So I'm grappling with this concept that is about as foreign to me as high level physics. I spoke with Austin via pm about how to change my approach when it came to communication and he noted how Carla had a wonderful ability to being honest but worded it in such a way, that it came off as loving rather than igniting or reinforcing ones own emotional overreactions.
My girlfriend and I just spoke about this yet can't come to an agreement because she allows herself to become emotionally invested into a given situation and will empathize with an other self without knowing the extent to which that other self is experiencing. Whereas I gather the facts first and respond with a blunt honesty. If it invokes a negative reaction within that other self, then my job has been accomplished by exposing that which they need to work upon.
Yet this Avenue isn't well received therefore such honesty is shrouded in a collective distaste based upon that other selves own insecurities. This baffles me to no extent because from my point of view, I feel as if I'm not only not being myself but I'm not being honest and honesty has always been my most honored virtue.
So it's quite clear that I need to balance love back into this equation yet am unable to find how.
Rather than framing it as being honest/dishonest, perhaps think of it as STS/STO.
Go deep within and be honest with yourself first. Are you being blunt as you believe that 'honesty is the best policy' and will charge your own spiritual development, or are you *absolutely genuinely* doing it to help them?
Sometimes the 'truth' isn't needed. Sometimes someone who is in a negative spiral (a specific emotional state) needs some words of encouragement to help lift them up and out of that state. Otherwise the 'truth' can seem too far away, and only add to that negative spiral of thought. This can be done without being blunt, it can be done with tact and care.
This mantra/notion has helped me enormously:
"I wish to part a conversation or meeting with another self having them feel better than before we met"
Helping the emotional state is more conductive to the person themselves finding 'truth' than 'slapping' them with the 'truth'. If you always leave people feeling better about themselves or the situation they are in, you've been of positive service.
A prime example being Jehoshua (Jesus) - he didn't 'slap' people with truth in order to teach. He was unconditionally loving and accepting of others and their situations. He taught by example and used parables to protect the free will of others, giving them the opportunity to seek truth within themselves.
See that's the thing. I don't factor in my own spiritual development while communicating with other selves, at least consciously. I don't concern myself on whether I'm polarizing but rather that other self will be able to take something away from the communication. Your mantra as I see it is exactly what I'm trying to do because it's exactly how I would expect someone to interact with me.
I'm not sure if you read that debacle of a thread where I asked for honesty and got labelled as everything from insensitive to being a bigot. That's the kind of honesty that I revel in. In that aspect, I can analyze the responses and find out whether I really am acting as such or are the responses based upon that other selves own imbalances. Giving me a pep talk and saying everything will be ok just keep your head up and keep trying is useless to me as it contains nothing of any practical substance.
You say that sometimes the truth isn't needed but that flies in the face of everything I stand for. Truth and honesty is always needed otherwise, you're either further enabling an other selves own imbalances or you're not being honest. People walk on egg shells around here because they are afraid of hurting an other selves feelings and it frustrates me because evolution cannot occur with such veiled responses
The truth is relative dear fellow. Understand that certain 'truths' are relevant to another self at that certain points of time.
It's not about being deceitful or lacking integrity. One can proffer a single statement in a way which either helps or hinders another. Adept blue ray communication (imbued with green) is an art form.
Quote:42.7 Questioner: I would like to try to make an analogy for this in third density. Many entities here feel great compassion toward relieving the physical problems of third-density other-selves by administering to them in many ways, bringing them food if there is hunger as there is in the African nations now, bringing them medicine if they believe they require administering to them medically, and being selfless in all of these services to a very great extent.
This is creating a polarization or a vibration that is in harmony with green ray or fourth density. However, it is not balanced with the understanding of fifth density that these entities are experiencing catalyst and a more balanced administration to their needs would be to provide them with the learning necessary to reach the state of awareness of fourth density than it would be to administer to their physical needs at this time. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect. To a mind/body/spirit complex which is starving, the appropriate response is the feeding of the body. You may extrapolate from this.
On the other hand, however, you are correct in your assumption that the green ray response is not as refined as that which has been imbued with wisdom. This wisdom enables the entity to appreciate its contributions to the planetary consciousness by the quality of its being without regard to activity or behavior which expects results upon visible planes.
Don't assume you're responsible for the evolution of another self. You're not. You're responsible for
only your own. You can point to the doorway, as they say, but only the self can walk through it.
Your 'bluntness' can be seen as catalyst to yourself. Promoting the notion of finalistic 'truth' over the feelings of another, in my opinion, is service to self, as it's one's
own truth that is being given more importance than the state of being of another.
This is not the density of knowledge or understanding. It's the density in which we decide to love (or not). Any truths we hold dear to us are highly distorted. We are not an authority of truth :¬)
I should clarify that I'm not always so honest. Take work for example. When I xray an obviously obese for back or knee pain, I don't tell them flat out that the reason they hurt is because they're fat. I skirt the issue as tactfully as possible which definitely frustrates me but I know it's not my place within a work environment.
Another example is my students. I have a certain level of restraint, empathy, and compassion for freshman because I know they will become overwhelmed or make silly mistakes. In this way, I encourage them based upon their relative reaction to any given situation. Now a senior I will respond completely different based upon the mistake that they make. If it's something they obviously should know at that point, I will display a blunt honesty that comes off as abrasive because there is a level of expectation of evolution.
I was just talking to my girlfriend about it and she made me realize that we all don't know each other's level of evolution which is where my misstep has been. I have this expectation that many here should have at least begun to begin how to balance their lower energy centers at the very least. Yet thus couldn't be further from the truth hence my need to adjust the ways I interact.
If anyone can just say what's on their mind, or what they believe to be true (which is a necessary part of balancing), why does Ra say true blue ray takes a substantial portion of our lifetime to accomplish? Self-knowledge allows us to serve in an appropriate manner, but we get stuck in the knowledge itself. We seek harmonious interaction. So the big question is how do we get there? What is the self, and how do we express it?
I work on refining this expression continuously and screw up regularly. I'm always amazed at how much I think I understand a situation between me and another, only to eventually realize I was missing something.
Blue-ray is delicate to balance. You girlfriend is right. We are in the realm of 3D-4D and most people are operating there, with the select few going up higher in the chakras already. You sound like you're smack in the middle of 5D working on blending towards 6th, which of course is the lesson of love balanced with wisdom. Attempting to always frame your words with truth is one way to integrity, the other way is attempting to frame all your words with love. Creating that beautiful blend like Carla had is a lifetime's work.
If you find it hard to express gentle affection and patience for other people, you could try working on expressing it towards yourself. That usually starts shifting a few things.
maybe this comment wasn't helpful oops
(07-17-2015, 08:40 AM)Jeremy Wrote: [ -> ]I should clarify that I'm not always so honest. Take work for example. When I xray an obviously obese for back or knee pain, I don't tell them flat out that the reason they hurt is because they're fat. I skirt the issue as tactfully as possible which definitely frustrates me but I know it's not my place within a work environment.
Another example is my students. I have a certain level of restraint, empathy, and compassion for freshman because I know they will become overwhelmed or make silly mistakes. In this way, I encourage them based upon their relative reaction to any given situation. Now a senior I will respond completely different based upon the mistake that they make. If it's something they obviously should know at that point, I will display a blunt honesty that comes off as abrasive because there is a level of expectation of evolution.
I was just talking to my girlfriend about it and she made me realize that we all don't know each other's level of evolution which is where my misstep has been. I have this expectation that many here should have at least begun to begin how to balance their lower energy centers at the very least. Yet thus couldn't be further from the truth hence my need to adjust the ways I interact.
What makes everyone else deserve less compassion than your patients and freshmen?
(07-17-2015, 01:29 PM)Farseer Wrote: [ -> ] (07-17-2015, 08:40 AM)Jeremy Wrote: [ -> ]I should clarify that I'm not always so honest. Take work for example. When I xray an obviously obese for back or knee pain, I don't tell them flat out that the reason they hurt is because they're fat. I skirt the issue as tactfully as possible which definitely frustrates me but I know it's not my place within a work environment.
Another example is my students. I have a certain level of restraint, empathy, and compassion for freshman because I know they will become overwhelmed or make silly mistakes. In this way, I encourage them based upon their relative reaction to any given situation. Now a senior I will respond completely different based upon the mistake that they make. If it's something they obviously should know at that point, I will display a blunt honesty that comes off as abrasive because there is a level of expectation of evolution.
I was just talking to my girlfriend about it and she made me realize that we all don't know each other's level of evolution which is where my misstep has been. I have this expectation that many here should have at least begun to begin how to balance their lower energy centers at the very least. Yet thus couldn't be further from the truth hence my need to adjust the ways I interact.
What makes everyone else deserve less compassion than your patients and freshmen?
The expectation that many here are more like a junior or senior in terms of personal evolution. But in hindsight, many here can't even say they have got passed basic yellow ray blockages to allow higher levels of communication and that's my fault for assuming such.
By saying someone needs 10 positive to counteract 1 negative indicates severe weakness in my mind. I guess I've just never needed anyone to pick me up or use positive affirmations to reinforce my actions. This is one of the main challenges with this way of communicating. I've never needed such feminine ways of empathy to learn and get to where I am so to communicate that way is difficult when I know it's not the way I would like to be communicated with.
Also this feminine way seems like a waste of time if the other self would be secure enough in its own self to realize the honesty being displayed would get them where they would also get to by being coddled and get them there that much faster.
Building trust and a caring relationship? Really? Why should that matter when it comes to communication? How would you ever communicate with a stranger in that aspect? Sure that may work in a clinical setting where you have the time and opportunity to grow something such as that but such aspects are useless in everyday communication with strangers.
If an other self continues to ignore such moments of learning, who's to say that such honesty isn't what they e needed. How can one say what's the appropriate response to a situation especially considering I wouldn't expect anyone to sugar coat anything to me. It's just so difficult to me to form what others deem as a compassionate and respectful response when I would laugh in someone's face if they did it to me.
You see how you always throw responsibility on to the other self? Communication is about two or more individuals but it seems you are more focused on just your side of it. Of course, it seems you are working to expand that.
It just seems you like blunt honesty because its comfortable for you personally rather than because it's what is needed by other self. Maybe in the end they do need your honesty, but it does seem you're honest more for your own benefit.
Also, if communication isn't about relationships then I dunno what I have been thinking all the years. My friend, perhaps you have the habit of talking 'at' people rather than 'with' people?
"Also this feminine way seems like a waste of time if the other self would be secure enough in its own self to realize the honesty being displayed would get them where they would also get to by being coddled and get them there that much faster. "
This is such a huuuuge unfounded assumption. You're just comparing yourself.
Your last post just gives me this image of the 'proud male, puffing out his chest', saying, "Bah! Who needs feelings?". It's rather comical.
(07-17-2015, 02:43 PM)Farseer Wrote: [ -> ]You see how you always throw responsibility on to the other self? Communication is about two or more individuals but it seems you are more focused on just your side of it. Of course, it seems you are working to expand that.
Actually quite the contrary. I'm allowing them to see that which they are ignoring or refusing to see. I'm sure you'll say well who am I to dictate or know what they are ignoring and how is that my responsibility. My response to that is because that's exactly how I would hope that someone would respond to me. It's not that I'm trying to tell the how to think as much as responding in the way that I would expect to be interacted with.
(07-17-2015, 02:46 PM)Farseer Wrote: [ -> ]It just seems you like blunt honesty because its comfortable for you personally rather than because it's what is needed by other self. Maybe in the end they do need your honesty, but it does seem you're honest more for your own benefit.
Ya think I like or enjoy if I hurt someone feelings? Of course not. This is partly the reason why I posted this.
(07-17-2015, 02:48 PM)Farseer Wrote: [ -> ]Also, if communication isn't about relationships then I dunno what I have been thinking all the years. My friend, perhaps you have the habit of talking 'at' people rather than 'with' people?
"Also this feminine way seems like a waste of time if the other self would be secure enough in its own self to realize the honesty being displayed would get them where they would also get to by being coddled and get them there that much faster. "
This is such a huuuuge unfounded assumption. You're just comparing yourself.
That was in more in response to everyday interactions with strangers. Especially in the Healthcare field where you could be with a patient for only a few minutes. Such short interactions are ripe with potential catalysts as long as honesty is present which it generally isn't based upon selfs biases and imbalances.
(07-17-2015, 02:51 PM)Farseer Wrote: [ -> ]Your last post just gives me this image of the 'proud male, puffing out his chest', saying, "Bah! Who needs feelings?". It's rather comical.
I am no such thing lol so for you to imply such is purely based upon some bias within yourself.
Such feelings are counterproductive to me because it involves illogical, emotionally driven responses that accomplish nothing. Once one balances enough to allow one to analyze the situation without such emotional response, a more balanced interaction and communication can occur.
But I appreciate the honesty because its given me a lot to think about
I wonder if someone is dishonest in order to help someone out, if that affects blue-ray and overall balance.
I think I get it. You're a Vulcan. That explains everything.
(07-17-2015, 03:05 PM)Jeremy Wrote: [ -> ] (07-17-2015, 02:43 PM)Farseer Wrote: [ -> ]You see how you always throw responsibility on to the other self? Communication is about two or more individuals but it seems you are more focused on just your side of it. Of course, it seems you are working to expand that.
Actually quite the contrary. I'm allowing them to see that which they are ignoring or refusing to see. I'm sure you'll say well who am I to dictate or know what they are ignoring and how is that my responsibility. My response to that is because that's exactly how I would hope that someone would respond to me. It's not that I'm trying to tell the how to think as much as responding in the way that I would expect to be interacted with.
Again that's just you with you with you. Where is the other person in this equation? Imposing your self expectations upon them.
(07-17-2015, 07:23 PM)Farseer Wrote: [ -> ]I think I get it. You're a Vulcan. That explains everything.
LOL, that's epic.
(07-17-2015, 07:23 PM)Farseer Wrote: [ -> ]I think I get it. You're a Vulcan. That explains everything.
I've been told I was a Vulcan.
(07-17-2015, 03:05 PM)Jeremy Wrote: [ -> ] (07-17-2015, 02:43 PM)Farseer Wrote: [ -> ]You see how you always throw responsibility on to the other self? Communication is about two or more individuals but it seems you are more focused on just your side of it. Of course, it seems you are working to expand that.
Actually quite the contrary. I'm allowing them to see that which they are ignoring or refusing to see. I'm sure you'll say well who am I to dictate or know what they are ignoring and how is that my responsibility. My response to that is because that's exactly how I would hope that someone would respond to me. It's not that I'm trying to tell the how to think as much as responding in the way that I would expect to be interacted with.
I think what he meant is that you wish to dicdate what is best for other self when in fact you're really just both currently working on something different.
(07-17-2015, 03:21 PM)Jeremy Wrote: [ -> ] (07-17-2015, 02:51 PM)Farseer Wrote: [ -> ]Your last post just gives me this image of the 'proud male, puffing out his chest', saying, "Bah! Who needs feelings?". It's rather comical.
I am no such thing lol so for you to imply such is purely based upon some bias within yourself.
Such feelings are counterproductive to me because it involves illogical, emotionally driven responses that accomplish nothing. Once one balances enough to allow one to analyze the situation without such emotional response, a more balanced interaction and communication can occur.
Balance can only come from working emotionally driven responses as it is facing head on your own distortions.
You can have a seemingly balanced state by having no emotional drive (I've been mostly like that) but that does not mean the self is balanced, just that the distortions remain non-apparent as they are not fueled.
(07-17-2015, 07:25 PM)Farseer Wrote: [ -> ] (07-17-2015, 03:05 PM)Jeremy Wrote: [ -> ] (07-17-2015, 02:43 PM)Farseer Wrote: [ -> ]You see how you always throw responsibility on to the other self? Communication is about two or more individuals but it seems you are more focused on just your side of it. Of course, it seems you are working to expand that.
Actually quite the contrary. I'm allowing them to see that which they are ignoring or refusing to see. I'm sure you'll say well who am I to dictate or know what they are ignoring and how is that my responsibility. My response to that is because that's exactly how I would hope that someone would respond to me. It's not that I'm trying to tell the how to think as much as responding in the way that I would expect to be interacted with.
Again that's just you with you with you. Where is the other person in this equation? Imposing your self expectations upon them.
Actually I've been thinking about that exact subject. I can definitely see how it may be perceived as that and I can admittedly say that I come off as a know it all but honestly I'm just trying to help people see the flaw in their thinking process. You may say well how do I know it's a flaw? When I've experience it time and time again that once the person actually thinks about what I said and integrates it into their thinking, progress occurs. The hang up is their emotional attachment to their internal biases and imbalances. This is the only hang up and I admit it's a big one.
Like I've said earlier on, I'm not always like this. There are plenty of times where I'm very compassionate and patient with people at work and in "real life". When I am blunt about something, it ultimately is for their benefit. Its much more difficult to bear the brunt of their criticism and wrath than to give them the ol pick me up everything will be ok speech.
I do wish to find that balance though where I can gently show the honesty but I'm at a loss as to how. The other option is to simply allow them to learn it themselves but then what is the mirror concept for if not for them to see that which they choose not to see?
That's one of the main issues I think. I believe I'm mirroring back that which they aren't seeing.
As for the Vulcan statement, I definitely have feelings and emotions lol. I'm quote the softy actually when it comes to certain aspects of life. I would even go as far as saying that I act a bit feminine in my mannerisms along with enjoying lovey movies and TV shows with my girlfriend where I'll tear up like a baby
But when it comes to interpreting catalyst and approaching a scenario where somehow I can immediately sense the potential for growth, a sort of stoic unemotional state comes over me where I can see the situation without the emotional attachment that some see. I see a potential for progress within another self and the hope that I can assist with it. The hang up obviously is that most of the time, they aren't ready for it.
So the end question would be how to gauge when the appropriate time would be to approach a situation with complete honesty.
I think you've got a great perspective to start with at least.
(07-17-2015, 02:46 PM)Farseer Wrote: [ -> ]It just seems you like blunt honesty because its comfortable for you personally rather than because it's what is needed by other self. Maybe in the end they do need your honesty, but it does seem you're honest more for your own benefit.
You just gave yourself great advice and I agree with what you said in either case.
Thumper from Bambi: "If you can't say something nice, don't say nothing at all"
A query doesn't always require an answer or an opinion, particularly if an honest one may risk causing harm. Who are any of us to pass opinion on another?
Many, many people are dealing with a lack of self-love. Sometimes the most honest response of all is to see the divinity, to see the creator, in the other and to reflect that back. Lifting people up through warmth, acceptance and love is something that is sorely lacking in our society. Perhaps an honest response is simply to radiate warmth, acceptance and love wherever it is needed? Seems to me that is something Carla did extraordinarily well.