The $%$$&%$@ next door

[Mountain Crown]

[quote author=E]Sorry Mountain Crown[/quote]

Though unnecessary, your apology is accepted. There weren't any hard feelings; I feel privileged that you responded.

 

[anart]

Maybe. I’ll be honest though, I’m having a little bit of difficulty here. When do we make the distinction between the necessary course of action or saviour/hero program kicking in?

I think this is a good question.

Mountain Crown, no offense is intended at all, but there seems to be quite a lot of rationalization in your post.

There is no doubt that the nature of what I was hearing was violent. The viciousness of his voice could only be described as from an animal. The sounds of furniture being tossed around and the slapping of flesh was unmistakable.

This sounds like an assessment in 'real time' - this is what happened.

Maybe using the term 'beat' was misleading, I don't know. Violence is violence.

How could the term 'beat' be misleading when you heard the slapping of flesh? Are you trying to convince us or yourself?

There is a fine line separating intervening and interfering. To repeat, the situation hadn't called for it yet, but could have. I was not in a confused or impotent state at that time of assessment.

So, at what point does the situation call for it, when you hear a gunshot?

 

[Mountain Crown]

[quote author=anart]This sounds like an assessment in 'real time' - this is what happened.[/quote]

After a sincere attempt to recall it, there's no doubt that this is what I experienced. I tried to remember everything as it happened then. While on the forum I began to feel confused. I needed to be clear about myself from start to finish.

How could the term 'beat' be misleading when you heard the slapping of flesh? Are you trying to convince us or yourself?

By saying that I was trying to leave open that there may be a distinction in the sense of degrees of severity.

So, at what point does the situation call for it, when you hear a gunshot?

I understand you here, anart. The point is that there is a point when the situation doesn't call for it. It was disturbing, no mistake about it, and it was over by the time of Joe's first post. I'm not comfortable about this, but from then on it was about me.

Mountain Crown, no offense is intended at all

I trust you.

 

[Pierre]

Belibaste, your quote would rightfully be attributed to E. The rest of your post seems to address her as well.

Yeah, Belibaste was addressing me here. Sorry Mountain Crown, I shouldn’t have hijacked your thread, especially in the frame of mind that I was in. Note to self: dispose of boxing gloves.

As you righfully noticed my post was adressed to E.

Sorry for the mistake.

 

[truth seeker]

I've witnessed this type of situation twice in my life. The first time, I actually saw what happened. The second time, I was only able to hear it. I'm now living at a place where there are several screaming neighbors. There was just an altercation last week that concerned yelling and the police were called (not by me). Just last night, it started again.

The advice given in terms of reporting it anonymously was the best in my opinion. Keep in mind that unfortunately the dynamics between the people involved many times are not resolved by police being called. In the first and third situations mentioned above, both groups returned to their "normal" behavior as if nothing had happened. In the end, it depends upon the individuals. Many times, abused people do return to their abusers. The reasons for this are many. In the first case mentioned, the abused (Many of us witnessed her being beaten up.) actually defended the abuser.

I used to feel strongly about calling the police, but when I saw this pattern emerging, I wondered if that was truly the best way to help particularly if no one is actually requesting it.

When the yelling started last night, I wondered whether doing the breathing/meditation exercises might help with this as I had read in the meditation thread that people's pets seemed to be soothed by the person performing the exercise and so I dedicated that meditation to peace. Perhaps it was coincidental, but the argument subsided way sooner than it usually does. If/when it happens again, you may want to try this. This may be one way to "do something" in a way that's less threatening to you.

The last thing I'll say is that the people arguing/fighting/abusing have free will. What if they need to go through this in order to learn their lessons? Isn't it STS of us to get involved if they clearly demonstrate that they "want" to live their life this way?

 

[Mountain Crown]

[quote author=truth seeker ]The last thing I'll say is that the people arguing/fighting/abusing have free will. What if they need to go through this in order to learn their lessons? Isn't it STS of us to get involved if they clearly demonstrate that they "want" to live their life this way?[/quote]

This was curiously avoided by all of us who posted in this thread. The crux of the matter seems to lie in the maturity of one's level of discernment of the event and of what forms asking can take. It also seems to me that it's not so much trying to act in an STO manner - because we aren't STO - but how best to act from conscience in the present state we are in.

 

[anart]

[quote author=truth seeker ]The last thing I'll say is that the people arguing/fighting/abusing have free will. What if they need to go through this in order to learn their lessons? Isn't it STS of us to get involved if they clearly demonstrate that they "want" to live their life this way?

This was curiously avoided by all of us who posted in this thread.[/quote]

I don't think it was - when it was mentioned that a person has a right to live in relative peace, and that domestic abuse is also the disturbing of the community, I think it was addressed - merely due to the fact that people do have the right to live how they choose to, to some extent. In fact, there is something to the idea of standing up for your own rights in a situation, to not have to live next door to that kind of psychic, auditory and emotional disturbance, at the very least, if one is not moved by the idea that a weaker person or child is being harmed.

The crux of the matter seems to lie in the maturity of one's level of discernment of the event and of what forms asking can take. It also seems to me that it's not so much trying to act in an STO manner - because we aren't STO - but how best to act from conscience in the present state we are in.

There are a lot of devils in the details - ultimately, we must act from our own level of being, as you say.

 

[Adaryn]

The crux of the matter seems to lie in the maturity of one's level of discernment of the event and of what forms asking can take. It also seems to me that it's not so much trying to act in an STO manner - because we aren't STO - but how best to act from conscience in the present state we are in.

There are a lot of devils in the details - ultimately, we must act from our own level of being, as you say.

That seems to be the crux of the matter, yes.

This interesting article somewhat addresses the issue:

For an example of [the dangerous power of the mind, and being under its influence] lets look at the June 2008 issue of Liberty magazine, whose writers and readers are known for their esteeming of reason above almost everything else. In that issue they published the results of a poll of readers. Here are some of the questions they asked:

"Suppose that a parent of a newborn baby places it in front of a picture window and sells tickets to anyone wishing to observe the child starve to death. He makes it clear that the child is free to leave at any time, but that anyone crossing the lawn will be viewed as trespassing. Would you cross the lawn to help the child? Would helping the child violate the parent's right?"

Fortunately, despite all of their arguments for property rights and the rights of all people (including babies) to be left alone to make their own decisions, 90.9% said they would cross the lawn. Of course the scary part is the 9% who would not help. In fact, in response to the second question, 24.1% said crossing would violate the parents rights.

This is fascinating, and I think it serves as a good example of being under the influence of the power of the mind. Virtually everyone's first reaction is to help the baby, yet some people are so under the control of the thoughts in their own minds (their philosophy) that they would refuse, or at least feel bad for "violating the parents rights" as they followed their hearts.

In another question, more than more than 80% of respondents viewed forcing ones way into a home to survive when caught in a deadly blizzard as "an act of aggression," and a fourth of those said you shouldn't do it - and so presumably risk death instead. In other words, they place a higher value on an idea - in this case a stranger's right to not be inconvenienced - above survival. You may not agree, but I'm suggesting that this is mental illness, and that a healthy use of the mind serves the purpose of life, not of ideas.

By the way, I didn't get into the details of the reasoning for people not helping the baby or not even helping themselves. Why? Because the whole point here is that they are not using their minds but being used by them. I could find a reasonable argument for the contrary views - complete with perfect logic. That is the power of the mind. It can find the arguments it desires.

 

[Joe]

Seems to me that what is needed in such a situation is an awareness of human nature and the pathological laws of our societies.

For Mountain crown to go over there and tell the guy that the police had been called and to order the woman to get her baby and come over to his house would be missing a lot of details.

First of all, if the guy opened the door and you walked into the house and started telling them what to do they could have you arrested for trespassing. That is as much the law laws against abuse.

Secondly, there is no way to know the disposition of either of the adults concerned. Let me illustrate by a real life example.

My father was walking down the street one day and over the other side of the street a gypsy man was beating a woman, probably his wife. Very soon thereafter a passer by approached the man, pulled him away from the woman and held him against a wall. Within a few seconds the wife, who previously was being assaulted, jumped on top of her would be savior and started beating him for "attacking her husband".

So in Mountain Crown's situation I think the most that can be done immediately is to call the police about a domestic disturbance. Sure, people have their free will and lessons to learn, but no person is an island, and if you create a ruckus and assault someone in an area where many other people live then you can EXPECT that someone will call the police and you will bear the consequences of your actions. No infringement of free will there that I can see. In fact, it is utilizing YOUR free will to act against violence and pathology to call the police. We live in a far from perfect world, but we do what we can and what we SHOULD, based on conscience and awareness.

 

[Buddy]

The last thing I'll say is that the people arguing/fighting/abusing have free will. What if they need to go through this in order to learn their lessons? Isn't it STS of us to get involved if they clearly demonstrate that they "want" to live their life this way?

I don't think this question was avoided in this thread.
What do the three 'they's in the above quote refer to? "the people arguing/fighting/abusing". If that is all that's involved, the answer seems obvious, but my understanding is this situation involved a close proximity of the 'fighters' to many innocent others - each with their own freewill, set of 'rights', and responsibilities to dependents, including a helpless, defenseless baby. Helpless, vunerable dependents in violent situations adds a variable that requires careful consideration if you don't already know exactly what to do. OSIT

 

[truth seeker]

I don't think it was - when it was mentioned that a person has a right to live in relative peace, and that domestic abuse is also the disturbing of the community, I think it was addressed - merely due to the fact that people do have the right to live how they choose to, to some extent. In fact, there is something to the idea of standing up for your own rights in a situation, to not have to live next door to that kind of psychic, auditory and emotional disturbance, at the very least, if one is not moved by the idea that a weaker person or child is being harmed.

I'm hoping that I didn't give the impression that I didn't care whether a child or "weaker" person was being harmed or not. I agree that people should stand up for their own rights in a situation, it's the how that can become sticky. When people who are in a domestic abuse situation are constantly involved in drama, how many times can the police be called? I think at that point, other options should be considered.

The crux of the matter seems to lie in the maturity of one's level of discernment of the event and of what forms asking can take. It also seems to me that it's not so much trying to act in an STO manner - because we aren't STO - but how best to act from conscience in the present state we are in.

I agree with the point about one's level of discernment. What I'm genuinely interested (I thought about this for some time last night) is when you speak of the forms asking can take. Can you elaborate or if there's a thread that speaks to this, just point me in the general direction.

Thanks for the article Carcosa. I think there's even less of a chance that someone will help when there's more than one person. It's as if that fact makes people even more inhibited.

Sure, people have their free will and lessons to learn, but no person is an island, and if you create a ruckus and assault someone in an area where many other people live then you can EXPECT that someone will call the police and you will bear the consequences of your actions. No infringement of free will there that I can see. In fact, it is utilizing YOUR free will to act against violence and pathology to call the police. We live in a far from perfect world, but we do what we can and what we SHOULD, based on conscience and awareness.

Thanks for this Perceval. That clarified my understanding.

The last thing I'll say is that the people arguing/fighting/abusing have free will. What if they need to go through this in order to learn their lessons? Isn't it STS of us to get involved if they clearly demonstrate that they "want" to live their life this way?

I don't think this question was avoided in this thread.
What do the three 'they's in the above quote refer to? "the people arguing/fighting/abusing". If that is all that's involved, the answer seems obvious, but my understanding is this situation involved a close proximity of the 'fighters' to many innocent others - each with their own freewill, set of 'rights', and responsibilities to dependents, including a helpless, defenseless baby. Helpless, vunerable dependents in violent situations adds a variable that requires careful consideration if you don't already know exactly what to do. OSIT

I never meant to suggest that the question was avoided but was and am genuinely asking a question in order to understand where freewill falls in all of this.

Yes, the three they's refer to the people arguing/fighting/abusing. This is an understandably emotional topic. I don't think I suggested at anytime that nothing should be done. I have gotten involved a couple of times in reference to abuse situations. All I'm saying is that calling the police isn't always the best course of action. Often it only leads to a temporary fix and unless there's an obvious (to the police) that a crime has been committed or someone is willing to press charges, very little seems to get resolved (at least on the surface). Sometimes a subtle and creative solution is called for.

I think we're saying basically the same thing, we're just in disagreement on how it could be done.

 

[Buddy]

I agree with the point about one's level of discernment. What I'm genuinely interested (I thought about this for some time last night) is when you speak of the forms asking can take. Can you elaborate or if there's a thread that speaks to this, just point me in the general direction.

In the thread:
"Helping:" STS or STO? There are a lot of posts that may help one to gain a deeper understanding of what it means to try and discern exactly what is being 'asked' for in various situations. Trying to understand this issue was the source of my greatest frustration at the time.

What I've learned (even though I keep making mistakes) is that you truly have to pull together as much as you can possibly see and consider at one time and that will be different for every individual in every context.

The level of discernment required depends so much on where you are in self-development and what (how much) you can 'see'. AT least that's been my understanding, so I'm working on increasing the levels of what I can 'see' in various ways - eliminating as much inner garbage as possible and expanding awareness thru gaining objective knowledge.

As it turns out, there is no rule of thumb to go by for a given situation, except maybe to keep your eyes open...don't blink and decide something prematurely...don't flinch and react emotionally...don't avoid and miss an opportunity. Trust yourself, the Universe, the Work. Be willing to act even when you can't see a direction - if you have a 'higher self' you'll be making your own job a little easier, I think.

 

[truth seeker]

I agree with the point about one's level of discernment. What I'm genuinely interested (I thought about this for some time last night) is when you speak of the forms asking can take. Can you elaborate or if there's a thread that speaks to this, just point me in the general direction.

In the thread:
"Helping:" STS or STO? There are a lot of posts that may help one to gain a deeper understanding of what it means to try and discern exactly what is being 'asked' for in various situations. Trying to understand this issue was the source of my greatest frustration at the time.

What I've learned (even though I keep making mistakes) is that you truly have to pull together as much as you can possibly see and consider at one time and that will be different for every individual in every context.

The level of discernment required depends so much on where you are in self-development and what (how much) you can 'see'. AT least that's been my understanding, so I'm working on increasing the levels of what I can 'see' in various ways - eliminating as much inner garbage as possible and expanding awareness thru gaining objective knowledge.

As it turns out, there is no rule of thumb to go by for a given situation, except maybe to keep your eyes open...don't blink and decide something prematurely...don't flinch and react emotionally...don't avoid and miss an opportunity.

Thanks for going into further explanation and the link.

Trust yourself, the Universe, the Work. Be willing to act even when you can't see a direction - if you have a 'higher self' you'll be making your own job a little easier, I think.

Nicely said. Thanks for being patient with me.