Regarding right and wrong

Ask questions related to Desteni Articles, Videos and Recordings. Share the information you have heard / read in your thread and then accordingly ask specific questions pertaining to it. This will allow others who may have similar questions now or in the future to understand the context shared in related material better.
User avatar
alex.c
Posts: 23
Joined: 30 Sep 2014, 19:13

Regarding right and wrong

Postby alex.c » 31 Oct 2014, 00:22

I get it, right/wrong, light/dark, good/evil, exist as polarity, which is a system of the mind. We are One, connected by the Unified Conciousness Field, I am the reality I previously thought I existed in.

And.. I am here, in this physical experience, to birth myself as life from the physical. I am here to take a stand for who I really am. I'm not my mind, I'm not my memories, I am a being in a state of being and becoming.

Now, please help me to understand so that others may too, what exactly are we allowing to manifest that should not be made manifest? Is this up to me? An example: a man kills a woman. The woman shot first, she was angry at him. The man then shoots the woman back in self-defense. She dies, he's in a coma. It becomes a legal matter, the law lets the man go free because he was acting in self-defense. Well, I don't want to live in a world of people killing people, yet I allowed this situation to occur. Why? Is this just the state of our world, necessary steps to take to purify existence? "It is what it is" some say. By picking either side, the man or the woman, I am buying into a system of right and wrong. This neutrality is a terrible way to live, I must pick a side. Who was right? Who was wrong?

We gauge what is "right" and "wrong" by determining if it is best for all or not. If so, we allow it. If not, we don't allow it. We manifest these situations to help us face ourselves, and then we make a "choice" (which is an illusion). We "choose" to not allow it again. We "choose" to allow justice, truth, self-honesty. But by making that very "choice" we define an experience as good and best for all. More clarification on right and wrong please. Actions have consequences. Maybe we label things "bad" if we perceive actions to have less-than-best-for-all consequences, and "good" if they are best-for-all.

Look at war: I think it is a necessary evil. The way the world works in this moment, war has been and still is inevitable. The starting point, the conflict and tension builds pressure and manifests in violent destruction. War is a result, a consequence of a point of disharmony. People, leaders, try to resolve the disharmony, taking months or longer. Some even feed the disharmony because they want war. Look back and tell me: who is wrong? the ones stopping the war or the ones fueling the war? If it started from a single starting point, the sequence of events leading to war are already set in motion, inevitable. The ONLY WAY that war won't go on is if the starting point gets corrected. Now I believe in a quantum universe where this is physically possible to change the moment in time when the starting point happened, and that is one way to correct it. In linear time way is through abasement of self and taking control of the situation, seeing what it has become, and painfully back-stepping until you can reconcile the starting point and continue another direction.

I guess I see both sides. I am interested in what Desteni has to say about absolute truth - does it exist?



User avatar
alex.c
Posts: 23
Joined: 30 Sep 2014, 19:13

Re: Regarding right and wrong

Postby alex.c » 31 Oct 2014, 00:41

Another perspective: (http://desteni.org/a/rauyule-sex-porn-a ... -addiction) "Therefore, it’s not about an addiction being to blame, it’s not about masturbation being to blame, it’s not about the feeling or experience being to blame within masturbation, it’s not about the pictures or fantasies within the mind that is to blame: IT IS YOU, YOURSELF that is responsible… You are the one not stopping yourself."

The author points out that masturbation is literally rape when you masturbate to the thought of another, you steal their energy during orgasm. So masturbation is rape and theft. I agree unless it's consensual, then that's not the case. Why, then, is masturbation not to blame? yet masturbation is rape and rape is bad? Does anyone see what I'm trying to get at here? Please I hope someone understands.



Marlen
Posts: 4092
Joined: 12 Jun 2011, 20:16
Contact:

Re: Regarding right and wrong

Postby Marlen » 31 Oct 2014, 03:01

I get it, right/wrong, light/dark, good/evil, exist as polarity, which is a system of the mind. We are One, connected by the Unified Conciousness Field, I am the reality I previously thought I existed in.
We are one within the consideration that we are all here and at a substance physical level 'made of the same' life - yet this doesn't mean we are 'living as life' yet. A note on the Unified Consciousness Field: it no longer exists, everything that was specifically holding it was dismantled at the same time that the white light construct was dismantled and else at dimensional levels.
And.. I am here, in this physical experience, to birth myself as life from the physical. I am here to take a stand for who I really am. I'm not my mind, I'm not my memories, I am a being in a state of being and becoming.
Yes and no. How it has been recently worded is that you're Not only your mind, you're not only your memories, yet you ARE your mind, memories, thoughts etc. as that which each one of us has accepted and allowed ourselves to become. So to 'take a stand' in fact means: I take responsibility for this that I have become as an individual which entails my mind, my body, everything that I have become at an individual and world-system level. Who we really are is what is explained as 'life' as that which is our fullest potential and that which one can uncover as oneself as you walk through the practical process of walking your mind/ taking responsibility for your mind through the tools of writing, self-forgiveness, self-honesty and self corrective practical application.

So in a way it is not a 'becoming' it is what already exists within each one of us as a potential, yet we're not living as it, because all that we have ever been is only our mind.
Now, please help me to understand so that others may too, what exactly are we allowing to manifest that should not be made manifest? Is this up to me? An example: a man kills a woman. The woman shot first, she was angry at him. The man then shoots the woman back in self-defense. She dies, he's in a coma. It becomes a legal matter, the law lets the man go free because he was acting in self-defense. Well, I don't want to live in a world of people killing people, yet I allowed this situation to occur. Why? Is this just the state of our world, necessary steps to take to purify existence? "It is what it is" some say. By picking either side, the man or the woman, I am buying into a system of right and wrong. This neutrality is a terrible way to live, I must pick a side. Who was right? Who was wrong?

What we have accepted and allowed is everything that we can currently see as 'how things are' in this world. It is thus up to each one of us what we continue to create as our world. In your example, what we aim at here is to prevent such disputes from escalating to get to the point of 'killing' and imposing such kind of abuse. However, it is not that 'it's the state of our world,' it is WHAT we have created of our lives while living in and through the mind only, while allowing our emotions to dictate what we do instead of considering consequential outflows of acting out one's emotions such as anger in this case leading to such murder.
It is not that 'this is necessary' it is simply that it is the outflow of what we have accepted and allowed - so in a way, yes it is what it is because it is physical law of action and reaction = there's no escape from that. The point I would here question though is why do you feel the need to define yourself according to 'taking a side' as either the man, woman or 'being neutral' which is still taking a 'side' of not taking a side to avoid having to take responsibility for 'taking a side' - in essence neutrality is still balancing out 'poles' and not a common sensical perspective.

So instead of trying to 'take a side' within the good/bad or 'right or wrong' - as you said because it is a polarity design - rather see the situation in its wholeness. That is where you can see where both parts would have to take responsibility for the escalation of their reactions, so that each one would recognize how they co-created such outflow of events by allowing themselves to be possessed in their minds. Therefore, you don't have to 'pick a side' - to develop self honesty is to understand such situation from the holistic perspective of seeing two individuals, within a relationship construct of friction and conflict that accumulated reactions within each other to such an extent that it ended up in such level of abuse =both are equally responsible for their actions and mind possession - and you, you can only make sure that you do not allow yourself to be possessed in an equal manner, you can only learn from such situations to ensure that you do not accept and allow you to play out such abuses due to becoming emotional. That's where your responsibility resides at this stage: you take responsibility for yourself as your mind, as your body, as your life.

We gauge what is "right" and "wrong" by determining if it is best for all or not. If so, we allow it. If not, we don't allow it. We manifest these situations to help us face ourselves, and then we make a "choice" (which is an illusion). We "choose" to not allow it again. We "choose" to allow justice, truth, self-honesty. But by making that very "choice" we define an experience as good and best for all. More clarification on right and wrong please. Actions have consequences. Maybe we label things "bad" if we perceive actions to have less-than-best-for-all consequences, and "good" if they are best-for-all.
No, what's best for all is not the same as measuring what's good or bad - what's best for all is a physical mathematical assessment of the consequential outflows of every action, word that you create, that you allow yourself to exist as - there cannot be a 'right or wrong' in physical events, a right or wrong is only a Mind-assessment, it has nothing to do with the physical outcome of something. So, why not instead of trying to fit the 'bad' or 'good' polarity of morality, you rather push yourself to step outside of that need to frame things within such polarity and start thinking in 'what's best for all' terms?
See, the reason why this is such a question within you is because it is still the mind wanting to know and cage things in a 'known way' - but, of course, no 'what's best for all' category exists in your mind as a preprogrammed 'frame' with which to asses reality, therefore your inquiry - so, let go of the good and bad and see how you change your way of looking at things.
Look at war: I think it is a necessary evil. The way the world works in this moment, war has been and still is inevitable. The starting point, the conflict and tension builds pressure and manifests in violent destruction. War is a result, a consequence of a point of disharmony. People, leaders, try to resolve the disharmony, taking months or longer. Some even feed the disharmony because they want war. Look back and tell me: who is wrong? the ones stopping the war or the ones fueling the war? If it started from a single starting point, the sequence of events leading to war are already set in motion, inevitable. The ONLY WAY that war won't go on is if the starting point gets corrected. Now I believe in a quantum universe where this is physically possible to change the moment in time when the starting point happened, and that is one way to correct it. In linear time way is through abasement of self and taking control of the situation, seeing what it has become, and painfully back-stepping until you can reconcile the starting point and continue another direction.
No, I disagree. War is not a necessary evil, that's the kind of excuses that we give to ourselves in order to justify the expenses of war, which means this is mostly part of the brainwashing people get through media. No war would exist if there was no money behind it. Do we exist within wars in our lives? For sure, in our minds, between one another and once again, notions of power, control, money exist within such conflicts. So, war is a result of us living in our minds and being guided by self-interest instead of common sense. Here instead of seeing 'who's wrong' which is you wanting to frame things between the bad and good mentality, rather look at what is common sense: to support self abuse and destruction or to stop self abuse and destruction? Then you see that what's best for all is then a point to take back as a realization of seeing ok how can I stop war within myself. So yes, the starting point is ourselves, and that's why stopping wars will be a process of stopping within ourselves

Suggest listening to the Dove's interviews where she explains this desire for peace and ignoring how we create war within ourselves first.

The Consciousness of the Dove - Part 1


I guess I see both sides. I am interested in what Desteni has to say about absolute truth - does it exist?
The ONLY TRUTH? REALITY is the PHYSICAL

There is no truth. There are only realationships. You either are part of what is best for all in all ways or you are in self interest and allows harm to exist in the name of your personal happiness. This is the Alpha and the Omega of this world. The ultimate truth. The ultimate choice. and You decide who you are and that determines the outcome of each individual. The universe is a group and if you are not able to be part of the group, you can work out for yourself what will be the consequence

The foundation of the truth of Here will only be uncovered with self honest self forgiveness. Only those strong enough as individual will fathom self honesty and will live self forgiveness. Ego will never grasp the simplicity of the message of Desteni



Marlen
Posts: 4092
Joined: 12 Jun 2011, 20:16
Contact:

Re: Regarding right and wrong

Postby Marlen » 31 Oct 2014, 03:04

Another perspective: (http://desteni.org/a/rauyule-sex-porn-a ... -addiction) "Therefore, it’s not about an addiction being to blame, it’s not about masturbation being to blame, it’s not about the feeling or experience being to blame within masturbation, it’s not about the pictures or fantasies within the mind that is to blame: IT IS YOU, YOURSELF that is responsible… You are the one not stopping yourself."

The author points out that masturbation is literally rape when you masturbate to the thought of another, you steal their energy during orgasm. So masturbation is rape and theft. I agree unless it's consensual, then that's not the case. Why, then, is masturbation not to blame? yet masturbation is rape and rape is bad? Does anyone see what I'm trying to get at here? Please I hope someone understands.

The answer to your question is in the quote that you place in fact, it's not about 'masturbation' it's about Who You Are within Masturbation - if you haven't yet listened to the series of interviews in Eqafe, I definitely suggest doing so as it will clear any and all doubts you may have around that

Shocking Secrets of Masturbation Series


Another point, you write about 'blame' and 'bad' - within understanding one's mind, no blame, no judgment can exist toward what we have become, that's why self forgiveness exists, to get to understand something instead of diverting one's self-responsibility through blame, pointing fingers, vilifying etc.



User avatar
alex.c
Posts: 23
Joined: 30 Sep 2014, 19:13

Re: Regarding right and wrong

Postby alex.c » 31 Oct 2014, 17:39

Therefore, you don't have to 'pick a side' - to develop self honesty is to understand such situation from the holistic perspective of seeing two individuals, within a relationship construct of friction and conflict that accumulated reactions within each other to such an extent that it ended up in such level of abuse =both are equally responsible for their actions and mind possession - and you, you can only make sure that you do not allow yourself to be possessed in an equal manner
Thank you Marlen this is exactly what I was looking for. To see things wholly is to transcend the mind, to see the situation as "what is" and to trust instinct, not emotion, to guide you next. Am I correct?

I enjoy stretching out this idea of "what is wrong, what is right" because I think it helps to overcome the mind by revealing its place in our lives, then allowing us to master the mind to the point that it serves us, not the other way. I will pick one word: harmony. I believe harmony should be sought after. Harmony is equality. I believe harmony is good. How would you escape this mind construct believing harmony is good? Thanks.



Marlen
Posts: 4092
Joined: 12 Jun 2011, 20:16
Contact:

Re: Regarding right and wrong

Postby Marlen » 31 Oct 2014, 22:35

To see things wholly is to transcend the mind, to see the situation as "what is" and to trust instinct, not emotion, to guide you next. Am I correct?
Yes, what then becomes our 'guiding point' is precisely this consideration of what is best for all, what is the common sense on this? A way I practiced to develop this was through reading people's questions and general living situations and how they were also directed/supported by others here within common sense, that is a practical way you can also apply for yourself in reading blogs and a general 'problematic' shared and how one goes through writing it out, applying self-forgiveness, self-honesty developing common sense and self-honesty

I enjoy stretching out this idea of "what is wrong, what is right" because I think it helps to overcome the mind by revealing its place in our lives, then allowing us to master the mind to the point that it serves us, not the other way. I will pick one word: harmony. I believe harmony should be sought after. Harmony is equality. I believe harmony is good. How would you escape this mind construct believing harmony is good? Thanks.
Master the mind and it 'serving us' - you can see how the mind is not something separate from you so mastering the mind is really about developing the ability to direct yourself one and equal to your mind, which means no longer being directed by emotions/energy/feelings but always having a clear common sensical understanding of how you can direct yourself to establish common sense = the consideration of what's best for all. In this the mind is thus not about 'it' serving 'us' but simply realizing it as a part of who we are and as such Self-Direction implies me directing myself as my body, my mind, my life that I take responsibility for here.

Harmony is thus not something to 'seek for' as that then is constructed as 'something out there' to exist for us/you. The point of understanding self-creation is to see HOW one can live harmony ourselves - hence the sharing of the Dove interviews which expand on detail about this point. By saying 'harmony is good' I mean, there's no need to dwell upon it or wanting to 'escape the construct,' the construct of good and bad is here and what one can do is simply realizing that one does not require to define things as good or bad within a moral stance, but rather within a physical assessment of what's supportive or not, what's consequential, in what ways, measuring the outcomes, etc.


So a challenge here is to instead of saying 'harmony is equality' rather define what harmony is, not only 'equality' - how does one practically LIVE the word harmony?

That's why to do this and to 'grasp' this is suggested to do the writing process, otherwise 'desteni' becomes only a source of mind concepts that are in no way lived, which renders them useless and unfortunately this is what happens when we only try and 'agree' with one or another perspective instead of actually working with it, walking the actual process of investigating it for yourself. If this is not done, then what is shared is merely knowledge and information that can 'serve' some purpose as a guideline, but ultimately these kind of 'definitions' is not the aim of this process but to learn how to LIVE words through redefining them.

So, that's the suggestion I place here for you to see why you are having all of these questions, where are they coming from, and how they are in fact pointing out that you could instead take responsibility for investigating these points for yourself, instead of trying to get a 'right' or 'wrong' answer to it - so, process is about SELF-realization here. Cross referencing points you have investigated practically for yourself is cool, but trying to get straightforward answers as 'ultimate truths' is definitely not a suggested way to follow.

Hence, here's another invitation to start with your own written self-investigation process to learn how to see things for yourself, there's plenty of examples here at the forum and that's what makes it such an awesome source of support that is lived and proven by each one participating here.



User avatar
YoganBarrientos
Posts: 247
Joined: 03 Sep 2011, 23:19
Location: Miami, Florida

Re: Regarding right and wrong

Postby YoganBarrientos » 12 Sep 2016, 06:12

To answer the question about Right/Wrong simply,
basically do what is best for all. So there is an absolute right. The absolute being everyone, because nothing exists outside of everyone. What is interesting is that I found for myself that initially I did not include everyone when saying everyone. So consider if you have done the same. For example, when I say do what is best for all, I am referring to EVERYTHING, like trees, rocks, bugs, animals, every person including rapists and politicians. (lol) So this is a challenge, yes. But I see this as the only way for real peace to exist. Because then no one is excluded. So for example, you have to question what are the RULES and REGULATIONS that govern what we have so far called GOOD and BAD, or RIGHT and WRONG. Basically ask yourself the question who decides what is good/bad? What are the rules and the criteria that are used decide this, if there are any. Are there? Because it seems like its kind of made up and arbitrary. Like some things makes sense but other things don't.

For me, having a principle such as do what is best for all, makes sense. So you can possible call this a new morality system for us to adopt and use. Though I see it as an ideal to strive for, not like a reward and punishment system that we have lived our entire lives through parents and schools. It is self-rewarding to see everyone be well of and benefited.

So does this answer the question about GOOD/BAD and RIGHT/WRONG ? I could give way more examples and discuss this at length.




Return to “Questions relating to Specific Desteni Articles / Videos / Recordings”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron