12-07-2011, 10:16 PM
(12-07-2011, 12:09 PM)Diana Wrote:When someone wants to be conscious, and uses their will to that aim, they can accelerate their growth to some extent.(12-07-2011, 12:40 AM)zenmaster Wrote:(12-07-2011, 12:14 AM)Diana Wrote: Yikes! I disagree. In some ways I see what you're saying. But most people, in my opinion, are still asleep; so movies like this may help awaken them out of their unconsciousness.Who is not asleep and who is not awake? The "sleeping/awake" dichotomy is one designed to create separation between someone's notion of what it means to be conscious and what it means to be unconscious.
I see your point here. I was succumbing to cliche language to explain myself. I agree that the concept creates separatism and elitism. I can't help wishing that humans do wake up, however, to the suffering caused from things like mindless consuming. By awake, I mean conscious of wanting to be conscious, if that makes sense.
Our wakefulness criteria tends to be selective, however.
(12-07-2011, 12:09 PM)Diana Wrote:That's because you've just abstracted an idea from that vision, separating from your experience right now.(12-07-2011, 12:40 AM)zenmaster Wrote:(12-07-2011, 12:14 AM)Diana Wrote: When I envision the future, it has nothing to do with my ego, and everything to do with helping to create a more balanced and evolved existence.That's just it, there is a difference between what one vaguely hopes for and what one is currently creating, experientially now, which actually serves to promote consciousness and 'polarity' for oneself and for others. I disagree that you have actually transcended your ego. That's a 'I want to do it' position which you have confused with your 'hope' for something more, which you have associated with these shows. Such hopes are necessarily ego-based.
I never said that I have transcended my ego, far from it. I do not consider myself very evolved. I do however endeavor to create my reality consciously. I do not think that my envisioning a future without cruelty is ego-based.
(12-07-2011, 12:09 PM)Diana Wrote: Perhaps I'm wrong; I don't have to be right; this just makes sense to me. And for the record, just because I said the movies were good, does not mean I "follow" them, or get on their bandwagons. I think for myself.Just like no one has a vision that they effectively participate in that is without 'ego', no one thinks for themselves entirely. The idea of 'if it gets people to wake up' is basically cut and pasted, for example.
(12-07-2011, 12:09 PM)Diana Wrote: If you had a child, and the child was cruel to animals or a pet, would you allow the cruelty so the child could have free will? Would you not desire that the child stop being cruel and kindly teach and guide? This is the way I see our present-day situation. There is so much suffering.You don't see our present-day situation for what it is, no one does. So we resort to manufacturing circumstances, such as your child guidance situation abstraction, which then have rules for more appropriate behavior.
"It is a necessary balance to the intention of law, which is to protect, that the result would encompass an equal distortion towards imprisonment. Therefore, we may say that your supposition is correct. This is not to denigrate those who, in green and blue-ray energies, sought to free a peaceable people from the bonds of chaos but only to point out the inevitable consequences of codification of response which does not recognize the uniqueness of each and every situation within your experience."
There is a limitation of 3rd density knowing which is incapable of adequately addressing unique needs of the moment for another's 'good'. The balance 'correction' we may authoritatively apply quite often, instead of showing one to 'the light', might shelter, discourage, embitter, sidetrack, confuse, or stifle growth. That is the system or culture which dictates conventions for our relationships, what we are using right now to evolve, from home, work, or in society. This happens constantly, and that treatment is the 'cause of suffering' here. A show that points fingers outside the self for 'action' ain't gonna help. We crave and demand all manner of surrogates to avoid our self-determined Opus: a saviour - be it an inventor, an alien race, a leader, distractions, a show that points out 'the truth', whatever. 'NASA is lying to us!' Truly, what is NASA hiding that is suppressing our spiritual development? We are the authority.
(12-07-2011, 12:09 PM)Diana Wrote: Suffering may be what humans have chosen.Yes, it's what we've chosen. It is indicative of the level of discomfort we are willing to tolerate in exchange for supporting our collective vision. We think it's a 'good' vision of course. (So did those from Maldek, if you want an extreme case of working towards a hopeful vision).
(12-07-2011, 12:09 PM)Diana Wrote: I am not so certain about the animal and plant life, or even the Earth. I can't help wanting (and if this is ego so be it) humans to wake up to the cruelty and selfishness of the destruction we have caused. But I don't go around preaching; I envision a better future.Who doesn't envision a 'better future', seriously? Who actually knows 'better', seriously? Really, for the most part we're 'along for the ride', selectively cheering shows like "Thrive" when they successfully induce a numinous feeling of transcendence over popular, 'new-age' focused social or environmental problems or remind the sleeper that 'anything is possible' as far as imagining shapes in clouds and letting emotion fill in the blanks with personal meaning.