as you admit to some faults in yourself, knowing that no human being exists without weaknesses. But you continue to ignore many trends, half-consciously thinking that this attitude proves your love and tolerance, but it is done really out of pride. The second reason is that deep down in your heart you are so insecure about your own ability to love that you need an idealized version of the loved person. Your love is not true love if you are compelled to see this person in an idealized form. No, it is a weakness and often a bondage.

Real love is freedom. It can stand the test of truth as it prevails in the other person at this moment of his or her development. When you reach that stage, you will be able to see the one who is dear to your heart as he or she really is and not the way you want to. As long as you close your eyes to the real picture of the other, you are not capable of love. Indeed, you are so aware of your incapacity, though on a rather superficial subconscious level, that you keep busily closing your eyes, afraid that if you saw the truth, you could not go on loving. Pride, and your present inability to truly love, make you go from one extreme to the other. Either you refuse to see the person who is close and dear to you as he or she truly is, or else you judge too harshly, even though the criticism in itself may be justified. The isolated fact that you object to may be valid, but not your evaluation of the whole person who has so many facets that you have no way of knowing.

When you persist in being blind to the faults of your loved ones, a crisis, a shakeup, and a painful awakening that will hurt deeply is often unavoidable. Actually, it is not the other person who will then have disappointed and hurt you, but your own past deliberate blindness. In such a crisis, the blindness is what deep down you resent most of all. Avoid such a crisis, my dear ones. If you learn to see and love other people as they really are, you can do so.

Think of the people you love most in the world, and then make a list of their good qualities and of their faults, just as you are currently doing for yourself. Then ask some mutual friends: “Please tell me, what do you think? Am I right? I would appreciate your opinion about this person’s qualities and faults, whether or not you see them as I do, so that I can check out whether I am objective or not. I ask this for the purpose of my development.” If they are on the path, all the better. Then compare how you and how others, who are perhaps more detached and objective, see the same person.

Observe your reactions on hearing of faults you either could not, or would not, conceive of in those whom you idealize. When you become angry and hurt inside, this should be a sign that you are not objective, that you fear the truth, most probably because of the two reasons already stated: pride, and your inability to love the other as he or she really is. Otherwise you would remain calm, even if your beloved is accused of a fault he or she does not possess. Considering the faults of their beloveds might be very healthy for some of my friends. You will learn to evaluate the people you love, and your love will mature and grow in stature. Thus you will grow out of the immature state in which you love like a frightened child who cannot see the truth.

The child knows only extremes: good or bad, perfection or imperfection, omnipotence that promises security, or utter weakness it must avoid. The child can accept only the first of these alternatives. When it discovers that an adored parent has faults and is not omnipotent, it either turns away from the parent and begins to hate and resent, feels let down and disappointed, or else hides the discovery in the unconscious, feeling guilty about having found something unworthy in the parent. These reactions continue to live in the soul of the adult and color his or her reactions and behavior patterns throughout life or until they have been reviewed and reevaluated in the light of mature judgment and reality. When you look at your present relationships from this point of view, the process will be painful at first, but not half as bad as your unconscious resistance would have you believe. Do not heed it. Go on in your search for truth that you will evolve a much happier, freer and securer person.

I beg you not to say offhand that you do see the faults of your loved ones. Yes, you may see some of their faults, but perhaps only those you can tolerate; the others you may not allow yourself to see. Thus you have no conception of his or her entire personality. You see a picture that is just as distorted as when you are too severe and intolerant. The picture is out of focus in both instances; both are mirrors that do not reflect reality. Each mirror distorts in a different way. You are so scared to approach the truth because the emotion of the child, for whom seeing an unpleasant truth in the beloved person is unbearable, still lives within you, and this emotion forces you to withdraw your love. But that is not the truth at all. If you approach this particular search with the knowledge that your love, instead of weakening, must grow and mature, you can overcome your resistance to finding out the reality.

Objectivity needs courage too. Many of you are still too weak and too cowardly to see the truth in others, as well as in yourselves. Mature love means to love others in spite of their faults, knowing them, seeing them, not closing one’s eyes to them and then to build on the good that is already there. Immature love means viewing the other person in terms of an absolute either/or, though you may have moderated this attitude somewhat as your intellect has matured. You may now admit to certain faults which do not violate your personal standards and concepts.

To judge people harshly, as though all human beings were on the same level of development, is equally immature. The other person may not even be less developed than you; he or she may simply be developed in another respect. Therefore you cannot compare or judge. Simply see! If you cannot see without anger, you need to realize that this reaction stems from the same origin as the other extreme, namely, that you cannot accept imperfection and are thus, emotionally, still a child. Discard your illusions which you build up for your ego, for your vanity, for your pride because of your still existing inability to love. Upon this truth you can then erect true love.
 
Curious Beagle said:
Objectivity is essential for the free and harmonious human being. The more unpurified and disharmonious you are, the less objective you will be. Objectivity means truth. Subjectivity means colored truth, half-truth at best, complete untruth in many cases. Contrary to a conscious lie, subjectivity results in unconscious or unintended untruth. All this emanates from the emotional level of one’s being. As you do the purification work, you will first find the untruth that exists in the depths of your soul. After the untruth is ousted, you will be able to plant truth within yourself. Only a path of stringent self-search will make such discoveries and the ensuing change possible. But this additional angle from which to view the process as a whole, and yourself in particular, will help you to advance a step further.

Let us first take the common phenomenon that what you see as a grave fault in others you often do not see in yourself. It makes no difference whether the fault is exactly the same or whether it has a slightly different and modified form. Your objection to the faults you observe in others may even be correct. Yet, you are in half-truth when you judge others and fail to see where you also deviate from what is right and good in a similar way. Furthermore, the fault of the other may coexist with good qualities you yourself do not possess. Thus your judgment is colored, for you concentrate your objection on one sore point, while you leave out of sight many other facets that would complete the picture. So, my dear friends, whenever you resent their faults, please ask yourself: “Don’t I, perhaps in a different way, have a similar fault? And doesn’t the person whom I judge so harshly have some good qualities that I lack?” Then think of the good qualities the other possesses and you lack. Remember also to ask yourself whether you do not have faults that the person you judge and resent does not have. This will help you to assess your anger at other people’s faults more objectively. And, if by chance the outcome of the evaluation turns out to be that your faults are indeed so much less than the other’s, and your qualities so much superior, that is an even greater reason to cultivate your tolerance and understanding. If you do so, you are indeed in a higher state of development, which means, above all, the obligation to be understanding and forgiving. If you lack that ability, all your superior qualities, your lesser faults mean nothing! But if you make serious endeavors in that direction, your objectivity will grow. You will thus definitely have more peace, and that which now bothers you so very much will cease to upset you.

Whenever you are upset about another person’s faults, there must be something in you that is not right either. Again, if you truly wish to find out what is in you, an insight will come. You should not be concerned with the fact that the other person may be so obviously in the wrong, so much more wrong than you are. Try to find the little grain of imperfection in yourself instead of concentrating on the mountain in the other. For it is your own unhealthy grain of untruth that robs you of peace and never the mountain of wrong in the other person!

There is another form of extreme subjectivity that comes from the same root although it manifests in a very different way. Many human beings are very severe with those who make them feel unloved and criticized, or at least insecure. Their severity is a defense. If you rest secure in your value, you will not feel insecure and you will therefore develop a natural tolerance. But most of you are still so insecure that you resort to such defective defensive measures. This behavior falls into the same category as blindly idealizing the person in whose love you feel secure. In such cases you do not see the very trends you most strenuously object to in someone else. That is dangerous too, especially because this tendency lends itself extremely well to deceiving yourself into believing that your idealization is love and tolerance. You try to convince yourself that you are tolerant and good when you close your eyes to the faults of those you love because they love you. That is not true loving. True love can see reality. If you are ready to love in the most vital and mature way, you will not try to close your eyes to the faults of the loved one, but will do the opposite.

If you do close your eyes persistently, it is for two reasons. One is pride: the one you have chosen as your loved one and the one who has chosen you as the loved one must not have faults which you do not consider acceptable. Oh, you may admit to some faults in the other, as you admit to some faults in yourself, knowing that no human being exists without weaknesses. But you continue to ignore many trends, half-consciously thinking that this attitude proves your love and tolerance, but it is done really out of pride. The second reason is that deep down in your heart you are so insecure about your own ability to love that you need an idealized version of the loved person. Your love is not true love if you are compelled to see this person in an idealized form. No, it is a weakness and often a bondage.

Real love is freedom. It can stand the test of truth as it prevails in the other person at this moment of his or her development. When you reach that stage, you will be able to see the one who is dear to your heart as he or she really is and not the way you want to. As long as you close your eyes to the real picture of the other, you are not capable of love. Indeed, you are so aware of your incapacity, though on a rather superficial subconscious level, that you keep busily closing your eyes, afraid that if you saw the truth, you could not go on loving. Pride, and your present inability to truly love, make you go from one extreme to the other. Either you refuse to see the person who is close and dear to you as he or she truly is, or else you judge too harshly, even though the criticism in itself may be justified. The isolated fact that you object to may be valid, but not your evaluation of the whole person who has so many facets that you have no way of knowing.

When you persist in being blind to the faults of your loved ones, a crisis, a shakeup, and a painful awakening that will hurt deeply is often unavoidable. Actually, it is not the other person who will then have disappointed and hurt you, but your own past deliberate blindness. In such a crisis, the blindness is what deep down you resent most of all. Avoid such a crisis, my dear ones. If you learn to see and love other people as they really are, you can do so.

Think of the people you love most in the world, and then make a list of their good qualities and of their faults, just as you are currently doing for yourself. Then ask some mutual friends: “Please tell me, what do you think? Am I right? I would appreciate your opinion about this person’s qualities and faults, whether or not you see them as I do, so that I can check out whether I am objective or not. I ask this for the purpose of my development.” If they are on the path, all the better. Then compare how you and how others, who are perhaps more detached and objective, see the same person.

Observe your reactions on hearing of faults you either could not, or would not, conceive of in those whom you idealize. When you become angry and hurt inside, this should be a sign that you are not objective, that you fear the truth, most probably because of the two reasons already stated: pride, and your inability to love the other as he or she really is. Otherwise you would remain calm, even if your beloved is accused of a fault he or she does not possess. Considering the faults of their beloveds might be very healthy for some of my friends. You will learn to evaluate the people you love, and your love will mature and grow in stature. Thus you will grow out of the immature state in which you love like a frightened child who cannot see the truth.

The child knows only extremes: good or bad, perfection or imperfection, omnipotence that promises security, or utter weakness it must avoid. The child can accept only the first of these alternatives. When it discovers that an adored parent has faults and is not omnipotent, it either turns away from the parent and begins to hate and resent, feels let down and disappointed, or else hides the discovery in the unconscious, feeling guilty about having found something unworthy in the parent. These reactions continue to live in the soul of the adult and color his or her reactions and behavior patterns throughout life or until they have been reviewed and reevaluated in the light of mature judgment and reality. When you look at your present relationships from this point of view, the process will be painful at first, but not half as bad as your unconscious resistance would have you believe. Do not heed it. Go on in your search for truth that you will evolve a much happier, freer and securer person.

I beg you not to say offhand that you do see the faults of your loved ones. Yes, you may see some of their faults, but perhaps only those you can tolerate; the others you may not allow yourself to see. Thus you have no conception of his or her entire personality. You see a picture that is just as distorted as when you are too severe and intolerant. The picture is out of focus in both instances; both are mirrors that do not reflect reality. Each mirror distorts in a different way. You are so scared to approach the truth because the emotion of the child, for whom seeing an unpleasant truth in the beloved person is unbearable, still lives within you, and this emotion forces you to withdraw your love. But that is not the truth at all. If you approach this particular search with the knowledge that your love, instead of weakening, must grow and mature, you can overcome your resistance to finding out the reality.

Objectivity needs courage too. Many of you are still too weak and too cowardly to see the truth in others, as well as in yourselves. Mature love means to love others in spite of their faults, knowing them, seeing them, not closing one’s eyes to them and then to build on the good that is already there. Immature love means viewing the other person in terms of an absolute either/or, though you may have moderated this attitude somewhat as your intellect has matured. You may now admit to certain faults which do not violate your personal standards and concepts.

To judge people harshly, as though all human beings were on the same level of development, is equally immature. The other person may not even be less developed than you; he or she may simply be developed in another respect. Therefore you cannot compare or judge. Simply see! If you cannot see without anger, you need to realize that this reaction stems from the same origin as the other extreme, namely, that you cannot accept imperfection and are thus, emotionally, still a child. Discard your illusions which you build up for your ego, for your vanity, for your pride because of your still existing inability to love. Upon this truth you can then erect true love.
Click to expand...
My goodness, where to begin? Where is all this stuff about judging others and faults and gradations of right/wrong coming from? Certainly it is an area where the subjectivity/objectivity issue can be explored. OK, I do get that.

I DO get your good and higher intentions here to communicate wisdom and learning, so, thank you for that! And I get your desire to teach for the benefit of others. And so much of what you say IS true and well said!

However... (yes there is always a "however" isn't there? LOL)

One thing I have learned over the course of this life is to try to speak for myself rather than pre-supposing I really know enough to speak for or at people in general terms of: This IS how it is, y'all.

Another thing I have learned is that I am (and potentially everyone?) in some sense, speaking to and for myself. (from the point of view that, in essence, there is really "nobody out there") So what you are saying might be a reflection of your own journey and life experience and discoveries which may be a part of the life lessons we all need to traverse, but, perhaps if it was said in a bit less of a didactic manner, it might be more effective? Certainly I tend to think that what I see and know is universal, but then, this may just be a part of the built in machinery of being a human. So, basically, universalizing personal experience and observation is a tricky business.

To conclude, I don't see this thread as so much about judgement of others as an attempt at discernment and explication of our own inner compass: What is it? How does it guide us. What is it based on? What interference is there with that process, etc. Do we listen to that inner compass? IF not, why not? Can we, in fact, even hear it?

Funny: so is my inner compass saying: "Nah, don't say anything, just let this go, whatever..."? Or is it saying "this might somehow be a contribution to Curious Beagle even though it could be seen as some faulty, negative, unloving judgement on my part"?

And in the final analysis, to say nothing is to say:

I have nothing to offer; Curious Beagle is not worth my effort; Even though Curious Beagle might not like what I am attempting to gently imply, it is worth the risk; and, If I am all wrong about this, I might learn something in the process even if it makes me look bad.

Inner Compass says: -flick- it, go for it...you'll be dead soon enough anyway!
 
Do I have enough awareness to intelligently use my internal compass?
I was thinking today about the motives that made me decide how to behave, what attitude to take during the pandemic, or now during this terrible war in Ukraine.
And this is where a concept came to mind. We need the instinct of self-preservation to survive, or to minimize our losses when threatened in difficult situations.
There will probably be a very big difference in how the instinct of self-preservation works for someone focused only on the physical body for physical survival and well-being than for someone who has an awareness of the soul and the associated responsibility to learn.
For example, some people, even though they know what the truth is, will deny it because it interferes with their career. You can't make money on the truth.
And some people change their attitude when they learn the truth although they will lose materially.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom