How to know: to use powerful technics or not to use
1) I need some hints how to find such "do-s and dont-s" by myself.
2) If you have your "do-s and dont-s", it is also intersting.
3) What about others people "do-s and dont-s"?
What are powerful technics? That means:
- to force anybody to make something by ajna-chakra
- to induce an intention into somebody by means of my energy and interception of his intentions and desires
- to induce a desire into somebody by means of my energy and interception of his intentions and desires
... and like this. It's something like hacking a system. System means etheric body, intentions, desires... and so on.
One may say that the system is already hacked by egregors (just like many computer systems are already hacked by viruses, and system owner do not know about this fact). And (just to follow the analogy) when I hack into such system, cure it from viruses, and install my own program instead of viruses into it, I do not make a harm to the system owner.
One may also say that the way to achive my goal is of no meaning, and my goal is the only thing I have to concern.
Your opinion?
UPDATE:
In a few hours after I asked you this question, someone probably scaned me and said "this question is not important for you". I do know that it is not important for me for now, because I can not do such a things now. But I shall master all the technics. Why?
- it's interesting
- it's MY power
- it will increase the field where I can combine parts together to make something
I have a vision of my life and my position in it, position in regard to other persons... I feel that my vision, or my life philosofy, is too shallow for this abilities. I plan to improve my life philosofy before I master all this. How to do this? That's the real question.
How to know: to use powerful technics or not to use (v.2)
Your question interests me because many people use techniques to coerce others to do things they do not want to do. Although I know your question is aimed towards the mystical use of power attained through techniques and practice, my answer relates to all forms of coercion. By understanding the universal principles underlying all forms of involuntarily modifying the behavior of others, one can easier find answers to your questions.
Let me clarify this. We are addressing the fundamental right of an individual to pursue his life within the context of other individuals who live within the group, be it a family, club, society, country, the planet or even the universe. At what point does my endeavor to get what I want interfere with your endeavor to get what you want? Who shall get preference in this conflict, if anyone? How will such problems be avoided before they occur and when they occur what shall we do about them?
All groups deal with this issue in very similar ways. The differences between them lie in how much power the group has, who controls the group, and what it is they wish to attain.
It usually works like this. The members of the group have inherited principles handed down to them. Those who have power and a desire to do so, modify these principles as needed. Upon these principles rest the mission statements of the group; that is, what it is they are as a group. From this their goals and methods are derived. To create order they create codes to negate unfavorable situations and create favorable ones. These codes are written as laws and regulations or infused within the individuals as moral codes and social expectations. When one breaks the code, there is some system of correction.
Living with a group demands constant attention. People often conflict as we are all different and want to fulfill our own interests in our own ways. Therefore, people live within groups where everyone basically accepts the same culture. This creates an immediate camaraderie and a platform on which all can function in agreement. Within the usual elaborate social codes is a system which facilitates everyone getting what they want without having to come in conflict with others. As everyone buys into this system either from birth or by choice, there is a relative peace that all enjoy.
Conflicts come when there are opposing elements that fall outside the allowable arena of interaction. For example, I wish to earn money and live happily and you wish to take my money and live happily. When you take my money by causing me to buy something you sell out of my free will, this is acceptable, but when you steal money from me this is unacceptable and laws are there to punish you.
You are asking about a more subtle aspect of social interaction, one where you induce me to do something I would not ordinarily want to do if left on my own. Here is where it gets interesting. I normally have no interest in driving a huge pickup truck with 550 hp, but you create commercials I watch on TV which seduce me with professional race drivers doing impossible maneuvers while they cavort with scantily clad gorgeous ladies! I might see this commercial 50 times in one week and gradually I start to think I need this truck with all its glitz and glamour and I buy it although all I do with my existing car is drive to the shopping mall! This is called advertising and it was one of the first forms of subtle marketing coercion in modern times. It was meant to convince me I needed something I did not need or to do something I did not need to do.
Here we have a situation where a merchant desiring wealth markets to me through commercials played by a broadcaster desiring wealth. The seller's advertising comes along with the programming I pay the broadcaster to see and is an intrinsic, albeit annoying, aspect of the media service. Because we have all bought into the system of the media, we all share the effects of watching. When I agree to pay for my cable TV license, I understand I shall be bombarded with offers to buy all kinds of useless things. Indeed, we all assume that without allowing ourselves to be accosted in this way, the broadcaster could not continue to supply our entertainment. Even the person selling that big truck goes out and buys an iPod when he is influenced by the nifty commercials he sees on TV. No one avoids the insidious pitch to consume. Yet it is acceptable since we all agree to it. If you do not like it, do not use a TV.
Capitalistic society is based on the unstated right of facilitating the means by which people can influence people. Socialistic society is based on the governments doing it. The most successful governments or businesses do it through the principle of win-win. We all win when we buy into certain transactions which benefit us. Because the end is to provide something everyone wants, influencing people is not considered a negative thing. Indeed, all business runs on this principle. Religion also runs on this principle, but with different mission statements, different goals, and different products. This is just the way it is.
It is important to note that people have not advanced beyond Machiavelli's principles. Might still makes right and the end still justifies the means. Indeed, entire countries are so ruled by these ideals they do not hesitate to enforce their will on other countries. Add to this the universal principle that everyone thinks they are doing the right thing at the time they do it. Even 'good' people engage in some form of coercion when they think it is the right thing to do. After all, parents do it to children to insure their children's safety and growth, businesses do it to their employees to insure their companies' safety and growth, governments do it to their citizens to insure their countries' safety and growth, and even religions do it for self-preservation and to make you pure and qualified to go to heaven. The stronger manipulate the weaker to facilitate the stronger who can work for sake of the weaker and therefore the whole. At least that is what the stronger think. Because they are the stronger and therefore the better, their goals are right and their acts justifiable.
Any group whose leaders are convinced that the group's ideals are good for the individuals within it will to some extent coerce its members in the name of benefitting all. Whenever there is a conflict of interests between such groups, the mightier prevail. If victory includes using methods which challenge the rights or independence of others, so be it, for the ends attained justify bending the usual rules.
Considering this, it makes sense that there are some who use subtle means to coerce others. It is, after all, human nature to do so and esoteric knowledge is a fundamental part of human existence. When esoteric groups are created (it does not matter how you label them, they can be religions, sects, secret societies, schools of thought, disciplines or whatever) they follow the same basic steps as any other group in human society and are led by individuals who must create a standard of interaction and a method to deal with those who oppose that standard in some unacceptable way.
Here is what a hypothetical follower of some empowered discipline might say:
"I have mystic capacity. I know how to protect myself and center myself with power. I know how to project my power on others and therefore know how to defend myself from them. I can defend myself by deflecting their energetic attack on me and I can bewilder them in some manner to dissolve their desire to do something to me. I know what is good for the world. I know what is good for others. I shall use my power to induce others to do what is right according to what I know to be right. If others are bad people, I will change them by getting them to do what I know to be right. I can also use people by manipulating them to get what is right for me as I am of the elite due to my evolution. Increasing my power and influence enables me to do more good for the world since I know what is good for the world and they do not. I am sure of this because I am in contact with authoritative sources of knowledge. When others are selfish and do not agree with my way of seeing things I shall induce them to do what I know to be right and thus transform their self-centered actions to correct ones."
In other words: "I am stronger than you. I am more evolved. I know what is best for the world and therefore for you. You simply harm yourself and others due to your ignorance. I shall stop this and transform you. Since my goal is good, I can do it in any manner possible. It does not matter to me if you want something else. Your will is not important to me as you do not know what is best for you or the world."
And then there is a second person who says, "I want this. I can get it by stepping on you and I do not care what it takes to get it. I do not care about you, only about me."
There is not that much difference between these two.
I know those who manipulate others do so with good intentions but the path to hell is paved with good intentions. It is one thing to do this in a situation where everyone participates -- for example, when we all buy into a system which provides us sense enjoyment -- but it is quite another when it is forced upon people unaware that their choices are being made by others.
I know the weakness of my argument. People are often mindless and vote for governments simply because they are fooled into doing so, they buy things they do not need because they are convinced into thinking they should, or they simply want to keep up appearances. I know that people have habits that kill them. I know that if people did things differently it would be better for themselves and for others. Therefore the idea of influencing people to do better things and create a better world is attractive. But who will decide what is better and who appoints those who shall influence people against their conscious will? Who will officiate this manipulation of society or of individuals? And if you knew they were doing so, would you allow them to?
Let's assume that evolution means the individual moves through the constant present by making choices. Each of these choices brings experiences and these experiences behaviorally modify our understanding of what we could or should do in this world. Thus, my advancement towards being the next best version of the greatest vision of myself depends on my being allowed to make choices and reap the results. As my choices modify my world, I move towards my evolving image of my ultimate situation.
When a person induces me to make choices by modifying my power of perception, by planting thoughts within my mind, by seducing me with illusory possibilities, or by a promise of heaven either on earth or beyond earth, they interfere with my evolutionary growth. Whenever another disregards my will, has no interest in my desires, sees no point in facilitating my path, or disrespects my soul by coercing me to act by overriding my inherent potential to choose, they are an aggressor.
If you induce me to buy something that is not what you promised, you either have to give me back my money or face legal action or disrepute. If a government acts directly against their stated platform in the election, they are voted out in the next election. Sometimes aggression goes unchallenged and this encourages further aggressors. Although no one sells snake oil anymore, they put fluoride in the water and tell us it is good for our teeth. Why no one questions why they cannot just provide plain old water and let people get some additive for their water if they wish to have it is beyond me. In this case an industry that needs to dispose of this toxic by-product sees a great opportunity to sell this useless waste for a profit and have everyone think it is good for them. Sooner or later, people wake up to such foolishness and demand change. In the meantime, we suffer. Enlightening people to the burden aggression puts on all of us, and the earth, is an important mission.
Let's talk about what happens to aggressors in the esoteric realm. Aggressive usage of etheric energy creates anxiety as it is a dissonance in the universal harmonic vibrations. The universe works in a finely tuned harmony which is demonstrated by the cosmic balance maintained amongst the practically infinite numbers of planets and objects in space. Despite the incredible power within the universe it is always in balance. Even cosmic acts of destruction are within the natural laws of harmony. All forms of physics are based on such law.
What happens when you step outside these boundaries? Well, you can get burned. When the most powerful country in the world thinks it can overwhelm another country easily, it often forgets to consider the situation that develops when social balance is usurped. The consequent instability hurts everyone connected to it. Similarly, when a powerful mystic interferes with the natural balance of another person or situation there are residual effects germinated by their disharmonious (aggressive) usage of energy. One may say such energy projections are for good and therefore not disharmonious, but as soon as one disrespects another, there are reactions. [Please refer to my lecture entitled, "Ethics and Morality" on harimedia.net's lecture page for an elaboration of this point.]
Why does a healer refuse to heal someone who does not give them permission to do so? Simple. If healing energy is sent to someone who does not want to receive it, it not only has no effect, but it creates a ripple in the energy communication which echoes back to the sender as negative energy. Further, a residual deposit within the sender is created by his or her disrespecting the recipient by not getting permission and 'hacking' into their sacred energy system. Think about what happens to one trying to build a house without building permission from the local government. There are reactions. Even if you idealistically desire to create a school for orphans, the planning board cannot encourage the creation of exceptional precedents by allowing you to do so without a permit.
Similarly, when a person uses esoteric power to coerce another against their will for whatever motivation or whatever reason, there are reactions. There are forces and powers within the universe that balance energy. These powers do not cooperate with aggressors. Being out of harmony with such power insures the aggressor will suffer the effects that distorted frequencies create within any sensitive being. If they do this enough (how much is enough varies as the threshold is different for each person), they can become mentally imbalanced, psychologically disturbed, depressed, fanatical, out of control, caricatures of themselves, unpleasant for others to be around, and so on. This does not happen instantly for it builds up gradually over time. Sometimes the victim of their aggression discovers what happened to them and lashes out at the aggressor either by going to a similar course in a similar school, or employing other aggressors who professionally attack and thus a war begins.
As for me, I follow principles and ethics. I do not act as an aggressor. I do act as a defender of myself and those I love, and those who specifically ask for my help against others who are harming them. If someone asks me to help them deal with an aggressor and I see the aggressor is reacting against former aggression by my 'clients', I do not use force against them but negotiate as best I can an understanding between the conflicting parties to encourage them to resolve their problems.
I once made the mistake of believing someone's answer to my question of whether they wanted a particular person removed from their energy field. Since they asked for my healing and I felt capable of giving it, after I encountered someone's influence within their field I felt it was my responsibility to report it and suggest that I could remove this. Although the 'client' stated that removal was acceptable, I later found out that this response was given because they thought it had to be given and not because it was really wanted. That person became very upset, being in love with the person in the field, and this created a chain reaction of negativity I had to deal with.
So powerful is the effect of disrupting the free will and desire of others that entire countries have been overturned by the unstoppable frustration of those who were victimized. Therefore, I suggest the ethic of those who deal with esoteric energy be based in non-aggression and respect for the will and desires of all entities. By allowing others to find their own evolution in their own way, we are part of the enlightened process of facilitation. By manipulating others to accept what we feel is right opens the door for our own personal conflict with the light which can dangerously slide us into darkness.
This principle of non-aggression can be utilized when educating children, in families, in marriages, in what we eat, or in any form of personal creation. We still need to follow principles upon which we all agree to facilitate the functioning of a society like obeying traffic lights, food and drug codes, maintaining acceptable public conduct, and so on, but manipulating the energy of others to transform them against their will creates unpredictable situations.
Let me clarify this. We are addressing the fundamental right of an individual to pursue his life within the context of other individuals who live within the group, be it a family, club, society, country, the planet or even the universe. At what point does my endeavor to get what I want interfere with your endeavor to get what you want? Who shall get preference in this conflict, if anyone? How will such problems be avoided before they occur and when they occur what shall we do about them?
All groups deal with this issue in very similar ways. The differences between them lie in how much power the group has, who controls the group, and what it is they wish to attain.
It usually works like this. The members of the group have inherited principles handed down to them. Those who have power and a desire to do so, modify these principles as needed. Upon these principles rest the mission statements of the group; that is, what it is they are as a group. From this their goals and methods are derived. To create order they create codes to negate unfavorable situations and create favorable ones. These codes are written as laws and regulations or infused within the individuals as moral codes and social expectations. When one breaks the code, there is some system of correction.
Living with a group demands constant attention. People often conflict as we are all different and want to fulfill our own interests in our own ways. Therefore, people live within groups where everyone basically accepts the same culture. This creates an immediate camaraderie and a platform on which all can function in agreement. Within the usual elaborate social codes is a system which facilitates everyone getting what they want without having to come in conflict with others. As everyone buys into this system either from birth or by choice, there is a relative peace that all enjoy.
Conflicts come when there are opposing elements that fall outside the allowable arena of interaction. For example, I wish to earn money and live happily and you wish to take my money and live happily. When you take my money by causing me to buy something you sell out of my free will, this is acceptable, but when you steal money from me this is unacceptable and laws are there to punish you.
You are asking about a more subtle aspect of social interaction, one where you induce me to do something I would not ordinarily want to do if left on my own. Here is where it gets interesting. I normally have no interest in driving a huge pickup truck with 550 hp, but you create commercials I watch on TV which seduce me with professional race drivers doing impossible maneuvers while they cavort with scantily clad gorgeous ladies! I might see this commercial 50 times in one week and gradually I start to think I need this truck with all its glitz and glamour and I buy it although all I do with my existing car is drive to the shopping mall! This is called advertising and it was one of the first forms of subtle marketing coercion in modern times. It was meant to convince me I needed something I did not need or to do something I did not need to do.
Here we have a situation where a merchant desiring wealth markets to me through commercials played by a broadcaster desiring wealth. The seller's advertising comes along with the programming I pay the broadcaster to see and is an intrinsic, albeit annoying, aspect of the media service. Because we have all bought into the system of the media, we all share the effects of watching. When I agree to pay for my cable TV license, I understand I shall be bombarded with offers to buy all kinds of useless things. Indeed, we all assume that without allowing ourselves to be accosted in this way, the broadcaster could not continue to supply our entertainment. Even the person selling that big truck goes out and buys an iPod when he is influenced by the nifty commercials he sees on TV. No one avoids the insidious pitch to consume. Yet it is acceptable since we all agree to it. If you do not like it, do not use a TV.
Capitalistic society is based on the unstated right of facilitating the means by which people can influence people. Socialistic society is based on the governments doing it. The most successful governments or businesses do it through the principle of win-win. We all win when we buy into certain transactions which benefit us. Because the end is to provide something everyone wants, influencing people is not considered a negative thing. Indeed, all business runs on this principle. Religion also runs on this principle, but with different mission statements, different goals, and different products. This is just the way it is.
It is important to note that people have not advanced beyond Machiavelli's principles. Might still makes right and the end still justifies the means. Indeed, entire countries are so ruled by these ideals they do not hesitate to enforce their will on other countries. Add to this the universal principle that everyone thinks they are doing the right thing at the time they do it. Even 'good' people engage in some form of coercion when they think it is the right thing to do. After all, parents do it to children to insure their children's safety and growth, businesses do it to their employees to insure their companies' safety and growth, governments do it to their citizens to insure their countries' safety and growth, and even religions do it for self-preservation and to make you pure and qualified to go to heaven. The stronger manipulate the weaker to facilitate the stronger who can work for sake of the weaker and therefore the whole. At least that is what the stronger think. Because they are the stronger and therefore the better, their goals are right and their acts justifiable.
Any group whose leaders are convinced that the group's ideals are good for the individuals within it will to some extent coerce its members in the name of benefitting all. Whenever there is a conflict of interests between such groups, the mightier prevail. If victory includes using methods which challenge the rights or independence of others, so be it, for the ends attained justify bending the usual rules.
Considering this, it makes sense that there are some who use subtle means to coerce others. It is, after all, human nature to do so and esoteric knowledge is a fundamental part of human existence. When esoteric groups are created (it does not matter how you label them, they can be religions, sects, secret societies, schools of thought, disciplines or whatever) they follow the same basic steps as any other group in human society and are led by individuals who must create a standard of interaction and a method to deal with those who oppose that standard in some unacceptable way.
Here is what a hypothetical follower of some empowered discipline might say:
"I have mystic capacity. I know how to protect myself and center myself with power. I know how to project my power on others and therefore know how to defend myself from them. I can defend myself by deflecting their energetic attack on me and I can bewilder them in some manner to dissolve their desire to do something to me. I know what is good for the world. I know what is good for others. I shall use my power to induce others to do what is right according to what I know to be right. If others are bad people, I will change them by getting them to do what I know to be right. I can also use people by manipulating them to get what is right for me as I am of the elite due to my evolution. Increasing my power and influence enables me to do more good for the world since I know what is good for the world and they do not. I am sure of this because I am in contact with authoritative sources of knowledge. When others are selfish and do not agree with my way of seeing things I shall induce them to do what I know to be right and thus transform their self-centered actions to correct ones."
In other words: "I am stronger than you. I am more evolved. I know what is best for the world and therefore for you. You simply harm yourself and others due to your ignorance. I shall stop this and transform you. Since my goal is good, I can do it in any manner possible. It does not matter to me if you want something else. Your will is not important to me as you do not know what is best for you or the world."
And then there is a second person who says, "I want this. I can get it by stepping on you and I do not care what it takes to get it. I do not care about you, only about me."
There is not that much difference between these two.
I know those who manipulate others do so with good intentions but the path to hell is paved with good intentions. It is one thing to do this in a situation where everyone participates -- for example, when we all buy into a system which provides us sense enjoyment -- but it is quite another when it is forced upon people unaware that their choices are being made by others.
I know the weakness of my argument. People are often mindless and vote for governments simply because they are fooled into doing so, they buy things they do not need because they are convinced into thinking they should, or they simply want to keep up appearances. I know that people have habits that kill them. I know that if people did things differently it would be better for themselves and for others. Therefore the idea of influencing people to do better things and create a better world is attractive. But who will decide what is better and who appoints those who shall influence people against their conscious will? Who will officiate this manipulation of society or of individuals? And if you knew they were doing so, would you allow them to?
Let's assume that evolution means the individual moves through the constant present by making choices. Each of these choices brings experiences and these experiences behaviorally modify our understanding of what we could or should do in this world. Thus, my advancement towards being the next best version of the greatest vision of myself depends on my being allowed to make choices and reap the results. As my choices modify my world, I move towards my evolving image of my ultimate situation.
When a person induces me to make choices by modifying my power of perception, by planting thoughts within my mind, by seducing me with illusory possibilities, or by a promise of heaven either on earth or beyond earth, they interfere with my evolutionary growth. Whenever another disregards my will, has no interest in my desires, sees no point in facilitating my path, or disrespects my soul by coercing me to act by overriding my inherent potential to choose, they are an aggressor.
If you induce me to buy something that is not what you promised, you either have to give me back my money or face legal action or disrepute. If a government acts directly against their stated platform in the election, they are voted out in the next election. Sometimes aggression goes unchallenged and this encourages further aggressors. Although no one sells snake oil anymore, they put fluoride in the water and tell us it is good for our teeth. Why no one questions why they cannot just provide plain old water and let people get some additive for their water if they wish to have it is beyond me. In this case an industry that needs to dispose of this toxic by-product sees a great opportunity to sell this useless waste for a profit and have everyone think it is good for them. Sooner or later, people wake up to such foolishness and demand change. In the meantime, we suffer. Enlightening people to the burden aggression puts on all of us, and the earth, is an important mission.
Let's talk about what happens to aggressors in the esoteric realm. Aggressive usage of etheric energy creates anxiety as it is a dissonance in the universal harmonic vibrations. The universe works in a finely tuned harmony which is demonstrated by the cosmic balance maintained amongst the practically infinite numbers of planets and objects in space. Despite the incredible power within the universe it is always in balance. Even cosmic acts of destruction are within the natural laws of harmony. All forms of physics are based on such law.
What happens when you step outside these boundaries? Well, you can get burned. When the most powerful country in the world thinks it can overwhelm another country easily, it often forgets to consider the situation that develops when social balance is usurped. The consequent instability hurts everyone connected to it. Similarly, when a powerful mystic interferes with the natural balance of another person or situation there are residual effects germinated by their disharmonious (aggressive) usage of energy. One may say such energy projections are for good and therefore not disharmonious, but as soon as one disrespects another, there are reactions. [Please refer to my lecture entitled, "Ethics and Morality" on harimedia.net's lecture page for an elaboration of this point.]
Why does a healer refuse to heal someone who does not give them permission to do so? Simple. If healing energy is sent to someone who does not want to receive it, it not only has no effect, but it creates a ripple in the energy communication which echoes back to the sender as negative energy. Further, a residual deposit within the sender is created by his or her disrespecting the recipient by not getting permission and 'hacking' into their sacred energy system. Think about what happens to one trying to build a house without building permission from the local government. There are reactions. Even if you idealistically desire to create a school for orphans, the planning board cannot encourage the creation of exceptional precedents by allowing you to do so without a permit.
Similarly, when a person uses esoteric power to coerce another against their will for whatever motivation or whatever reason, there are reactions. There are forces and powers within the universe that balance energy. These powers do not cooperate with aggressors. Being out of harmony with such power insures the aggressor will suffer the effects that distorted frequencies create within any sensitive being. If they do this enough (how much is enough varies as the threshold is different for each person), they can become mentally imbalanced, psychologically disturbed, depressed, fanatical, out of control, caricatures of themselves, unpleasant for others to be around, and so on. This does not happen instantly for it builds up gradually over time. Sometimes the victim of their aggression discovers what happened to them and lashes out at the aggressor either by going to a similar course in a similar school, or employing other aggressors who professionally attack and thus a war begins.
As for me, I follow principles and ethics. I do not act as an aggressor. I do act as a defender of myself and those I love, and those who specifically ask for my help against others who are harming them. If someone asks me to help them deal with an aggressor and I see the aggressor is reacting against former aggression by my 'clients', I do not use force against them but negotiate as best I can an understanding between the conflicting parties to encourage them to resolve their problems.
I once made the mistake of believing someone's answer to my question of whether they wanted a particular person removed from their energy field. Since they asked for my healing and I felt capable of giving it, after I encountered someone's influence within their field I felt it was my responsibility to report it and suggest that I could remove this. Although the 'client' stated that removal was acceptable, I later found out that this response was given because they thought it had to be given and not because it was really wanted. That person became very upset, being in love with the person in the field, and this created a chain reaction of negativity I had to deal with.
So powerful is the effect of disrupting the free will and desire of others that entire countries have been overturned by the unstoppable frustration of those who were victimized. Therefore, I suggest the ethic of those who deal with esoteric energy be based in non-aggression and respect for the will and desires of all entities. By allowing others to find their own evolution in their own way, we are part of the enlightened process of facilitation. By manipulating others to accept what we feel is right opens the door for our own personal conflict with the light which can dangerously slide us into darkness.
This principle of non-aggression can be utilized when educating children, in families, in marriages, in what we eat, or in any form of personal creation. We still need to follow principles upon which we all agree to facilitate the functioning of a society like obeying traffic lights, food and drug codes, maintaining acceptable public conduct, and so on, but manipulating the energy of others to transform them against their will creates unpredictable situations.
1) I shall listen Ethics and Morality. Also, if I uphold something, this does not nessesary mean I think it is true. It may be that I am testing if it is fit me. So I shall not use "one", I shall use "I".
2) Could you address a specific issues (A-D):
Instead of:
Increasing my power and influence enables me to do more good for the world since I know what is good for the world and they do not. I am sure of this because I am in contact with authoritative sources of knowledge.
Something like this:
Increasing my power and influence enables me to do more good for the world since I know what is good for the world and they do not. I am sure of this because:
A. Due to my power and technics I am in contact with much deeper layers of me, than others
B. Due to my power and technics my desires are not influenced by such things as social and political advertisement, and not influenced even with more subtle effects of ideas
C. Due to my power and technics I do understand the future effect of others actions, but others do not understand such effect
D. And like "I cured a system from one virus and infected by my own virus -- so it is of no harm for the system owner."
I do not ask you what of ABCD is applicable to me -- it is mostly planning. But sometimes something may be true -- for example, a child want to play with matches and do not understand that he may cause a conflagration.
Probably this may not be resolved by understanding olny. So I am interested (again!) in technics... but one of the technics is to discuss.
I suppose that when somebody really is in contact with the deepest level of self (see "A") one do not need such a technics.
3) BTW: I fight advertising. I do not tolerate it on TV. I do not see TV if it can be interrupted by ads. I do not like a book if it presents something by an circuitous way. I learn and I shall learn to quickly detect such attempts. Now is the time to make such a defence in an energetic way.
4) And the most interesting -- concerning marriage... I shall ask later.
2) Could you address a specific issues (A-D):
Instead of:
Increasing my power and influence enables me to do more good for the world since I know what is good for the world and they do not. I am sure of this because I am in contact with authoritative sources of knowledge.
Something like this:
Increasing my power and influence enables me to do more good for the world since I know what is good for the world and they do not. I am sure of this because:
A. Due to my power and technics I am in contact with much deeper layers of me, than others
B. Due to my power and technics my desires are not influenced by such things as social and political advertisement, and not influenced even with more subtle effects of ideas
C. Due to my power and technics I do understand the future effect of others actions, but others do not understand such effect
D. And like "I cured a system from one virus and infected by my own virus -- so it is of no harm for the system owner."
I do not ask you what of ABCD is applicable to me -- it is mostly planning. But sometimes something may be true -- for example, a child want to play with matches and do not understand that he may cause a conflagration.
Probably this may not be resolved by understanding olny. So I am interested (again!) in technics... but one of the technics is to discuss.
I suppose that when somebody really is in contact with the deepest level of self (see "A") one do not need such a technics.
3) BTW: I fight advertising. I do not tolerate it on TV. I do not see TV if it can be interrupted by ads. I do not like a book if it presents something by an circuitous way. I learn and I shall learn to quickly detect such attempts. Now is the time to make such a defence in an energetic way.
4) And the most interesting -- concerning marriage... I shall ask later.
I understand you are exploring. It is a good thing to explore. I personally find not being able to explore intolerable. For example, formerly when I had to initiate and manage multiple large projects, I would use thought games as the generals used war games to test feasibility. In these games, talking and planning would go on passionately as all concepts were explored using 'think tank' or 'brainstorming' methodology. Some people had a hard time with such passion for they assumed the exploration ended with inalterable conclusions that dictated courses of action just because the meeting ended. Those who love the creative passion of mind/speech churning sometimes temporarily follow a line of reasoning only to discard it later. Coming to a final conclusion is often difficult due to the various opportunities or possible modes of action, but when enough research is done there are often only one or two real options to choose from. When the path is clear, one can move down it with conviction. Yet, if one finds the path is not the best, the courageous must say so and make a change despite the inability of others to understand it.
I embrace your methodology of exploration and I know you will find what you seek because you are not afraid to look for it.
I agree with your supposition that a person in contact with very deep levels within them already has the capacity to do what they wish energetically. It is also possible that the deeply sensitive would not want to learn or use techniques designed to control or coerce others.
Considering this, we could conclude that these techniques might be useful for those who seek their essence within the depths of their consciousness or who feel a calling to intervene in the lives of others. Through learning how to gain and use power, they might find a way to be of service. I believe that increasing the power of others goes hand in hand with increasing their knowledge of how that power affects themselves and those on whom it will be used.
I am not sure if you meant the virus switching example in the way it read to me. I do not want a virus in me, or on my computer, and therefore someone who replaces one virus with another is equally an aggressor as no virus is good. If you wish to heal, cure all viruses. I cannot understand the mentality of someone who wishes to coerce others in this way. It is like a mother who justifies her domination of her child's words, friends, time and eventually thoughts, by declaring she knows what is best for her child, even more than the child herself! Such a mother succeeds only in stifling the child's growth until the now crippled offspring rebels and reaches out for freedom through contradiction. This is sad, for the child's life becomes characterized by a strong need to counter anything the mother said, good or bad. When I come in contact with those who declare they know better than me what is best for me, I become suspicious for my experiences contradict this notion. That does not mean helpful knowledge or suggestions should be discouraged!
"We Know What Is Best For You!" Governments say this, doctors say this, teachers say this, gurus say this, your friends or parents say this, your wife or husband says this, the TV says this, your financial or tax advisor says this, and so on. It is a common mentality in this world. There is no lack of people who are convinced they know what is best for you and want you to simply listen to them. Thank God there is still a choice! I can walk the other way if I want. I can research options or alternatives. I can examine the qualifications of the person presenting me their 'product,' and I can judge if this is something I wish to be involved in.
I find unacceptable that someone will use esoteric mystic energy to program me according to their conception of what is best for me. Whether that matters to the person interested in learning or practicing such arts of coercion depends on the quality of the person. If they care, they are cultured, but if they do not care, they are aggressors.
It depends on your value structure. If your value structure includes the concept that you know better how others should be due to your power or knowledge, then you will engage in learning how to influence others. If your value structure includes the acceptance of the organic reality that all must go through their own evolutionary life experiences and usurping this would be against the natural course of events, you will not use esoteric mystic power on people unless they ask for your help.
Even if one is a great healer, one will not attempt to work on someone without their desiring such help. Healers are an interesting combination of people who care, who have the sensitive capacity to feel the pain and problems of others, and who have the power to change others' situation to something better, all within the context of facilitating the growth and freedom of the 'patient' rather than directing it. Part of the healing process is the realization of the deep emotional trauma that often precipitates illness and the individual's correcting their (often) involuntary response to the trauma. This can do wonders. No healer can heal well if they dictate to the energetic body or mind of another, for the response one makes to inner trauma is personal and cannot be programmed by others.
Even the Gita advises those who are wise to not disrupt the patterns of the ignorant. One can only encourage others to stop doing self-destructive things. One cannot command them to do so -- at least not successfully!
It is not within my power to direct anyone to stop trying to control others, for such a realization comes in one's own time and in one's own manner. I periodically discover people attempting to influence me against my will and I deal with them as aggressors. Do not forget: one can get burned while attempting to coerce or dictate to others, especially when trying it on those with power.
Learning powerful techniques is useful to carry one into other dimensions where useful and valuable things about ourselves and others are discovered and therefore it would be wrong of me to stop you from learning and practicing power expanding techniques. Just be warned of my concerns and use your energy to develop in the most advantageous way. After all, nothing ventured, nothing gained -- just be careful -- fools rush in where Angels dare to tread.
I embrace your methodology of exploration and I know you will find what you seek because you are not afraid to look for it.
I agree with your supposition that a person in contact with very deep levels within them already has the capacity to do what they wish energetically. It is also possible that the deeply sensitive would not want to learn or use techniques designed to control or coerce others.
Considering this, we could conclude that these techniques might be useful for those who seek their essence within the depths of their consciousness or who feel a calling to intervene in the lives of others. Through learning how to gain and use power, they might find a way to be of service. I believe that increasing the power of others goes hand in hand with increasing their knowledge of how that power affects themselves and those on whom it will be used.
I am not sure if you meant the virus switching example in the way it read to me. I do not want a virus in me, or on my computer, and therefore someone who replaces one virus with another is equally an aggressor as no virus is good. If you wish to heal, cure all viruses. I cannot understand the mentality of someone who wishes to coerce others in this way. It is like a mother who justifies her domination of her child's words, friends, time and eventually thoughts, by declaring she knows what is best for her child, even more than the child herself! Such a mother succeeds only in stifling the child's growth until the now crippled offspring rebels and reaches out for freedom through contradiction. This is sad, for the child's life becomes characterized by a strong need to counter anything the mother said, good or bad. When I come in contact with those who declare they know better than me what is best for me, I become suspicious for my experiences contradict this notion. That does not mean helpful knowledge or suggestions should be discouraged!
"We Know What Is Best For You!" Governments say this, doctors say this, teachers say this, gurus say this, your friends or parents say this, your wife or husband says this, the TV says this, your financial or tax advisor says this, and so on. It is a common mentality in this world. There is no lack of people who are convinced they know what is best for you and want you to simply listen to them. Thank God there is still a choice! I can walk the other way if I want. I can research options or alternatives. I can examine the qualifications of the person presenting me their 'product,' and I can judge if this is something I wish to be involved in.
I find unacceptable that someone will use esoteric mystic energy to program me according to their conception of what is best for me. Whether that matters to the person interested in learning or practicing such arts of coercion depends on the quality of the person. If they care, they are cultured, but if they do not care, they are aggressors.
It depends on your value structure. If your value structure includes the concept that you know better how others should be due to your power or knowledge, then you will engage in learning how to influence others. If your value structure includes the acceptance of the organic reality that all must go through their own evolutionary life experiences and usurping this would be against the natural course of events, you will not use esoteric mystic power on people unless they ask for your help.
Even if one is a great healer, one will not attempt to work on someone without their desiring such help. Healers are an interesting combination of people who care, who have the sensitive capacity to feel the pain and problems of others, and who have the power to change others' situation to something better, all within the context of facilitating the growth and freedom of the 'patient' rather than directing it. Part of the healing process is the realization of the deep emotional trauma that often precipitates illness and the individual's correcting their (often) involuntary response to the trauma. This can do wonders. No healer can heal well if they dictate to the energetic body or mind of another, for the response one makes to inner trauma is personal and cannot be programmed by others.
Even the Gita advises those who are wise to not disrupt the patterns of the ignorant. One can only encourage others to stop doing self-destructive things. One cannot command them to do so -- at least not successfully!
It is not within my power to direct anyone to stop trying to control others, for such a realization comes in one's own time and in one's own manner. I periodically discover people attempting to influence me against my will and I deal with them as aggressors. Do not forget: one can get burned while attempting to coerce or dictate to others, especially when trying it on those with power.
Learning powerful techniques is useful to carry one into other dimensions where useful and valuable things about ourselves and others are discovered and therefore it would be wrong of me to stop you from learning and practicing power expanding techniques. Just be warned of my concerns and use your energy to develop in the most advantageous way. After all, nothing ventured, nothing gained -- just be careful -- fools rush in where Angels dare to tread.