Ooo, a bit to catch up on... 🙂
The term heroic was mentioned in the context of having the courage of following your conscience (not following the crowd) - it will make you heroic. What's wrong with that? Likewise becoming a "person of quality" is in regard with respect. Do you find fault with this too?
I see what you're saying, but... if a person is being truly authentic, then why is there any need to be perceived (either by themselves or others) as being heroic or a person of quality. Why are such perceptions needed in order to be authentic? A person can be truly authentic, and whether they or others perceive them as heroic or whatever, shouldn't be part of it. The message telling people that it will make them heroic etc., is feeding the desire within ego, to seek such a perception, but it isn't necessary, and that's the point I was making. I can be authentic, and I don't need to seek any sense of heroism or being a person of quality... either within myself or from others. I am what I am and such perceptions are not necessary. Such 'rewards' (just labelling them as a whole for ease) can only serve to distract from truly being authentic, and that is why I perceive that as a flaw in the video (not that the underlying message of being authentic isn't there)
Is ego a dirty word to you? Being ego centred is (imo). Ego is how we commonly perceive ourselves in the world/our ID if you will. Hence becoming authentic necessarily will address aspects of our ego where it falls short of becoming whole/integrated with our spirituality.
Dirty word... LOL... no. Ego exists... fact. Those who say, let go of ego are mistaken, as it cannot be let go of. However it can be recognised for what it is, and we can cease to become attached to ego. The best description of Ego that I have come across, is from the advaita (non-duality) teachings. In sakskrit, Ego is called Ahankara. Aham (Ahan when used with other words) is the true Self (the authentic self if you like), and Kara is anything in 'creation' which can be anthything phsyical, metaphysical, or otherwise e.g. material object, thoughts, emotions, judgements etc. When the Aham becomes attached to Kara it becomes Ahankara, the ego, and this is basically saying that when our true self becomes attached to some-thing then we create duality, so the ego is an indication of duality, and duality causes conflict, preventing us from simply being the true self. By recognising the ego in this way, we can practice being free of attachments (as taught in buddhism and other philosophies), and thus be our true self and authentic.
You seem to think the video is imposing external values. It is taking the qualities that most of us have (to varying degrees) e.g. respect, honesty, courage and joining up the dots to bring about awareness of practising what we preach.
No, not imposing external values, but connecting truthful teachings with the ego to create an attachment that isn't needed, and one that 'gets in the way' of being truly authentic.
The video is about walking the talk, i.e. for those who strive (i.e. may already want) to become authentic. This is "tapping into" becoming whole. Tapping into ego would be "oh yes of course I believe this" and not carrying it out in our behaviour. Do you see?
Yes, of course there are people who talk the talk rather than walk the talk, that's something we see all the time, and is simply a form of hypocricy. I don't disagree with the message about walking the talk, though I do still see the video as containing the unnecessary messages to 'attract' people through attachment in ego, in order to persuade them to follow the message, whilst at the same time that itself will prevent true authenticity.
I doubt that I would be surprised about how much time you give up to HP, and HP members. Just going by initial impressions, you put a heck of a lot of effort into it, as a matter of fact, I admire the time and effort you put into it. Personally, I don't like to see anyone volunteering their time for no financial reward. But, if someone wants to volunteer, genuinely on their own time, then it's is their choice....:):rolleyes:
What benefit would be got from financial rewards? I could buy more material things?... I don't need them. I also help moderate a technical forum elsewhere, as well as giving my time to other things. If I have a true need for money, then I am able to meet those needs. I don't seek any rewards for helping people to be able to use forums without being disrupted by spammers or fear of other members etc.
I had presumed that you were dipping in and out of the forum whilst at work. It does seem (as I just said) that you are on here, submitting lengthy posts at all times of day.
No, when I'm working, I'm working. I do work flexi hours, so can sometimes be on here at times of day that appear to be work-hours to others.
But, if your employer is in agreement with, in effect funding HP as a business (the forums generate traffic to the site, right?) ..... then that's all fine and dandy, isn't it 🙂
They're not funding HP. The time used is my own to do as I choose (within the rules of the land and business etc. hehe! :D)
I don't judge being defensive as a bad thing. In fact, I see the benefits to it (In fact, I could write an essay about it - but I don't to squander all of my resources on a public forum) :).
I appreciate your friendly comments. But as I say, I'm okay with being defensive, I'm not judging the defensiveness, or the feelings 🙂
Being defensive, in the moment, I can see. Taking up a defensive stance for something in the future that has not yet happened, doesn't seem to make sense. Perhaps you'd like to start a seperate thread on that one for discussion. 😉
Whilst I understand the need to modify posts for spam etc, it would appear that being authentic (e.g. too honest - even if polite) may be problematic within the rules of a forum. That said, this forum is more lenient than another forum I frequent more often.
The rules created by Mike, allow for people to talk freely about almost everything, just so long as respect is shown to other members beliefs and discussion takes place in a friendly manner. Yes, it's understood that sometimes the written word can be misinterpreted from what a person truly intended to say, so leniency is necessary, as well as putting forward other perspectives or trying to clarify what people meant. Occasionally we get offensive people who think they can just be rude and offensive to other people and that the moderators (and admin) don't have a "right" to supress what they are saying... but as Mike owns the website, and is paying for it's upkeep while people are freely able to use it, he has all the "rights" to say what is and isn't acceptable, and the "rights" to instruct the moderators that anyone not meeting his guidelines should be 'removed'. I to have come across other forums, some of which are lacking decent moderation and are full of people being offensive to each other, and ones where they are over moderated, and you can't say boo to a goose without getting booted out. Needles to say, I don't frequent such forums, as they are not conducive to honest discussion.
All Love and Reiki Hugs
Ooo, a bit to catch up on... 🙂
I see what you're saying, but... if a person is being truly authentic, then why is there any need to be perceived (either by themselves or others) as being heroic or a person of quality.
There is no need for either. The way to be authentic is to identify what the universe wants you to do whether that is being a Consultant or a cleaner a brain surgeon or a bin man.
Ooo, a bit to catch up on... 🙂
I see what you're saying, but... if a person is being truly authentic, then why is there any need to be perceived (either by themselves or others) as being heroic or a person of quality. Why are such perceptions needed in order to be authentic? A person can be truly authentic, and whether they or others perceive them as heroic or whatever, shouldn't be part of it. The message telling people that it will make them heroic etc., is feeding the desire within ego, to seek such a perception, but it isn't necessary, and that's the point I was making. I can be authentic, and I don't need to seek any sense of heroism or being a person of quality... either within myself or from others. I am what I am and such perceptions are not necessary. Such 'rewards' (just labelling them as a whole for ease) can only serve to distract from truly being authentic, and that is why I perceive that as a flaw in the video (not that the underlying message of being authentic isn't there)
I think you are getting unnecessarily stuck on the heroic bit.....it was just one of many examples of ways that we can become authentic, i.e. not about needs; just showing the feeling (heroic) that would transpire if we showed the courage of following our conscience.
Dirty word... LOL... no. Ego exists... fact. Those who say, let go of ego are mistaken, as it cannot be let go of. However it can be recognised for what it is, and we can cease to become attached to ego. The best description of Ego that I have come across, is from the advaita (non-duality) teachings. In sakskrit, Ego is called Ahankara. Aham (Ahan when used with other words) is the true Self (the authentic self if you like), and Kara is anything in 'creation' which can be anthything phsyical, metaphysical, or otherwise e.g. material object, thoughts, emotions, judgements etc. When the Aham becomes attached to Kara it becomes Ahankara, the ego, and this is basically saying that when our true self becomes attached to some-thing then we create duality, so the ego is an indication of duality, and duality causes conflict, preventing us from simply being the true self. By recognising the ego in this way, we can practice being free of attachments (as taught in buddhism and other philosophies), and thus be our true self and authentic.
This is good - I largely agree with it. (Surprise!) 🙂
No, not imposing external values, but connecting truthful teachings with the ego to create an attachment that isn't needed, and one that 'gets in the way' of being truly authentic.
Yes, of course there are people who talk the talk rather than walk the talk, that's something we see all the time, and is simply a form of hypocricy. I don't disagree with the message about walking the talk, though I do still see the video as containing the unnecessary messages to 'attract' people through attachment in ego, in order to persuade them to follow the message, whilst at the same time that itself will prevent true authenticity.
All Love and Reiki Hugs
What you see as attracting attachment in ego, I see as integration of mind and spirit so that there is no incongruence. Since you agree with the message of walking the talk, how would you then have made this video differently I wonder?
As you are aware the roles that we choose to do within our life experience, does not define who or what we are, I have been moderating on this forum for over a decade, in which time I and the forum have changed considerably, the forum rules are what Mike created, he asked for volunteers who would be happy to help keep the forums ruining in a friendly and family safe manner, to which I and others agreed to help.
The forum rules are something which we all have to agree to if we wish to be a member of the forum,
Paul, aren't you the one that drew attention to the forum rules in this thread:
I had been participating in this thread (an exchange between myself and Giles was occuring), and then at post #38; speaking as Paul without his moderator hat (btw, Paul with moderator hat on is an alter ego, isn't it), you jumped in to tell me that you "personally perceived" that my: "latest posts to Giles and other members are coming very close to overstepping the mark concerning the forum rules"
As I pointed out to you twice, up to this point: you stated that you are personally perceiving that my post are coming close to overstepping the mark. In doing so, you are personally placing a judgement of "right" and "wrong" behavior on to my (and any other member that you choose to don your moderator hat for) posts. As this thread is about authenticity and "walking the talk", I asked you to clarify why this conflicted so obviously with your repeated statements that you gave up judging others a long time ago.
There's nothing 'wrong' with my asking for clarification around this point is there - none that I perceive.
it is irrelevant if I agree with them or not, they are there for a purpose, much the same as we have speed restrictions on the roads to help and keep them safer for everyone, we might not always agree with the rules and regulations that govern aspects of our activities but if we wish to participate in various activities then they are there.
Paul, of course it isn't irrelevant if you agree with them or not. This is such an obvious abdication of responsibility. If you sign up to implement rules that you haven't chosen to agree with or not - this would make you hired (or voluntary) muscle. It is not my intention to insult you (perhaps you're taking that as a compliment), I'm sure you understand my point.
Would you rather have the forum full of spam, with members swearing at each other and verbally abusing each other all of the time as is what happens on a lot of forums that are not moderated? Believe me this forum with it moderators in place has resembled a battle field and it has had to be taken down and had to be resorted a couple of times in the past.
Believe me, I understand what you're saying. But pointing this out to me here is still side-stepping the points raised about authenticity. On the one hand saying you gave up judging other years ago, and then, on the other hand, telling me that you're perceiving an overstepping of the mark on some of my posts. Where there is "wrong" their has to be "right" - and this belies an underlying conflict. In your words, from post#17:
It then injects a judgement into the equation by saying that we have to do the right thing, practice what we preach and walk the talk, by choosing to perceive one thing as the right thing, effectively makes something else the wrong thing, this sets up a division and division equates to conflict, this is how we set up our inner divisional conflicts between our aspects of consciousness. If we wish to be authentic, then there is no right or wrong judgement, there only is what is.
As for what I personally perceive both on the forums combined with the many reported posts that we receive off the main forums which helps the moderators to perceive how members are perceiving what is posted on the main forums, then no I would not be prepared to discuss that type of information on the main forums. 🙂
There's an awful lot of perceptions going on there isn't there, Paul. And yet you (Paul) are the one who can, and is, choosing the manner in which those perception are received as they enter your personal arena.
I think you are getting unnecessarily stuck on the heroic bit.....it was just one of many examples of ways that we can become authentic, i.e. not about needs; just showing the feeling (heroic) that would transpire if we showed the courage of following our conscience.
No, not stuck with anything. There were several things like that in the video and "heroic" was just one of them, used here for illustrative purposes. I don't intend to transcribe the whole video just to comment on each part of it. 😀
My point is though, and let's try and put it in plain terms... why does it need to 'entice' people with promises of feeling heroic or whatever. It's possible to be authentic without such enticements, as we all know inherently within us what acting with truth is, just so long as we learn to recognise the discursive mind and the tricks it plays to take us out of the present moment.
What you see as attracting attachment in ego, I see as integration of mind and spirit so that there is no incongruence.
So you believe it's good to gain attachment to things? :032:
Since you agree with the message of walking the talk, how would you then have made this video differently I wonder?
Aside from the pictures and music which are very samey (in relation to other videos of a similar ilk), if we're just talking about the messages, I would have left out all the enticements. e.g. simply "treat others with dignity and respect" rather than "treat others with dignity and respect; it will make you a person of quality"
As I mentioned previously, this would be similar to the Reiki princples:
Just for today (i.e. meet the needs of the present)
Be free of anger (i.e. just be free of anger, not because it should make you or others perceive you as being better for it)
Be free of worry (likewise the same)
Have gratitude (this is to all things regardless as everyone and thing is our teacher)
Work diligently (this is about practicing to the best of our ability, practicing what we preach, and working to our utmost ability to stick by our practice of Being; sometimes horribly corrupted in the west to mean "earn your living honestly", when it's nothing to do with earning a living)
Be kind to others (in the buddhist philosophy, all others have been our mother at some incarnation of our past lives, so we should treat all as we would want to be treated)
The actual translations can vary somewhat due to language, but the underlying intent is the same... live by these principles, not because there is a goal to be a better person, but because you simply know that they are the right way of living. There is no need to believe that these make you a better person, or to be told that, because you already know that living this way makes you the person you truly are, without judgement of being 'good' or 'bad'.
And that is where I felt the video fell short.
All Love and Reiki Hugs