09-13-2020, 06:25 AM
I'd like to add that I've actually seen examples of how less focused and tuned input from newcomers can actually be helpful at times. But that's when things are very quiet and a quick and sloppy short note from anyone is perfectly adequate for moving things along, prompting more thoughtful discussion in response, instead of a dead silence remaining.
But I've been bothered when I've seen people not care about what is said in the material or in response to them, ignoring the plain meaning of phrases, and going on to repeat plainly wrong or totally irrelevant stuff over and over again. That's as disruptive as trolling even if the "perpetrator" doesn't intend it to be.
Most of the time, when things simply get noisy (loss of clear signal, yet loud), it's somewhere in-between.
Some years ago, I had a super-pristinely crystalline organization of metaphysical ideas going on in my mind. It's almost all remained private, so far. It turned out to be by and for the purposes of my personal initiation, and not helpful at all to try to tell to others. And it only marked the end of a stage in my journey, turned out to be incomplete and misleading, and I was given the challenge of totally breaking down and rebuilding my understanding.
Sometimes, I've been comparing the pattern of that "inner knowing" and other unusual experiences with what other people visibly put on display. But it's generally disappointing. Because my own process actually held me back from sharing stuff I was sure about, but which later turned out to be wrong, instead of sharing it all along with a false humility.
I had the over-intellectualized rudiments of a later understanding that it was all premature, like a placeholder, more like art filling the canvas of the inner world than anything else. That I had from the start, but then I was the self-questioning type who took in all I read about spiritual errors from the start, too.
I think of that old "crystalline inner knowing" as a bunch of idiosyncratic study material, quite rich and varied, which I can keep working with while breaking the old mold and growing in a way I couldn't have imagined before, but which is at the same time far less dramatic than the stuff I used to imagine.
But I've been bothered when I've seen people not care about what is said in the material or in response to them, ignoring the plain meaning of phrases, and going on to repeat plainly wrong or totally irrelevant stuff over and over again. That's as disruptive as trolling even if the "perpetrator" doesn't intend it to be.
Most of the time, when things simply get noisy (loss of clear signal, yet loud), it's somewhere in-between.
(08-22-2020, 08:13 PM)peregrine Wrote: Very often I see people on these forums who speak with such supreme authority about what the LOO means or what this or that means. I just assumed they were brilliantly clairvoyant, but I don't see them coming forward now to say so. How odd. If they don't have miracle-born crystalline inner knowing, I wonder why they type out verbiage as if they do?
Or, alternatively, perhaps I'm just being cynical? Sometimes it's hard to say.
Some years ago, I had a super-pristinely crystalline organization of metaphysical ideas going on in my mind. It's almost all remained private, so far. It turned out to be by and for the purposes of my personal initiation, and not helpful at all to try to tell to others. And it only marked the end of a stage in my journey, turned out to be incomplete and misleading, and I was given the challenge of totally breaking down and rebuilding my understanding.
Sometimes, I've been comparing the pattern of that "inner knowing" and other unusual experiences with what other people visibly put on display. But it's generally disappointing. Because my own process actually held me back from sharing stuff I was sure about, but which later turned out to be wrong, instead of sharing it all along with a false humility.
I had the over-intellectualized rudiments of a later understanding that it was all premature, like a placeholder, more like art filling the canvas of the inner world than anything else. That I had from the start, but then I was the self-questioning type who took in all I read about spiritual errors from the start, too.
I think of that old "crystalline inner knowing" as a bunch of idiosyncratic study material, quite rich and varied, which I can keep working with while breaking the old mold and growing in a way I couldn't have imagined before, but which is at the same time far less dramatic than the stuff I used to imagine.