Caring/Compassion/Sensitivity/Tact vs Lying/Faking

[Monica]

there is no point to attempting to share any kind of information in such an environment. everyone can talk anything about anything they want, regardless of how nonsense or misleading they may be, ignoring/refusing/denying any kind of common truth that god forbid may be used in weeding out valuable and usable information.

Theoretically, you're right.

However, in reality (meaning this forum in this 3D reality), it's really not an issue; you're exaggerating the risk of people "talking nonsense."

Because:

1. It hasn't happened much. Sure, there have been a few instances of someone sharing something that seemed a bit 'way out there' but guess what, no one except you seemed to notice or care. Why? Probably because they read it and thought, "Oh wow, that person had a pretty wild meditation...but that's a little too far-out for me" and promptly forgot all about it. This isn't Sunday school Bible study! No one is at risk for getting suckered into believing in pink unicorns. I mean really, it's just not an issue.

2. Even if it were an issue, as ascertained by the mods, the community overall, and the owner of this forum, who are you to decide what is 'correct' and what is nonsense? When was it decided that a particular member of our community gets to police the comments of everyone else? With all due respect, unity, if you aren't happy with the level of freedom we enjoy here at Bring4th, you could always start your own forum with different rules, and enforce those rules as you wish. But the owner of this forum - Carla - has made it very clear that she doesn't want the Law of One turned into a religion. You speak of it as though it's a religion and you are singlehandedly responsible for weeding out any heresies.

of course, numerous among you again switched the 'personal truth' switches at the point you read the preceding sentences, and immediately invoked the 'how dare you question my truth' leave aside 'how dare you insist on questioning my truth' knee-jerk reactions again.

Respectfully, you do it too. Your way of doing it is to exit the discussion as soon as holes are found in your logic or someone offers points you are unwilling or unable to answer...ie., shown to be...wrong.

Or maybe you do it when points are made that you need to ponder? In which case, a more honest response would be to say, "Those are very good points. I'm not sure I agree, but I'm going to exit this discussion and think about all that's been said." I've never seen you do that. Surely there are times when you might feel a bit shaken in your convictions and need to think about the points made by others, right? Surely you do learn from us sometimes?

It's ok to admit that you need to think about things for awhile. You don't need to have a ready answer for everything. This is a learning process for all of us.

an environment in which people gather to exchange/discuss/learn/discover advanced information, leave aside study them, and god forbid something that is important, fundamental, delicate and at times potentially dangerous in many ways like spiritual information, is not a suitable place for people who are seeking self-realization, appeasement, validation through the 'personal truths' they have taken on, regardless of how right, or how wrong they may be. actually this goes valid for any place of learning/exchange. knowledge is not for self-worth and appeasement. people who are afraid of their self truth being questioned or called wrong, should not embark in spiritual voyages, leave aside sit with other people to discuss anything about them.

What you just said, right there, is your 'personal truth.'

You state it as though it's an absolute truth, but it's not. It a personal truth. Your personal truth.

You have no right to impose your personal truth about who should and shouldn't participate in these discussions. It's not your place to do that. No offense, but you're just a member, like everyone else.

it doesnt matter whether the distaste for being wrong, or being unable to validate self-worth/value/strength through 'personal truths' that are used to identify with, is conveniently translated into form of demanding 'compassion' through definitions conveniently created from local social political correctness.

First of all, how is demanding compassion any different from you demanding 'correctness'? and your perception of 'correctness' at that! We don't even agree on what is correct! So why should we adhere to your perception of 'correctness'? You aren't an authority.

Anyway, correctness isn't even as important as compassion. It's compassion that is integral to graduation from 3D. I don't recall Ra ever stating that 'correctness' of understanding or belief was required for us at any time. Ra even stated that understanding wasn't of this density.

Sure, Ra gave us a great deal of information. And also told us to use our own discernment. But never did Ra indicate that complete understanding would make or break our progress in any way. That's all your perception, to think that it could, or that having an 'incorrect' understanding is "dangerous." Ra never said that. You did.

No one is "demanding" anything, and certainly not some fake display of compassion. However, it is clearly stated in our guidelines that each member act with love, caring, respect, and...compassion.

1) Respect. Compassion. Loving-kindness. Empathy. Trust. Goodwill. Desire to serve. Embracing each other. Opening our heart. Participants are asked to keep the thought in the forefront of their minds at all times that each on this forum IS the Creator. Please keep communication respectful at all times and in all ways. The participant may disagree to the bone with an idea without personally attacking the author of the idea. Please remember that we are all here to expand our knowledge, deepen our understanding, and support one another by reflecting our divinity to each other. We are One being -- we are not here to forget the real.

There it is, right there. The 2nd word in Guideline #1. I'd say that makes it pretty important.

Unity100, it's no secret that many members have accused you of not having compassion. I personally have gone to bat for you numerous times, because I thought that most of it was due to cognitive distortions, cultural differences, the fact that English wasn't your native language, and just simple personality differences.

But I am now very disconcerted to learn that you don't seem to value compassion at all. Throughout this entire thread, you have been arguing against compassion having any value at all, and have even stated that it's not even found in 3D!

I don't know what to make of this. I'm stunned, quite frankly.

The bottom line is that compassion is an important requirement for participating in our community. So important, that it's the 2nd word in our #1 guideline.

if something is wrong, it is wrong continually, until the situations surrounding it changes.

The problem is that it's not your place to decide what's wrong.

You can voice your opinion, like everyone else, and we welcome it. But we don't appreciate being told that we are wrong, just because you think we're wrong. That has to change. It cannot continue.

if that does not happen throughout the course of an internet discussion (it very rarely does), it means that something that was wrong 2 pages ago, flying in the face of basic spiritual information which everyone is SUPPOSEDLY subscribing to, remains wrong for the remainder of the discussion.

Well excuse me, but compassion is really basic, and you seem to have missed it.

and no - 'reinterpreting' the basic spiritual information that everyone uses as common ground, PERSONALLY, does not help either - its just the practice of manufacturing 'personal truth' as convenient.

But we ALL interpret and 'reinterpret' the same 'basic' spiritual info, including you.

For some reason, you seem convinced that the way you have interpreted the material, is canon.

But you are mistaken in that. And yes, I do have the authority to tell you you're wrong on that point, because I know the wishes of the owner of this forum, and that is that the material not be made into a religion. So for anyone to insist on their interpretation being established as canon, is to make it into a doctrine. That's expressly not allowed here.