Trained in Thought, Word, and Action

[Bring4th_Austin]

I can relate pretty strongly to your experiences, Icaro. I've also spent the past year or so contemplating the nature of communication and trying to learn how to refine my own communication in ways that might be more consonant with consciously creating and sharing love. 

To build up sort of a strawman, I often see people (especially seekers) reach a point where they will take an attitude of "I am only speaking the truth, if that affects you then that is your responsibility, not mine." I do think there is a piece of truth in this, but the attitude itself is one that I feel shirks responsibility. If a person who wishes to live consciously knows that their words will be perceived (or mis-perceived) in a certain way, then they hold the responsibility for the results of how their words are perceived. If someone's words work to further distortion rather than smooth it, even if they are "speaking the truth," then that person holds responsibility for those further distortions. So often, a person will claim to have a goal of growing understanding with their communication, but they will refuse to alter the way they communicate despite the fact that understanding is not succeeding, and in fact can decrease when a person communicates in a way that can be emotionally charging for another person. What is the goal then? Is the goal truly to increase understanding, or is the goal to speak one's opinion no matter the consequences? The "proof of the pudding is in the eating," as they say. If further understanding does not result from communication, yet the communicator refuses to alter the way they communicate, then there are ulterior motives behind the communication besides furthering understanding, whether conscious or not.

Once we accept this responsibility, communication becomes an intricate and delicate dance. It takes careful consideration to try to understand how your words will be received. This is obviously an arena that is rife with catalyst, such was the plan when the Logos opted out of telepathic communication. We can't know for sure how someone will receive our words, but we can do our best to put ourselves in that persons shoes and speak to them in a manner of speaking that we know they will understand, that we hope will be received with understanding rather than distortion. Different levels of development tend to communicate in certain ways. Different cultures attribute different types of meaning to language used. Doing our best to understand these intricacies and adapt to them, instead of try to blow through them with rigidity in our own composure, is what I think comprises a good part of our "outpouring" blue ray work. And, as you pointed out Icaro, sometimes the best thing we can do is remain silent. There are some situations where nothing we say can grow understanding, and anything we say will increase confusion and distortion. 

The method of this particular blue ray work is fairly simple, I think, although seems to be the work of an entire lifetime. We ask ourselves, "What is my goal in communication?" Then we evaluate how our communication is being received. "Am I building a bridge of understanding between me and the other person? Is my goal being achieved? Or am I increasing the gap, only pressing their buttons and causing them to be energized further in our disagreement?" Then, think about how you might be able to adapt to the situation and communicate on a level which might closer fulfill your goals, and do it all over again.