Lucy wrote on Apr 24th, 2011 at 7:26am:I guess no one means it to be offensive, but I find it ..wierd, at a minimum, that anyone offers the idea that guidance has told them this or that about something, as though this was something that should be applied to my life. We can make logical arguments here and discuss facts, but I'm not sure what I am supposed to do with someone else's guidance. That guidance is for that person. It deosn't make sense to use that guidance as a logical argument.
I can understand that in a certain context, but what happens when we enlarge the perspective a bit? For example, it seems that a number of us here were at some point inspired by Bruce Moen's and/or Bob Monroe's work.
Much of their work and their tellings, comes from what they were told by their guidance. If these folks weren't receiving this seemingly "exotic" nonphysical guidance, and not telling us some of their experiences, perceptions, etc. as well as how to do it likewise, i doubt their work would be as interesting or attractive to us.
To some extent, everytime we open our mouths to talk to or communicate with others, there is some kind of "front-loading" going on, though yes we can lessen it by being more vague, general, etc.
I see me sharing what guidance has shared with me, as no different in some ways socially than talking about any of my other opinions, beliefs, experiences, and perceptions especially when i have not set myself up in the position of an authority of some sort (meaning I have not made definite, concrete steps towards "teaching" in any official or structured capacity. If i did move into that capacity, i would perhaps change my approach some).
The only difference for me is that it's coming from a level more expanded than just my conscious awareness and intellect. If i more personally respected a person and they told me something that guidance told them, if it was sufficiently interesting or pertinent to me, i would listen, not necessarily automatically believe but then later check up on myself. (One of the reasons why i support Bruce Moen's work, is that i was pleasantly surprised to find that some of his info corroborated with previous intuitions i had had about some issues important to me).
This is not dissimilar from people sharing info with me that comes more from the intellect or from physical world data; the only difference is is that the "checking up" has a different, nonphysically oriented process. It's no less real or pertinent than info involving the intellect or physical world data. Maybe that is one of your beliefs that is blocking more clear receiving of such info (i mention this only because i've seen you mention this issue a few times on this board)?
Quote:And then we have the potential for the situation in which my Guidance tells me something that does not agree with what your Guidance tells you. Who's right? Isn't this the source of conflict among religions anyway? Wow we could have some really good board a0rguments!
Sure, that is a potential i suppose, but there are ways to talk about ones perceptions and experiences without getting personal or emotional about it. I find it's the way you interact which matters more than whatever specific info you are sharing or relating.
If a person starts to personally insult others, yell at, call names, swears at, and in other ways puts down or belittles another board member i.e. being personal with it, then YES this is not a constructive path to walk on. But if a person shares their perceptions etc. in a more impersonal way and keeps it about the subject at hand, then of course their will always be some disagreeing or what not, BUT i find a definite difference between the two.
It's alright to share experiences, beliefs, etc. which contradicts anothers, and again it's how you do it and interact with the people who have different beliefs, experiences, and perceptions.
Also, it is my experience that if two different people are truly hooking up to expanded guidance levels or whatever you want to call it, then chances are unless they are misinterpreting the info they receive then there will be more similarities than differences between such info.
It is not a mistake to me that i have found so many similarities between
different sources that i particularly resonate too, for example when i compare a lot of the general info between the Cayce work, Monroe's latter work, Moen's work, McKnights work, etc, i see a lot more similarities in the general info than i see differences.
And often the "differences" are rather more lack of info in a particular area rather than contradicting info. For example, in Cayce's, McKnights, and Campbell's work we see some emphasis on diet and health lifestyles potentially affecting nonphysical experience and perception.
In Bob Monroe's and Bruce Moen's work, there is a lack of info about such issues.
But of course, since we are individuals and very few of us are "He/She" types, then we will interpret and perceive some things a bit differently than others when it comes to more specific and narrow kinds of information.
It is a total waste of time debating about these kinds of discrepancies. The kinds of discrepancies or rather contradictions i'm more concerned about and talk about are the big red flags in relation to sources that have a limiting effect as a tendency.
Quote:Maybe it is the way it is expressed, but it feels like some of these statements are addressed in a paternalistic voice. I'm not saying that is the intent, but that is the experience. It creates a situation where some folks don't want to post their experiences or ideas because of potential criticism. And sometimes being told what soneone else's guidance thinks in a particular situation 0comes across as criticism. Not sure why.
Well, i am connected to a male body and i'm sure sometimes i sound a bit paternalistic here though that's not my intent. I mentioned it before, when one speaks confidently about a particular issue then sometimes others perceive that as paternalistic or arrogance. Sometimes there may be some of that in the person speaking, and sometimes it's more the insecurities in the receiving end, and sometimes it's a mix of both. I have a hard time, usually, seeing in blacks and whites though.
When it comes to such stuff like that, i find it's more worthwhile to worry about what self is doing and not so much the other person. That is why for example, i just shrugged off the somewhat recent personal insults, underhanded jabs, etc. that were handed to me when i disagreed impersonally with anothers views on another thread.
Focusing a lot on what others are doing to you, can drive a person crazy after awhile because usually there is very little one can do about what others do or say.
Back to the issue at hand, there has been very little personal criticisms pointed at individuals here with Recoverer and i addressing what we perceived as lacks within some outer sources. Speaking critically about a belief or source you are interested in, is not the same as speaking critically about you individually. We're not coming from a "personal" and emotional space here.
Time and time again, we kept it about the issue and topics at hand despite that personal insults, put downs, huge generalizations etc. were being handed back to us as "debate" or disagreement of the issues and points we've brought up.
I found it interesting that a couple of other posters felt they had to keep it about us so much rather than sticking impersonally to the issues and points we brought up.
When it came to the actual experience of others, again their was not personal criticism involved. I will give an example. A poster named Elanor shared a Sai Baba experience here. I responded to her post but i did not personally criticize her or say her experience was not real or authentic. I said i was not definitively sure what her experience meant, but i offered a couple of different explanations for it from the more straightforward, literal interpretation.
This is similar, in my experience, to often what a mature and real nonphysical "Guide" type will do when we request info or ask questions. We generally aren't forcefully told anything, but offered suggestions in an impersonal manner. (though i've have had some more critical and/or firm info handed to me on occasion).
I strive to emulate guidance and those more constructive ways of transforming beliefs, perceptions, etc, but in being human, male (
), not fully attuned to PUL, not perfectly balanced, etc. i miss the mark more than i like.
Despite my personal preference, i feel it's important for me to interact and be more positively charged in this process, rather than primarily retreating and/or being silent. The latter two are actually easier for me to do coming from some of the other lives and childhood experiences i've had. Growing up, i very much disliked confrontation and disagreement. I was a born "people pleaser" and often catered to what i thought others wanted to hear or what caused least friction. I've had to move out of that both for personal growth and for other reasons.
Home
Pages: 
My Feelings on the Condemnation of AL Sources (Read 47942 times)
