talking about people

[solomon levi]

I'm not a believer in rules and regulations in my life,
but I also understand the need for them in society.
Everyone has to act from the mind they currently possess.
Any coercing towards something else can only cause more problems -
take one farther from the self, knowing oneself, however light or dark.

That said, I do think it sad that people still feel the need to talk about people/
personalities here. A "warrior" or sage does not take personalities
seriously, nor do they take anything personally. What people do they must
do - that is their level of knowledge and action. They can't do something
they are not. Dogs bark, egos ego... Why be offended when the ego egos?

And the words "right" and "wrong" really have no place in a broadened mind.
It's very narrow-minded. This type of narrow-minded thinking will
produce a narrow-minded science and a narrow-minded forum.

This place will only be as great as we are.

I really love you guys. I really appreciate the opportunity to share my thoughts
and work with you all and to see what you're working on as well, practically,
spiritually... it's really wonderful.

Every human deserves respect in my opinion. That we are here, on this earth
in these bodies, living life... it's quite an amazing thing, and a challenge.

And in alchemy, everyone who has set themselves to the work deserves
applause. That we have found our way through a labyrinth to be here, to
begin another labyrinth towards the Donum Dei!! Are we not brothers and
sisters?

When I see a person, I see a journey and not a personality. I see mistakes and
wisdom, successes and failures... There is no person who is merely half, merely
one side of life. Does your mind seem to gravitate towards one more than the other?
Doesn't that say something about your mind and not "them"?
All life is whole until a mind comes along and picks it apart....
but then, life is still whole - it is your mind that is divided.

[Hephælios]

Ego's make the best eggs

[Ghislain]

Ditto sol.

[solomon levi]

As subjectivity has been on my mind lately, it very much applies to
crticising other personalities. I was just reading a site called the
Gurdjieff con. All I saw was speculations on personalities - no criticism
of whether the Work works or not. No science, and the facts do not support
the speculative claims. There's a blog called Gurdjieff the rapist where they
inform you of a report that G came on strongly to some woman. In what
objective mind does coming on strongly = rape? So the fact is no one was
raped and this guy writes a post called Gurdjieff the rapist. And the purpose
of his blog is to debrief you! Instead he perpetuates lies. Such ignorance.

If people do not know to separate personality from teaching and work, is emphasizing
the negative aspects of personality going to help them? And what personality doesn't
have negative aspects? This is why talking about personality is an endless game once
started, and why it is frowned upon here. Anyone can do that and say just about anything.
But this is not a place for that. Whatever this guy says about Gurdjieff doesn't alter in one bit
my ability to practice self-observation as G taught it. There are sites that discuss all the flaws
of Castaneda and they don't affect my ability to practice not-doing.

So it should be obvious that there are personalities and there are teachings and practices.
People who don't know to separate the two are lost in their own problems and this is
not a forum for those mis-guided ventings. I say mis-guided because if you are talking
about the personality now, you must have believed in the past that personality was important,
was the message. It's not. The messenger and the message are two things. Sometimes they
do get confused. We can look at any religion to see that. Alchemy is about separating the gross
and the fine. But we will fair far better to separate our own personalities from our own
essence rather than focussing on the personalities of others. What is the saying - “A man may
conquer a million men in battle but one who conquers himself is, indeed, the greatest of conquerors.”


Anyway, as far as my moderating is concerned, if you feel it is important to point out something
that has to do with a particular personality, I'm not going to ban you for it. But if it is all you talk
about, and you have some mission to take down someone else, that will not be tolerated. Hopefully
you will check yourself, the hypocrisy of one personality criticizing another... the more you harp on
it, the larger your own personality, ego, "flaw" appears. This just isn't the place for that. Start a blog
of your own.

So the guideline is:
You want to mention something. Ok.
You want to dwell on it. Not Ok for long. You'll be given a warning.
You just cant help yourself. Probably going to be banned soon. :)

[Awani]

This is why talking about personality is an endless game once
started, and why it is frowned upon here. Anyone can do that and say just about anything.
But this is not a place for that. Whatever this guy says about Gurdjieff doesn't alter in one bit
my ability to practice self-observation as G taught it.

I see this a lot, everywhere. Like the fact that people complain that John Lennon sang about "no possessions" whilst sitting in a million dollar mansion. Why can't the message of his song be important regardless. All humans are flawed, we can only strive/aim for greatness... very few get there. Recently read a biography on Paracelsus. Still to this day there is a lot of pages that cover his excessive drunkenness... what does this has to do with the excellent discoveries/truths that he has put forward? The list can go on, but these two are enough examples at the moment.

There is the idea and then there is the man/woman. Attack an idea constructively is never wrong, as V (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_for_Vendetta) says "ideas are bulletproof". People are not.

:cool:

[Seeker of Truth]

I have sometimes had similar thoughts about this:

I have seen the divide between my words and my actions. Many people see actions and think because a personality cannot connect its actions with its words, its words hold no meaning. "Actions speak louder than words" (sometimes) Once words are spoken by a personality, ownership is often claimed, but IMO words belong both to the Truth that they carry and the personality giving them voice. Once personality falls away for some reason, Truth still stands as it always has, as it always will.