Wishful thinking/strategic enclosure

[Buddy]

Thanks everyone!
The main things I am working on right now are the various degrees of anger, annoyances and irrations that I've been experiencing in my day-to-day life. Feelings were being stimulated from all kinds of sources, from injustices due to 'man's inhumanity to man' to people who say and do things that make me feel that THEY are being thoughtless and inconsiderate towards me. I am happy to say I have a much different perspective now!
I see my application of 'Strategic Enclosure' to sum up like this:

Basically, you want to act towards other people in your world strategically in such a way that you create space behind a wall, so to speak, to do the Work. If you let everyone know what you are thinking and what you are working on, you will be wide open for attacks of various kinds.

and:

The part of you that does the Work should be kept private, hidden, tucked away from those in your External life in order to protect it as it grows. The key point is to not draw the attention of the General Law.

At the same time, my application of External Considering sums up like:

But if a man really remembers himself he understands that another man is a machine just as he is himself. And then he will enter into his position, he will put himself in his place, and he will be really able to understand and feel what another man thinks and feels. If he can do this his work becomes easier for him. But if he approaches a man with his own requirements nothing except new internal considering can ever be obtained from it.

and:

It also helps to act... ... by not daying and doing things that will disturb other people in your life in ways they never asked for.

I'm also trying to use the concept of the 'petty tyrant' to my advantage. I represent feelings of anger as being like a midget 'little I' jumping up and down and stomping his tiny feet and yelling: "Just let me outta here! I'll give THEM 'what for'!".
It makes me smile, and most of the time seems to keep me from identifying with the emotions so that I can more easily empathize with the person I had previously thought was the troublemaker. I can then introspect and look for the source of the problem internally.

I'm also reading about 'seeing the unseen' and 'reading clues in the environment' so that "If I were being pursued by someone who intended to do me harm, I would have 'strategy' to escape their clutches...

 

[PepperFritz]

I have a question: Does General Law manifest itself mostly/only when you are NOT practicing external consideration and doing the Work in a Strategic Enclosure? If you are successful at doing this all the time, you escape General Law? or am I oversimplifying?

That is not my understanding. Please see the Mouravieff passage below (quoted in the Cassiopaea Glossary entry on General Law)' That passage suggests to me that if someone seeks to escape the mechanical nature of General Law and live instead according to the Law of Exception, and does so in an open, obvious, and confrontational manner (rather than in a "sly", quiet manner, utilizing Strategic Enclosure), he draws the attention of STS forces to himself, and attracts "the increasing pressures of the General Law upon himself". To me this echoes various sayings attributed to Jesus, such as "Be in the world, but not of it"; "Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's"; and "Be then as wise as snakes, and as gentle as doves".

In short, you're asking for trouble if you raise your fist defiantly against the chains of the General Law, and loudly announce your rebellion, as you will only attract an increase of pressure to keep you in line. But if you work quietly, strategically, slyly, subversively, without drawing attention to yourself, you have a better chance of gradually slipping those chains unnoticed.

Ever see the movie The Shawshank Redemption? To me, the manner in which the main character eventually earns his freedom, parallels the the Sly Man's use of Strategic Enclosure.

_____________________________________________

"As long as man accepts the principle of the final annihilation of his Personality without a fight, he can carry on in life without attracting the increasing pressures of the General Law upon himself.

"The case is totally different if he struggles to surpass the limits which it imposes. It acts simultaneously on several planes: physical, mental, and moral. Its action on the moral plane is conceived by man, since time immemorial, in the form of a personification: the Devil.

"In the orthodox Tradition demonology occupies a considerable place. We find there practical constatations, fine and profound observations on the highly sophisticated and insidious forms that the Devil's action takes in very varied circumstances, in which it goes as far as using the good faith of humans for its own ends.

"We will also find precious advice, based on accumulated experience over the ages, which is particularly helpful to students of esoteric science; because once the first positive results are obtained those students will unmistakably run up against the active opposition to the law and the GAME OF THE CRAFTY ONE.

"It must be realized that in placing himself under the aegis of the Law of Exception, man goes against the General Law, which he is even called upon to overthrow, if only on an individual scale. He must not forget--under penalty of 'surprise attack'--the salvation depends on victory over the Devil, which as we have said, is the personalized moral aspect of the General Law. This is so, even though this, being a cosmic law, is naturally a divine law. One must not be afraid, as the Law of Exception is also a divine law. In choosing it, man continues to serve the interests of the whole, but differently and in an incomparably more efficient manner. During his fight against the first law, he is subject to tests that often take the form of temptations. In orthodox Doctrine deep studies are devoted to this theme, As stated above, they contain precious advice of a practical nature, details of which we cannot cover in this present book. We are however permitted to draw attention to the indirect nature of the diabolical action. If, aiming straight towards his goal, which is liberation and salvation, the seeker successfully overcomes the obstacles and by this shows proof of a strength that would permit him to defy the authority of the General Law, the latter will begin to act upon him indirectly, generally by the mediation of his near ones if they do not follow the same path: this action occurs on the moral plane, and often takes emotional forms appealing to his most noble, generous, and disinterested sentiments: to his charity; his obligations; his pity. It impels him down blind alleys, insinuating that he will be returning to his duty, that by so doing he will go on walking in the right path, etc. This will clarify the profound saying of Jesus that: 'A man's worst enemies are those of his own household.'

 

[Meg]

Thank you for the clarification Pepperfritz. I was thinking in black and white terms, and not clearly.

In short, you're asking for trouble if you raise your fist defiantly against the chains of the General Law, and loudly announce your rebellion, as you will only attract an increase of pressure to keep you in line.

That is difficult with the ever-growing pathocracy. I find it hard to do, especially at work.

Ever see the movie The Shawshank Redemption? To me, the manner in which the main character eventually earns his freedom, parallels the the Sly Man's use of Strategic Enclosure.

Excellent example of the Sly Man. I'll have to watch it again.

 

[Buddy]

That is difficult with the ever-growing pathocracy. I find it hard to do, especially at work.

It occured to me that if experienced forum members shared their 'live action' experiences dealing with others, it would be a big benefit for the less experienced. On the other hand, personal interactions are private matters and I think we all have to find our own way, doing and learning and acting from what we know at the moment.
I can share this:
The next time I'm in a conversation with someone and they forcefully insist that 'so and so' is true when I know that it is not, I'm going to throw up a stop sign to the petty tyrant within and just observe the person until it's safe to resume the conversation. If the person insists on questioning my lack of support on the issue, I'm just going to say something like: "I don't think it's all that important if I agree with you. The reason I was looking at you like that is because I realize you're important too. I'm just trying to see your point of you so that I can understand where you're coming from".


...or words to that effect.


I'm really fascinated with the concept of dealing with a petty tyrant. I'm gonna wait until I can afford it.
It wasn't all that long ago that I would have found and acquired whatever I wanted free. But I think external consideration in this context requires me to respect the work of the authors. I wouldn't want the material anyother way.

In the meantime, I think I'll get The Shawshank Redemption and watch it.



edit - The 'it' that I'm waiting to afford is the book that Laura published.

 

[Al Today]

Hello Buddy,

Don't know if you seen the glossary or if anyone has posted a link
http://glossary.cassiopaea.com/glossary.php?id=587&lsel=P

Also for anyone who has not been to what I believe was the initial web site.?.?.?
http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/site_map_qfg.htm

Man, I stumbled upon "Sponsored Sites Master Index" a few years ago and boy, have I changed. I didn't even know the definition of esoteric at the time...

 

[PepperFritz]

It occured to me that if experienced forum members shared their 'live action' experiences dealing with others, it would be a big benefit for the less experienced.

In my experience, keeping my mouth shut, changing the subject, playing stupid, and excusing myself to visit the ladies room have always been highly effective "techniques". It's not a question of having the right "come back" at your disposal. The best approach is to make it a habit to refrain from discussing certain subjects in the first place. In other words, to practice "Strategic Self Enclosure". Things that get in the way and must be "worked on":

(1) Enthusiasm/Loneliness:
Often those who are just beginning to "wake up" desperately want to "share" what they are discovering with others, and thus, are often the initiators of discussions that should be avoided. They need to come to terms with the fact that the path they are on is a lonely one that should be kept private, and that it is not STO to predetermine the needs of another, by attempting to influence their beliefs.

(2) Emotions
When those around us express ignorant beliefs and attitudes, it often provokes strong emotions, such as anger and outrage. We have to learn to keep our emotions "below the neck" and not just "vent" them indiscriminately. Once the STS "feeders" around you know they can provoke such emotions in you, they will start to target you just for a reaction. Emotional self-control is key.

(3) Self-Importance
I think this is the one that is the most difficult to see and/or overcome. But shutting down the impulse to demonstrate your moral and intellectual superiority over others is a necessity. Reminding myself of all the nonsensical beliefs I myself have held and the vast amounts of knowledge I am still pitifully ignorant of, has always been a good way to regain perspective....

 

[Buddy]

Hello Buddy,

Don't know if you seen the glossary or if anyone has posted a link
http://glossary.cassiopaea.com/glossary.php?id=587&lsel=P

Thanks Al Today.
I hadn't made it to the glossary yet, but will be studying the relevant entry tonight.

 

[Pierre]

I'm really fascinated with the concept of dealing with a petty tyrant.

Hi Buddy,

Just to add a point to the glossary definition, a petty tyrant might not have to be an individual per se.

If you look at the society we are living in, you can see most of the petty tyrant's features : tormenting with violence and cruelty, inducing fear and sadness, generating anger and frustration.

 

[Buddy]

Things that get in the way and must be "worked on":

(1) Enthusiasm/Loneliness:
Often those who are just beginning to "wake up" desperately want to "share" what they are discovering with others, and thus, are often the initiators of discussions that should be avoided. They need to come to terms with the fact that the path they are on is a lonely one that should be kept private, and that it is not STO to predetermine the needs of another, by attempting to influence their beliefs.

(2) Emotions
When those around us express ignorant beliefs and attitudes, it often provokes strong emotions, such as anger and outrage. We have to learn to keep our emotions "below the neck" and not just "vent" them indiscriminately. Once the STS "feeders" around you know they can provoke such emotions in you, they will start to target you just for a reaction. Emotional self-control is key.

(3) Self-Importance
I think this is the one that is the most difficult to see and/or overcome. But shutting down the impulse to demonstrate your moral and intellectual superiority over others is a necessity. Reminding myself of all the nonsensical beliefs I myself have held and the vast amounts of knowledge I am still pitifully ignorant of, has always been a good way to regain perspective....

Thanks for sharing this PepperFritz. The technique I described certainly can use some work. I failed to mention that the context for that particular example was my relationship with the person who is closest to me, and in THAT light, it's a big improvement in my behavior!

In addition to the things that must be 'worked on' that you mentioned, I realized recently that with me, there is another issue that's so closely associated with self-importance as to be almost indistinguishable.
That is, a very persuasive argument once had me thoroughly convinced that to not speakup when someone was propagating irrationality amounted to tacit consent. In other words, you were practicing a contradiction by knowing one thing and yet giving credibility to its opposite by not exposing it and you feel the consequences in diminished self-esteem and emotional energy.
I still feel that in some cases this is true. [Perhaps those cases are the ones where 'the lie' is to be given what it's asking for?]
Anyway, the point is, The information I have learned here has helped me to reconcile this issue with the concepts of "external consideration and strategic enclosure". The problem was that the argument I referred to was based on an assumption that was unstated and unnoticed by me. And that assumption was that 'one was struggling for control' externally.
And lo and behold...when I realized that the real struggle for control is internal, the ideas in the Work became real to me.

I hope I explained this right.

 

[PepperFritz]

I failed to mention that the context for that particular example was my relationship with the person who is closest to me....

Ah, yes, well, there ARE other considerations when dealing with someone with whom you have a close relationship, it is a much more complex situation. One would have to know the larger context in order to provide any advice, feedback, etc.

You may find these threads of interest:

Marital conflict, children and the work

Asking for trouble

 

[anart]

One would have to know the larger context in order to provide any advice, feedback, etc.

While this is true, just a reminder that this is a public forum, so going into too much personal detail is not wise. General dynamics can be helpful, but please remember that this is not a private conversation by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[PepperFritz]

One would have to know the larger context in order to provide any advice, feedback, etc.

While this is true, just a reminder that this is a public forum, so going into too much personal detail is not wise. General dynamics can be helpful, but please remember that this is not a private conversation by any stretch of the imagination.

I agree completely. My comment was not an invitation to provide the "larger context" (i.e. more personal detail) -- just an acknowledgment that relationships usually involve more complex issues and that the general principles under discussion may not apply. Sorry if I created a different impression.

 

[Johnno]

That is, a very persuasive argument once had me thoroughly convinced that to not speakup when someone was propagating irrationality amounted to tacit consent. In other words, you were practicing a contradiction by knowing one thing and yet giving credibility to its opposite by not exposing it and you feel the consequences in diminished self-esteem and emotional energy.
I still feel that in some cases this is true. [Perhaps those cases are the ones where 'the lie' is to be given what it's asking for?]

Sometimes it does pay to speak up and other times it doesn't. It takes a degree of skill, knowledge and confidence to not be swayed. And sometimes the person "propagating the irrationality" just doesn't want it pointed out.

The Emporer's new clothes......

An emperor who cares too much about clothes hires two swindlers who promise him the finest suit of clothes from the most beautiful cloth. This cloth, they tell him, is invisible to anyone who was either stupid or unfit for his position. The Emperor cannot see the (non-existent) cloth, but pretends that he can for fear of appearing stupid; his ministers do the same. When the swindlers report that the suit is finished, they dress him in mime. The Emperor then goes on a procession through the capital showing off his new "clothes". During the course of the procession, a small child cries out, "But he has nothing on!" The crowd realizes the child is telling the truth. The Emperor, however, holds his head high and continues the procession.

 

[Buddy]

Sometimes it does pay to speak up and other times it doesn't. It takes a degree of skill, knowledge and confidence to not be swayed. And sometimes the person "propagating the irrationality" just doesn't want it pointed out.

A balanced view indeed. Thanks Johnno

 

[foofighter]

Sometimes it does pay to speak up and other times it doesn't. It takes a degree of skill, knowledge and confidence to not be swayed. And sometimes the person "propagating the irrationality" just doesn't want it pointed out.

I can definitely relate to that at the moment. I have sort of relocated to SE Asia, and if I were to "speak up" at all times (or even just some times) about what I think about thing I would thrown in jail really fast, and also bring down quite a lot of misery on those I live with. That would be double-bad. So I have to always make a difference between what I see and know and what I say and do. To not say and not do becomes the conscious decision, withholding until the precise moments where saying and doing actually makes a positive difference. A very useful exercise