On being "non-judgemental"

[antiloop]

Hi Erictwo,

My interpretation of being "non-judgmental" is quite simple. Who am I to judge others for the things they do, for whom they are or what they think and say?

Until such time as I honestly know that I am better than somebody else, that I know more, that I've experienced more - only then do I vouch for judgement, and in doing so, I don't mean to perform it in an accusing manner, but rather to dispel the clouds and fog and offer the truth I've personally experienced with constructive criticism (i.e "Be a coach not a critic") and offer this coaching only after the judged seeks my counsel, as opposed to volunteering it without their request - As Jesus put it "do not cast your pearls of wisdom before the swine". Or as another popular saying goes "When the student is ready, the master shall arrive". (and in my case I am light years from masterhood, but I think you get my meaning)

In regard to discerning good from evil. My take on this is that these are mere creations of the human psyche. The Universe cares not for good nor evil. Neither does the "Creator" who would have created everything (encompassing all ranges of Good and Evil), which would answer the question for those contemplating how can GOD be truly good if so many people die or are harmed without any apparent purpose or "sin" on their behalf. The answer is that before man there was no such concept as good nor evil. This is but a temporal concept, and concepts which do not transcend time are worthy of little contemplation.

But I'll go a little further, take a look at the animal kingdom  for it easily dispels this myth for us. An animal that kills another is no more evil than the killed, for it too had to kill in order to survive. Evil is humanity's attempt at separating the light from the darkness - we do this because we think that without darkness we would not know what light is. And although there is logical truth to this, the ultimate truth is that they are one and the same thing. To understand this, picture an infinite line representing a scale. Evil and Goodness exist on that same line, only at different ends of the same line depending on their severity.

As for being non-judgemental about "bad" aliens and abductions, perhaps what these "non-judgementalists" might be trying to say is something along the lines of "Love thy enemy". And what does this mean really ? Well, I came to some level of understanding of this great quote recently when I saw an interview of the Dalai Llama in which the interviewer asked the Llama "Who has been your greatest spiritual teacher?" to which the Llama replied "Mau" (the asian communist dictator which drove him and his people out of Tibet).

So you ask, how can such a man who condemns spirituality/religion be the Llama's greatest teacher? Perhaps because he truly taught him(although obviously unintentionally) the lesson of humility and that man can survive and be happy without any material possessions (the Llama's temple(s) and all his worldly material paraphernalia). And without this "Evil" person the Llama would never learn his lesson in such depth, and to this, he is most greatful!

Even the Llama does not judge his worst enemy for he understands that Evil and Good exist on the same plane, and that it is only human perception which erroneously attempts to seperate the concepts of Good from Evil.

Now to answer your question "Is Evil non-judgemental?". No, evil is the absence of good, or light. In the darkness evil lays in ignorance for it can not see. Evilness can only perform acts of ill-judgementalism. And now that you know this, a better question is, "Do I want to be evil and incorrectly judge others just because others judge me?". By being judgemental you are only digressing to their level and becoming like them - evil - for you too are now judgemental. And is this where you want to be? Doing evil onto others as others have done evil to you is only a path toward the degeneration of your being. "An eye for an eye only makes everyone blind" -Ghandi

My best wishes to you,
antiloop

PS. Sorry for the philosophy overdose, but I hope some people will get something out of this as I have in my research

Edited by - antiloop on 10 April 2002  08:43:41

[cainam_nazier]

Your point is well seen but consider this phrase.

You must judge for yourself before you can choose your path.

Just because you judge a person on thier actions or words does not mean you are doing a bad thing.  Or you are considering that person to bad or idiotic.  Judging other people is another way that we decide what is good for us.  You see some one do some thing and decide wether or not you will take the same path as them or not.  You are required to be judgmental of people, places, and things.  That is how we decide if we like them or not.  We judge things on our own set of ideals.  But our open mindedness comes in when we decide to give that person our opinion or not.  Are we close minded and go and tell everyone what it is that we think they are doing wrong?  Or are we open, and let that person do as they wish and not say anything?
 It is important for us to judge, so that we can decide, so we can then learn.





"I'll be the judge of that!"


David Rogalski
cainam_nazier@hotmail.com

[antiloop]

Hi cainam_nazier,

You raise some interesting points To me judgement often implies the attempt to categorize something so that it fits in and belongs to either category "A" or category "Z". The problem with this is that such judgement is so often done in a fraction of a second without really doing any deeper research. In some of these cases a better word would be "assumption". To force something which is neither A nor Z but rather is a "G" for example, into the first two categories would be incorrect. Sure G is closer to A than to Z, but still, to say it is an "A" is to make a generalization and to stereotype. Herein lies yet another reason to not be judgmental because it can lead to your falling into the two aforementioned traps.

Regardless of all this, it is human nature to decide upon something based on their judgement and yes such judgement is almost always derived from personal ideals. So you are quite right about how we function, even if it is mostly a flawed process in terms of reaching any really accurate conclusions. Here's a popular quote reflecting this:

"You can't judge a book by its cover".

But I believe the original question was deeper than this. Erictwo was to my understanding refering to the extremes of judgement where severe harm is done yet people appear to remain non-judgemental and questioning why this is so.  I don't believe he was refering as to whether it is evil to judge someone as bad or idiotic based on some minor action they took - such as saying a book contains nothing of value because of its cover.

quote:
But our open mindedness comes in when we decide to give that person our opinion or not. Are we close minded and go and tell everyone what it is that we think they are doing wrong? Or are we open, and let that person do as they wish and not say anything?

I believe open mindedness is separate from the outward expression of personal opinion. Open mindedness to me means to accept other possibilities even when there appears to be direct evidence that all possibilities have already been accounted for - it is this which allows us to see beyond the obvious and to truly expand our horizons. So I'm not sure I fully understand what you are saying here.

quote:
"It is important for us to judge, so that we can decide, so we can then learn."

If to judge is to categorize/stereotype as I've previously mentioned, and we base our decision on such judgement, then what we learn is really of little worth, now isn't it?

I would say it is important for us to arrive at a decision regarding a serious matter only after deep contemplation of the situation. To quickly judge it as black or white is of little value and should only be applied to matters of little importance.

If we observe human nature, quick judgement is only of mediocre use and fortunately we instinctively apply it to minor issues in life (like looking at how somebody is dressed and judging them as well dressed or not, which may decide for us if we want to go out and buy a similar pair of pants or not) - such decision making process is rarely used in serious life-threatening situations to which Erictwo was making reference. However; when we apply quick judgement to serious matters, that is when we potentially get into serious trouble.

Best wishes,
antiloop

Edited by - antiloop on 10 April 2002  20:56:16

[Greg 11.11]

Hi folks,
Interesting posts, thanks for the stimulation of my thought processes!

Disclaimer: All my opinions, ideas, etc., are based upon my own life experiences only, and reflect me only---that is to say, my arguments are not designed in an attempt to convert anyone to my way of thinking...we all have our own paths to walk.

First, in reply to Erictwo's question "Is evil non-judgmental?", I would say no, it's not. Like antiloop alluded to, evil for me is a judgment itself created by those who subscribe (whether overtly  or perhaps more commonly just plain unaware of it) to the dualistic view of life experience being good, evil, or some part in between these two polarities. In other words, I don't believe evil to be a sentient being unto itself, one capable of judging. Humans (some) judge things to be good or evil, black or white, right or wrong, real or illusion, the list goes on & on. Evil itself is technically just an adjective used to describe someone, something, or some action. It is dualistic, meaning that it sits on one end of a sliding scale with the concept of good at the opposite end (polarized by whatever the Judger means by both).

In addressing "open-mindedness" vs. "enlightenment", "human growth experience", etc., I agree that blindly calling a painful experience "enlightenment" or a "human growth experience" is simplistic and naive, particularly when no enlightenment or growth has yet to take place! Yet at the same time, I have personally found it the most beneficial for my spiritual/personal growth when I do not give in to the temptation to immediately call my painful experiences "bad", or to judge those involved as "bad" or "evil" or "wrong".

I have been through some experiences that were extremely difficult to deal with. In retrospect, some of my initial judgments about what was happening to me were incorrect, as were my judgments of those involved. Much reflection/meditation time (and the passage of time itself) spent on these painful experiences produced the wisdom, enlightenment, growth, etc.

Thus I guess my experience has taught me that it's best to avoid judging something or someone prematurely, good or bad, as not all of the experience's information is available right off the bat, so to speak. (Actually my experience has taught me that there is no good or bad, period---and that much human 3D judgment is flawed and simplistic, but that is for another discussion time perhaps)...

I agree with Erictwo & Cainam Nazier that it is necessary to be as judging/discerning as possible in one's life (I think it's just semantics here in these examples---to judge = to discern); we seek truth, and not illusion (I hope!).

Yet I put discernment in with my bag of awareness tools, moreso than it functioning as a gatekeeper would, separating the black sheep (or evil) from the white (or good) as they approach his gate. Awareness, discernment, sensitivity are all things that I have sought to expand since I began my non-physical exploration many moons ago. At the same time, my ego's judge has been reduced in importance. That 3D conscious judge attempts to serve me well in this life, so concerned with my survival is he. But it can get in the way, depriving
me of valuable insight that only comes from always being aware that there just might be more than my one way of looking at something...

I like antiloop's working definition of the concept of "non-judgmental"---indeed---give space "to be" and have space granted to you. There are so many (billions? zillions?) different lives being led, and none of them are the same. How pompous of someone to assume a judging position over the life of another! We simply do not have the omniscience to make those assumptions. And deciding for myself that another's actions or beliefs are not for me or have not proven themselves true for me does not mean I have judged the person necessarily, either. Judging seems to come when the labels are stuck on (good/bad, stupid/guru, wise/foolish, etc.), and they seem to get stuck on without all of the truth being known at that time...the jury's still out, as it were.

Warm regards,
Greg

[lateralus897]

I just wanna make a short post saying that I agree with antiloop that good and evil are creations of the human mind. Similar to this is what we see as "right and wrong." Realizing that there is no right or wrong, or good or evil is a necessary step in our evolution.

[Rob]

Depends on how you define "judging" someone. I always try and (fairly) work people around me out, and to do this it is often useful to fit certain personality types/flaws/irregularities/etc into categories - eg I see person a. acting in a similar way to person b., I know why person b. acts like that so perhaps there is something similar going on with a. Extend this and you have a category, useful for analysis but not to be taken too far eg classic Jungian terms like introvert, extrovert, insecurity, etc.
But I always keep in mind that my views can never be entirely correct, because the only person you have to opportunity to fully understand is yourself, with everyone else its usually just guesswork.
I call all this in a way judging with a continuous re-examination of the evidence and an ongoing Jury. Although, I suppose to judge implies that you can come to a definate final conclusion, so hmmm maybe not a good term to use.
Anyway when you start blindly making assumptions about whole swathes of people because of the way they act, look, hold themselves etc that is where the real bad judging lies. Eg I was in a landy the other day and my parents were having a chat to a farmer, who was driving. He said something like "I have no time for people who smoke, no time at all". And I thought to myself: "I have little time for people who are that closed minded and judgemental". Lots of my friends smoke, I do occasionally (tho my reaction was not a defensive reflex), and to say something that broad is completely ludicrous. Another form of judging is racism. But was I being judgemental to him by thinking that? Hey the Jury is still out

[Kristen]

Hi All -

After reading the string of posts here I find myself asking an existential question: what it means to be human and present in the world.  There is a common thread to humanity - its a fuzzy logic thread maybe but basically there is a rough mean around which experience and understanding fall... I mean we all have emotions, we all think - its likely that a person will get to experience violence in their life, birth, death, love, hate and so on; we generally exist within human families and communities that have structure of some sort; most of us know what a mother and a father are - and we make meaning from our experience - while we can only be subjective because we're not Borg, (although I so relate to 7 of 9)... there is a common ground somewhere in human conception of what human experience is and what that experience means.  (I'd hate to design and conduct the study that measures such a thing).

But, how about a mini, non-statistically relevant study?  So - in reference to the idea that good and evil and other relevant dualistic continuums arise out of human psychies and not the cosmic psyche, I would ask what others might think about what defines us as human, and if that definition of humanity includes a human morality.

And while I'm here there's a few more questions I have - for those familiar with the Kabbalah - what do you think of the idea that the Cosmic Tree is reflected in the human tree?  And; if there is metaphysics, then is there metaethics?

Kristen

Disclaimer - statements made by the author, in this post or any other, may appear to be judgmental at any time.  The author will not except responsibility for the comfort of any reader's ego except her own.  Human discretion is advised.

Here's a fun poll to take - after reading the posts in this topic, which of the following statements best reflects your current attitude?

1.  Judge not lest ye be judged
2.  Judging a judger is judging
3.  Here a judge, there a judge, everywhere a judge-judge!
4.  Opinions are like *@%holes - everyone has one.
5.  I am so inspired not to make judgements without prolonged deep meditation that I have joined an isolated mountaintop buddhist monestary.

[cainam_nazier]

Antiloop

quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

But our open mindedness comes in when we decide to give that person our opinion or not. Are we close minded and go and tell everyone what it is that we think they are doing wrong? Or are we open, and let that person do as they wish and not say anything?

----------------------------------------------------------------------quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But our open mindedness comes in when we decide to give that person our opinion or not. Are we close minded and go and tell everyone what it is that we think they are doing wrong? Or are we open, and let that person do as they wish and not say anything?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps I should expand my thought here.  It is not that we just sit and let that person do what ever it is that they were to do and not say anything but to also accept that "for them" it my be correct.  This being even if we can not see thier reason or even thier path.  Even if it does not exist for us it may for them.

Quote:

"But I believe the original question was deeper than this. Erictwo was to my understanding refering to the extremes of judgement where severe harm is done yet people appear to remain non-judgemental and questioning why this is so. I don't believe he was refering as to whether it is evil to judge someone as bad or idiotic based on some minor action they took - such as saying a book contains nothing of value because of its cover."

For me there is no difference in the process.  Wether it be a major event or a minor one you must still choose and decide.  I did not mean that we steriotype people or situations, that stems having one experience and being blinded by it and not allowing yourself to take each one after as completely new experience.  That is not judging, that is an irrational response bases of life experiences.  

But I argue that no matter the sercomstances you still however must judge and be judgmental.  This means that you do not make an irrational choice, but rather you explore the event and try to acertain why and how befor making any conclusions as to what the reason is and how it should effect you.  There are a great many things that just happen to a person.  There is no why.  But you must look at it and decide how it is going to effect you.  You must judge and decide if there is anything for you to learn from it, or was it just one of those things that just happens, like a car accident.  There is no lesson to learn in the event itself but perhaps there is a lesson that fallows.  But only by looking at it can you decide that.

Greg 11.11

Quote:

I agree with Erictwo & Cainam Nazier that it is necessary to be as judging/discerning as possible in one's life (I think it's just semantics here in these examples---to judge = to discern); we seek truth, and not illusion (I hope!). ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


Thank you.  You hit it right on the head.




Antiloop again.
Yes you are correct. "Don't judge a book by its cover."  Pick it read it.  Get the facts.  Then decide/choose/judge/discern wether it was worth you time or not.  But just because you see another book by the same author or perhaps by the same title or on the same subject does not mean that you will not learn from or like the book.





David Rogalski
cainam_nazier@hotmail.com

[goku22]

I think that alot of what antiloop says is stuff that we can work towards, because it would create more things that we enjoy in the world i.e. understanding, peace, harmony, etc... I think cainam_nazier describes it more the way it is, and will more than likely be for the majority of humanity for the rest of our existence. Either way, I'm enjoying this thread, because I like ideas that my mind can't fully put into place. It feels good to confound the robot now and then.  Ben

[Greg 11.11]

Kristen,
A thought-provoking post, thank you! First I tackle the easy part
Instead of choosing one of your 5 descriptors, I figured I'd go the all-encompassing route and answer all 5, to therefore provide a better reflection of my current attitude. To wit:

1. Judge not lest ye be judged
True ultimately, if not sooner, karmic influence might be backed up up a bit from time to time, slowing the reciprocation, but it'll come.

2. Judging a judger is judging
Sho' nuff true as well.

3. Here a judge, there a judge, everywhere a judge-judge!
4. Opinions are like *@%holes - everyone has one.

True. Seems a human pre-requisite (more on that in a bit). However, I don't know if judge-judges are as prevalent as mere judges. Maybe there's a ratio of 1 judge-judge for every 10 judges, which does, I suppose, validate "everywhere a judge-judge".  
 
5. I am so inspired not to make judgements without prolonged deep meditation that I have joined an isolated mountaintop buddhist monestary.
Not so inspired as to discard all my birthright sensual pleasures! No, isolated mountaintop won't work. Instead, I'll pack my porta-Buddha with me in me noggin and do my pre-judge meditation on the fly...
================
You asked:
"And; if there is metaphysics, then is there metaethics?"

Methinks certainly there is. If "ethics" are a theory or system of moral principles or values, and "moral" implies conformity to established sanctioned codes or accepted notions of right and wrong, then I think that it stands to reckon that, as with any human-contrived system or conformity code, that something could conceivably exist above & beyond it (i.e., meta).

Our (i.e., human) ethics, then, would appear to be confined to the standards and behaviors here in 3D Earth, and given our significant explorations and verifications of things non-3D (and things seemingly more powerful than 3D), then things meta-ethic (above our ethics, anyway) seem very plausible to conceive of.
================
You posed "what defines us as human, and if that definition of humanity includes a human morality"...

Please help me build this list, this is off-the-cuff brainstorming going on with me here...but yes, I do believe, for reasons related to my discussion above on meta-ethics, that our definition of human will necessarily include the CONCEPT of human morality, if not a concise list applicable and common to every culture on our fair planet...

I think we are commonly human in our input and output "portals" or mechanisms---
our senses;
our brains;
the capacity of our minds to be aware of our own existence and to ponder abstract things;
the capacity of our spiritual hearts to experience emotions;
our imaginative abilities to create something from nothing;
our souls (that individual aspect that renders us unique from one another---we all possess this, no?)....

...what else?

So regarding a human morality--- even with divergent cultures with divergent codes of ethics, morals, behaviors, etc., there seems to be a common current of the desire to create social structure in order to maintain/strengthen/preserve the societal norms (the status quo)...

Better stop here. Quoting Austin Powers "....and I'm spent!" Comments?

Warmly,
Greg

[Kristen]

Hi Greg..

Comments - oh yes... (love your post)

But for now I just want to quickly add a free-associated set of ideas to the list of what makes us human (dinner is stridently demanding to be made)...

Conscience (sometimes aka superego)... related to conscience - empathy and guilt... abstract reasoning... for want of a better term: martyrdom (consciously/deliberately sacrificing one's own health/safety/life for another or even for an idea)...  sprituality... religion...

All right - that's all I've got for now... must tear myself away and go be a mother and a wife...

Kristen

[distant bell]

I can only say like Depech Mode-
"If you try walking in my shoes..."

[bitsmart]

I'll probably be echoing what's already been said here, just adding a piece of my current worldview.

Everything exists exactly as it should be. Nothing is wrong with the universe, otherwise it wouldn't exist. The principle of polarity is what holds it together, and this polarity manifests in all sorts of ways...light and dark, hot and cold, north and south, pain and pleasure, inside and out. Without one, you simply cannot have the other.

The Creator's greatest gift to sentient beings was the gift of free choice; without this gift, we'd be sentient puppets. This gift, like many other things can be used for positive or negative purposes, the intent falling towards one end of the spectrum or the other. When something as complex and unpredictable as emotion gets thrown into the picture, then sentient beings grasp and reach for explanations.

The concept of good and evil, right and wrong are models we use for explaining something we can't make sense of, but they truly are creations of our mind. I'll explain it this way:

The sky doesn't know that it's the color we call blue; the sky doesn't know it's a sky! It just exists. We, humans, call it a sky, say that its color is blue. It's all in our heads...

There are as many different perspectives on reality as there are sentient beings in this universe. Thus, disagreements happen frequently. And this is the challenge, these disagreements. It is so challenging to live in physical reality because you're constantly in conflict with 90 kajillion other perspectives of reality; it's a wonder you're even able to communicate with other sentient beings through primitive laryngeal grunts (language).

By resisting all these conflicts, you add fuel to the fire and make life extremely difficult for yourself and others. Absolutely and truly going with the flow brings a new found freedom. When it's you against the universe, you'll always lose. When you become a willing participant, a player in this cosmic drama, you'll always win. It all comes down to how you make your decisions: are they based on love, or fear?

The world is too crazy for judgement; it's simple lunacy to think you can make sense of it all, put it all into neat little categories like good and evil, right and wrong. Speaking from personal experience, completely letting go and going with the flow, not judging, labelling, categorizing, rationalizing, or justifying ANYTHING makes me feel so care free.

I know there's wars, violence, hate, disease, starvation, a plethora of other problems, but I look at it this way: the perfect functioning of this universe is based on a great natural balance. There is NO WAY to stop this self-balancing process, because it is absolutely necessary. Each sentient being has their own mission, their own karma, their own perspective. We all do what we have to do to make up this universal dance of life. And make no mistake, this cosmic drama is CHOCK FULL of illusions. Illusions like money, good and evil, dominance and submission, smart and stupid. It's all relative, based on context. It's a game, and it's completely up to YOU how you will play the game.

bitsmart -
information illumination -
bitsmart@bitsmart.org -

[Greg 11.11]

bitsmart---thanks for the post! Not just because I heartily concur, but I do appreciate it when someone else's experiences have led them to an observation "post" (no pun intended) not far from my own...it encourages me. Granted, I know we don't need empathetic validation for survival, but it feels good nonetheless...

Two things you wrote I'd like to explore. In the first, I'd like to take our ongoing expose` on the duality illusion and juxtapose it with the following question of mine. I'm thinking that you have already answered it, but wanted to confirm:

"Why is it that in my entire life's accumulation of non-physical/non-3D experiences I have not experienced a single demon, not a single malevolent entity of any kind, yet this quite starkly contrasts with the experiences of many members of this forum site..."

Secondly, I have had powerful experiences that completely confirm for me the idea you touched on regarding the choosing of love over fear. I won't go into the details in this post, but I felt it was important to share that I have been guided (quite profoundly at times) to choose love over fear, and to identify the dynamics of every encounter or idea, so as to better understand what would constitute love and fear in each situation---and thus choose accordingly, wisely, hopefully...

Love & light to all,
Greg

[Shirley]

Hi Everyone,

Just wanted to say how much I have enjoyed this thread. The posts have been so well-written and interesting. Thanks

The bottom line has to be that we are all 'right' (Judgemental?)

If good and evil sit on either end of a spectrum - and if (as I believe) what is all-encompassing can have no opposites, then we are all sitting nicely somewhere along this - and since we are all connected and yet separate, then all that has been said is relevant. This is of course overly simplified and two-dimensional. Forgive .

This may sound like a semantic argument now, but I do think that because we have choices in life all the time, the more conscious (aware) we become, then the  more discerning or discriminating we become (with ourselves). What others do (unless they are very young and then we need to be careful with issues of control) is not our responsability.  But this is also difficult when we look at 11th September for instance. However our primary responsability has to be to ourselves and 'let there be peace on earth and let it begin with me'. I tell you,  I need a few lifetimes to get to embody this one...

I think we humans like to create meaning in our lives - it's part of being conscious of being conscious... Also, we want to protect those that we love - we are discerning as an animal would be in a situation of danger. It is one thing 'living and letting  live' and another to not be discerning..We require to be both in a variety of context-related situations - able to respond in  the present (becoming reponsible).  We have the choice  and we chose, for instance,  to protect those we love. As we grow in consciousness we may want to do this to a wider and wider circle of people - which may be why spiritual leaders and those in the field of metaphysics often lead such difficult lives - because the balance of helping others and helping themselves becomes blurred.  (again it is much more complex but one could never answer any question if it wasn't simplified).  When I heard the Dalai Lama speak a few years ago I can hear his words 'It doesn't matter' to complex questions. And in his presence it all made such sense... to be here and now (that glib cliche!) is really all there is.  In the present we don't need to separate and differentiate. It is not that no opposites exist - but we can learn  to understand them as being inherently connected. In doing the 'wrong' thing we learn the lessons we needed -  and destruction and deconstruction  is required  before new things can evolve - it is the cycle of life - it  is  the paradox of being human in all its wonderful complex colours.. We are all connected and yet separate.  

I think, I am beginning to travel up my own rear end so I'd better stop...

Someone quoted this some time ago on the forum (I am sorry I have forgotten your name!) but it is one of my favourite quotes by Jelaluddin Rumi:

'Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing there's a field. I'll meet you there'

[Kristen]

Hi All -

Shirley - I really like what you've had to say and how you've said it - for this topic and others you've posted on.  That quote - I think Terri first posted it.  (you've been hanging around for a while haven't you)?  But - sometimes the field comes to us whether we want it or not.  N'est-ce pas?

To Bitsmart - you wrote:  

By resisting all these conflicts, you add fuel to the fire and make life extremely difficult for yourself and others. Absolutely and truly going with the flow brings a new found freedom. When it's you against the universe, you'll always lose. When you become a willing participant, a player in this cosmic drama, you'll always win. It all comes down to how you make your decisions: are they based on love, or fear?

So Bitsmart - what do you mean by "resist" and "freedom?"  Resistance under what circumstances/contexts, and freedom from what - freedom from responsibility or tyranny?

Do you suppose Gandhi's passive resistance added fuel to fires?  Or Martin Luthor King's?  Do you think that Lech Walesa's or Rosa Park's resistance added fuel to fires?  Or do you suppose they were going with their flows?  Do you suppose any of these people made decisions out of fear?  Such as the fear of what would a world look like and be like to live in if it was not   characterized by dignity?  Do you suppose they didn't feel fear and/or acted in the face of difficulty?   And even if our actions in the world do not attract the attention of historians - are we lessor actors in the drama?

I like Winged Wolf's signiture quote for this particular set  of value-laden questions.


KB

[Shirley]

Hi Kristen,

Thanks for all your post too - past and present -  thanks for that connection

Yes of course it was Terri! I remembered she was blonde, Australian and Aquarian - it was just her name that eluded me ..
So you've been around some time too - nice place to hang out isn't it?

Yes, what you said about the field (beyond the ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing) coming to us. ABOLUTELY!! It's in that 'metaplace' we can find and learn about the All (and Isness)..

Love,
Shirley

[bitsmart]

Kristen -

I guess by resistance I mean trying to control that which is out of your control. Conflicts which arise from different perspectives of reality are a tricky thing. Most people will defend their belief systems tooth and claw. Gandi, Dr. King, Rosa Parks, and many others did what they felt was right, and the effects are still felt today. They may or may not have felt fear, but their actions reflected their belief systems regardless of the fear they may have felt. However, I don't believe this was the same thing as them passing judgement.

Here we fall into a strange paradox. I often find myself wondering, if everything that happens should, then how do my decisions play a part in that? In other words, every decision that's supposed to be made is, according to the divine plan, right? Err, confusing, isn't it? So I always base my decisions on love, not fear. I do say you should stand up for what you believe in, and that injustices violating the common-sense laws of humane living should not be tolerated. If I saw someone hurting someone else, my beliefs would prompt me to help them, without judging.

Understand where I'm coming from? It's a dodgy subject, as semantic and moral discussions usually are. I have great respect for everyone here and their beliefs, and I'm pleased that discussions liks this can occur in this civilized way.

-Andy

bitsmart -
information illumination -
bitsmart@bitsmart.org -

[Nita]

Hello Everyone
  I do think that people are too judgemental. No matter what you believe there is always the tempation to judge others. To judge others we have to feel that we are superior to them in some way. Everyone has different experiences so we develop different value judgements. You can also add to that the things that people refuse to believe because they don't want to accept those things about themselves.
  I always base my decisions on a few things. One will it harm or hurt me. Two will I care about whatever happened in a year? People who are judgemental always react with anger. Anger will draw anger and then you have a really nasty cycle going on in your life.
  Alot of this is happening in the world today. People being angry at others. People asking for justice and determined they are right. It isn't helping anyone but yet people consistently try to harm others because they have learned something where they are capable of doing so.
  I always remember what the Dalai Lama said in his one book on Anger. It was be grateful for every impossible person you meet because it gives you a chance to practice what you believe. A lot of things happen in a persons life for that very reason to develop the inner person. I think judgemental attitudes and angry attitudes hold you back from this purpose.
  Nita

[Adam]

My 2 cents...

I believe that judgement is a faculty (?) that we are leaving behind in this stage of our evolution. I think that it was necessary to, as erictwo said, discern good from evil...or really, just to decide what you think is the best course of action.

Judgement is not the truth though....it is just an interpretation.

Don't feel though that you must give up judgement, or that you *need* to. As you progress down the path, you might just decide you want to stop judging yourself, and accept yourself for who you are. But don't worry about being judgemental. Just accept it, don't judge it  - I was judging my judgements (as being wrong, and something I shouldn't do) up until about two weeks ago, and just decided I wanted to accept my judgements, and that I've made them.

Adam

[Qui-Gon Jinn]

The highest form of human intelligence is to observe yourself, without any form of judging...     very few people in the world today holds that intelligence/wisdom though..   when people are judging others, they are really judging themselves.

 I feel they project their own "faults" on others and nail ´em for it - much more convinient than having to judge themselves...   even though judgng themselves seems very popular to..

    A lot of folks say when asked the Q, that; - "yea, sure, I am non-judgemental"...   that´s a lot of bs..   either they are just making it up knowing it´s not the case or they are just plain and simple blind....

 I do not know one person who is non-judgemental to be honest, although I am sure there are a few out there...  what a life..  no judgements, and unconditional love for all things.....   is that the ultimate freedom??  I think yes..

   Ps.  a non-relating Q - is there a drought going on in the states currently?´

      Peace //Richard



- Your focus determines your reality -

[cainam_nazier]

As is the USA.

There is always a drought some place over hear.  It seems this year Arizona, being a desert, is living up to it.  And I know that we lost a whole bunch of lettuce to a drought and recently we were loosing some other crop because of actually too much rain.  But I think over all we are on the low end of the yearly average.


David Rogalski
cainam_nazier@hotmail.com
I am he who walks in the light but is masked by the shadows.

[Qui-Gon Jinn]

David, okay, I was wondering from an overall perspective though...  I don´t know if you are aware of chemtrails in the skies?  I ´learned´ yesterday that the stuff some "group" lets out in the skies has the effect that moisture doesn´t hit the ground quite so much as it did before the spraying, and the spraying seems to be most frequent in the states so,
just wondering...             .. something really fishy is going on!!´

- Your focus determines your reality -

[cainam_nazier]

Yeah I have been looking up different material on chemtrails as well.  Art Bell Rules.  But I have not as of yet seen any hard facts about it.  There has been no definate pattern to the phenominon.  Ie.  Trail=rain, or wind or what ever.  Yes some places have been experiencesing some abnormal weather patterns to include us in AZ but it has mostly been linked to the El Nino situation which is a "provable" situation.   Then of course comes in the big question of how can you really prove anything when dealing with a choas science like meterology?  You can only observe and make logical guesses.
       Then again you also need to look at the old "salting the clouds" thoery, which is doable but is considerably difficult.  And just a note:  It was called Salting the Clouds but I do not know if they actually were using salt but the idea was that you could force rain given the correct amount of addative was placed within a cloud.  Ofcourse there are several other theories on who and or what is actually going on with the chemtrails.

1.   The US and possibly other national governments to include the former USSR had at on epoint looked to control the weather and spent large amounts of money on the subject.   The US government even published a report entitled "Controlling the Weather by 2025"  Which lists all the advantages and possible problems with engaging on such a path.  War would be considerably easier because the poper weather situation could make one sides troops up to ten times stronger.  But also can the question of wether or not by creating say rain in one location you would in essence be taking rain away from it's normal location and cause a drought there.   Then of course my thinking on this being that if it was the US behinde it would we not have perfect weather and plentiful crops because of it?  The previously stated crop problems would simply not happen.
2.   Then of course there is always the "Black Hand" of the US government that is doing various things to maintain a certain amount of tension to keep there projects going.  But if so we will never hear of it.
3.  Being that its aliens looking to terraform the Earth to a more suitable enviroment for them.  But then why would there be more over the US than any where else?  Granted we have a large military and heavy poulation count but I do not think those reasons for that kind of targeting.


  I have several other problems with the whole chemtrail thing.  No one has seen one actually being formed.  Most stories and pictures come from after the fact.  I would have to see one actually being made to believe it was not just a wind pattern thing.  I have sat and watched many con-trails turn into all kinds of funny shapes after with no adverse affects on the enviroment.


I will get off my soap box now.


David Rogalski
cainam_nazier@hotmail.com
I am he who walks in the light but is masked by the shadows.

[Qui-Gon Jinn]

Haven´t listened to Art since he, well premiere, started to charge $ for it... (through the internet).  You haven´t listened to Jeff Rense then?  He has a very informative guest on pretty frequently, ´expert´ on chem/con- trails...  perhaps he is on Art as well, his name is.....  yay!  sorry, my cat just ate the mosquito (sp?) that´s been torturing me..  his name is I think his first name is Clifford, his second is definately Carnicom (I think)....  you can see alot of pics of chemtrails on rense.com, somewhere on the page...

"I have several other problems with the whole chemtrail thing. No one has seen one actually being formed. Most stories and pictures come from after the fact."

  As far as I know, thousands of people have seen them being formed, ´sprayed´ from aircrafts...

  Anyway, as I said something really fishy is going, that´s a fact, and since the public won´t be told what is going on I feel it´s something we the people won´t benefit from....   it being aliens out to terraform earth, naah...  don´t reason a sec with me at least.....  

 Well, I guess we´ll know some day...

 Be well //Richard


- Your focus determines your reality -