just wondering

[number six]

Is there an inverse relationship between "the awakening" and individual responsibility for "the agenda", (where "the agenda" is defined as a continuing perception of being a victim)?

It appears to me that humanity desires to be the creator of a reality of eternal peace but in so doing never realizes it creates separation itself by identifying with its "humanity".

Isn't identification the obstacle to peace, which never sees peace, because it would no longer be?

 

[SeekinTruth]

Welcome to the forum number six.

As this is your first post on the forum, we would appreciate it if you would post a brief intro about yourself in the Newbies section, telling us how you found this forum, how long you've been reading it and/or the SOTT page, whether or not you've read any of Laura's books yet, etc.

 

[Buddy]

Hi number six. Without some context, or knowing the thought system from which your questions arise, it would be hard to offer a meaningful answer, I think, so I second SeekinTruth's recommendation. Welcome to the forum. :)

 

[number six]

Hi number six. Without some context, or knowing the thought system from which your questions arise, it would be hard to offer a meaningful answer, I think, so I second SeekinTruth's recommendation. Welcome to the forum. :)

Greetings, and thanking you for your replies and welcoming! I have taken the advice in presenting a short introduction of myself and begun reading some of the material. My question now for any one, if i can be so bold is......

How relevant is it to know the "thought system" from which my question arises? For me a question created by a system is always going to generate an answer also created by a system.

Truth is in the moment, how could it ever be revealed through a system? ;)

 

[obyvatel]

Is there an inverse relationship between "the awakening" and individual responsibility for "the agenda", (where "the agenda" is defined as a continuing perception of being a victim)?

So is the question "is the degree to which a person is awake inversely related to his/her perception of being a victim?" If so then I would say that the degree to which a person is awake enables him/her to see the reality of the situation regarding the perceived victimhood. Then he/she can take real steps to address the situation if possible and thus change the situation. Then the actions stemming from the degree of awakening to the reality of the situation can end the perception of victimhood. An example would be waking up to the reality of abusive personal relationship and taking steps to address it.

In some cases, waking up may mean understanding the situation but not having the power to change it entirely. An example would be someone understanding prevailing social/political/economic forces at a level which is not fixable or controllable by individual action. Then one understands one is a victim at a macro level. Depending on the degree of awakening, he/she may take incremental steps to improve things a little at a time keeping in mind what is in his/her control and what is not.

[quote author=number six]
It appears to me that humanity desires to be the creator of a reality of eternal peace but in so doing never realizes it creates separation itself by identifying with its "humanity".
[/quote]

"Eternal" is rather loosely used here, and so is "peace". If peace is understood as absence of conflict, then the question is at what level is any hypothetical member of humanity seeking such an absence of conflict? It can be speculated that mindless slaughter of fellow members of humanity can and should be avoided. Even in the animal kingdom, intra-species slaughter of the kind humans inflict on each other is rather unheard of. But if by peace is understood an absence of conflict of interest or disagreement in views among people, it is not likely to happen.

As far as "eternal" goes, no-thing in nature/universe that has been studied so far as far as I know has been shown to be static and unchanging.

[quote author=number six]
Isn't identification the obstacle to peace, which never sees peace, because it would no longer be?
[/quote]

Maybe you can clarify what you understand as "peace" and "identification" in the context which you have left unstated?

Is your question something like "how can one have peace if one is identified as a victim"?

 

[trendsetter37]

How relevant is it to know the "thought system" from which my question arises? For me a question created by a system is always going to generate an answer also created by a system.

Truth is in the moment, how could it ever be revealed through a system? ;)

Imagine for a moment that we have someone that is learning English. Then, they come to you and ask about a phrase they've overheard in a conversation which is "I must travel soon. Hopefully there are suites/sweets where I am going".

How do you explain the true meaning of that phrase without providing more context? In my opinion more information and context leads to truth not the reverse. I could be wrong here but this is probably the case regardless of whether or not we can identify the truth while being in the moment, in hindsight, or otherwise.

Other than that I really liked obyvatel's response.

In some cases, waking up may mean understanding the situation but not having the power to change it entirely. An example would be someone understanding prevailing social/political/economic forces at a level which is not fixable or controllable by individual action. Then one understands one is a victim at a macro level. Depending on the degree of awakening, he/she may take incremental steps to improve things a little at a time keeping in mind what is in his/her control and what is not.

 

[Buddy]

How do you explain the true meaning of that phrase without providing more context? In my opinion more information and context leads to truth not the reverse.

That's the way I see it. Words and meaning is one thing (and I think meaning is wired into individual nervous systems), but intelligence is the context and context is intelligence. If I'm wrong, at least there's someone in that boat with me. :)

 

[mkrnhr]

We were taught as kids that asking the right question was half the answer, and the answer leads to more questions fortunately. That's why the process is fun and alive. Asking the wrong question on the other side may to no answers at all, if not to fantasy. I personally don't like the expression "awakening" in the framework of the Work. Being asleep is sound, but "awakening" is not reverse of being asleep, it's a continuous process. One awakens by steps, each time emerging into a dream within a dream so to speak. When someone writes for instance "I awakened in 1979", a more fertile attitude work-wise would be "I started to fight sleepiness in 1979".

As for being a victim of whatever situation, one is a victim whether s/he knows it or not. However, the knowledge (however incomplete it is) about the situation offers more possibilities to fight, to avoid, or to simply use it for the growth and conscious evolution of consciousness. From our perspective, it would so much better if the world wasn't so cruel and dangerous. But it is all we have, and all we have to do is to deal with it as it is the best we can. The other alternative pushed to its extreme is even more terrifying: living on a secluded paradise-island with a beautiful goddess (supposedly lol) preparing breakfast and providing massage like in the Odyssey. There is balance to attain, between "hardship" and "comfort" and given the actual situation where all the odds are against us, that is achieved by a continuous fighting-back in the sake of our destinies and our destiny in the grander scheme of things. OSIT

 

[number six]

Thanking all who have commented to this thread. It is important for you to know that i did try to post a comment yesterday (not insulting, no "dirty" words, following up on your replies) that apparently did not make it past the moderators and or censors lol.

You need to ask yourself, "do you really want to wast your time on a site that finds the need to filter for you what 'they' have deemed you should read or not".

The administrators who run this site obviously have something to loose and are more interested in hanging on to that then your individual freedom.

I do not expect that this comment will ever see the light of day either, but the intention is there and that has infinitively more power then words. The process is fun and alive, and IT IS FOR ALL! It is not something retained and dead.

Those whom moderate truth for reasons of their own just do not yet know that............ 'They' soon will.

 

[Meg]

Thanking all who have commented to this thread. It is important for you to know that i did try to post a comment yesterday (not insulting, no "dirty" words, following up on your replies) that apparently did not make it past the moderators and or censors lol.

You need to ask yourself, "do you really want to wast your time on a site that finds the need to filter for you what 'they' have deemed you should read or not".

The administrators who run this site obviously have something to loose and are more interested in hanging on to that then your individual freedom.

I do not expect that this comment will ever see the light of day either, but the intention is there and that has infinitively more power then words. The process is fun and alive, and IT IS FOR ALL! It is not something retained and dead.

Those whom moderate truth for reasons of their own just do not yet know that............ 'They' soon will.

Hi Number six,
We don't see any posts you made yesterday that need approval. Are you sure you hit the post button?

 

[paralleloscope]

You need to ask yourself, "do you really want to wast your time on a site that finds the need to filter for you what 'they' have deemed you should read or not".

The administrators who run this site obviously have something to loose and are more interested in hanging on to that then your individual freedom.

Newbies' 10 first posts are set to be approved, or not. People (and bots) sometimes come here without reading the forum rules they supposedly agree with by creating an account, and come with some agenda that runs counter to the forums goals. It's a good thing, because it saves serious users a lot unnecessary noise.

 

[Kay Kim]

I have been waste 60 some years reading and searching but conclusion was that mostly all was useless junk.
So, in this forum, I am thankful for all the useless postings are filtering out.

I just want to read truthful, sincere information or commend that help me or helping humankind to rise spiritual progress.

 

[dredger]

Hi Number 6,
It apparently sometimes happens, the mysteries of the IT - I had the same problem, a post which disappeared even I was not anymore a "newbee" and that the post was sometimes a simple message.
And yes, my reaction was kinda your reaction, felt rejected and a bit upset.

Cheers

 

[number six]

Is there an inverse relationship between "the awakening" and individual responsibility for "the agenda", (where "the agenda" is defined as a continuing perception of being a victim)?

Maybe you can clarify what you understand as "peace" and "identification" in the context which you have left unstated?

Is your question something like "how can one have peace if one is identified as a victim"?

No, it would be more in the lines of how can one have peace if one still identifies with war. Peace is the absence of war. War is the delusion as i see it. Sure on some primitive level, which one cannot entirely dismiss, war "seems" real, but on a "spiritual" level it must be delusion, for anyone whom loves life would not harm another on the pretense of this is allowable or justified. From whence comes that authority? I am speaking now of the context of war as it is defined and experienced in this world and not about the taking of life for ones nourishment, that is a separate discussion.

War is "right" against "wrong", but the resolution of that can only begin in ones self. As long as 'you' are seeing the world as there is what is "right" and there is what is "wrong" then 'you' are still validating duality. War (delusion) must come to its end within the individual. How can that come to fruition when 'you' still label or identify and see 'your' self as separate. One creates the separation ones self then the mind searches outside ones self for the resolution of the problem 'it' has created.

There is no right or wrong from a view point of the what is but from a fragmented pov words will always be misunderstood and language will always be an obstacle. That is their nature and why i sense it is imperative to first resolve the fragmenting one does ones self with in ones self as much as is conceivable and take complete responsibility for the rest. Maybe then and only then will the inconvenience of words lose its power and claim to right and wrong. "In the beginning was the word" is not to be understood frivolously imo.

How then can there be peace while the one mind is simultaneously validating war and its very own separation? Humans create the separation them self by identifying individually with 'their' humanness and feelings of nobility for defending the very separation 'it' has created, and the circle goes round and round over countless millennium. ;)

 

[Buddy]

Is there an inverse relationship between "the awakening" and individual responsibility for "the agenda", (where "the agenda" is defined as a continuing perception of being a victim)?

Maybe you can clarify what you understand as "peace" and "identification" in the context which you have left unstated?

Is your question something like "how can one have peace if one is identified as a victim"?

No, it would be more in the lines of how can one have peace if one still identifies with war. Peace is the absence of war. War is the delusion as i see it. Sure on some primitive level, which one cannot entirely dismiss, war "seems" real, but on a "spiritual" level it must be delusion, for anyone whom loves life would not harm another on the pretense of this is allowable or justified. From whence comes that authority? I am speaking now of the context of war as it is defined and experienced in this world and not about the taking of life for ones nourishment, that is a separate discussion.

War is "right" against "wrong", but the resolution of that can only begin in ones self. As long as 'you' are seeing the world as there is what is "right" and there is what is "wrong" then 'you' are still validating duality. War (delusion) must come to its end within the individual. How can that come to fruition when 'you' still label or identify and see 'your' self as separate. One creates the separation ones self then the mind searches outside ones self for the resolution of the problem 'it' has created.

There is no right or wrong from a view point of the what is but from a fragmented pov words will always be misunderstood and language will always be an obstacle. That is their nature and why i sense it is imperative to first resolve the fragmenting one does ones self with in ones self as much as is conceivable and take complete responsibility for the rest. Maybe then and only then will the inconvenience of words lose its power and claim to right and wrong. "In the beginning was the word" is not to be understood frivolously imo.

How then can there be peace while the one mind is simultaneously validating war and its very own separation? Humans create the separation them self by identifying individually with 'their' humanness and feelings of nobility for defending the very separation 'it' has created, and the circle goes round and round over countless millennium. ;)

I see the sense in what you're saying, number six, and I think you'll find basic agreement with the main ideas. Indeed, I'm thinking that war and peace as it is happening in the world is a reflection of the war and peace going on in many individuals. I think that as long as one subscribes to his culture's promotion of the "ideal man/woman" and his society's promotion of the "ideal world", one must always find himself in conflict with others, trying to impose "rightness" externally in a mistaken bid to balance the "wrongness" one is experiencing within himself. We do know the individual tends to need work on himself first.

Is this pretty much aligned with your understanding as you experience things internally?