possible rules of messaging

[Guest guest]

Buddha said: (do not reveal your state.) I think there exist lots of

non-sense communication here, from old commers, new commers, about my

cat who is sick or my dog's diet, etc. It is non of my business, but if

it were, i would suggest that people do not talk <useless> talks. also

sensorship is necessary. freedom of talk causes waste of internet

bandwidth.

[Guest guest]

My only response to this post Shahin is that this group is different than most,

I think... and the people here genuinely care about one another.  Like any

family oriented group, I think you will have that kind of cordial small talk,

anywhere.   Now... if it were ever decided to make the group more formal, and

strictly business, than I could see how that would be totally appropriate to

limit the discussion to only kundalini related issues.  But I for one hope we

never go in that direction, as I enjoy getting to know the entire essence of the

person, including the details about their cat, diet etc. That is just me.

 

Kind Regards,

 

Sharon

 

--- On Wed, 8/6/08, Shahin <sh1963sh wrote:

 

Shahin <sh1963sh

possible rules of messaging

 

Wednesday, August 6, 2008, 7:31 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Buddha said: (do not reveal your state.) I think there exist lots of

non-sense communication here, from old commers, new commers, about my

cat who is sick or my dog's diet, etc. It is non of my business, but if

it were, i would suggest that people do not talk <useless> talks. also

sensorship is necessary. freedom of talk causes waste of internet

bandwidth.

[Guest guest]

Actually, the Etiquette Guidelines for this group ask that we keep to K-related topics and discuss off-topic subjects off-list; here is that section of the Guidelines:

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Staying On TopicWe are here to discuss Kundalini and other subjects relating to Kundalini awakening such as psychic experiences, dreams, OBEs, meditation, and the myriad of symptoms and sensations related to Kundalini awakening. We are asked not to discuss topics unrelated to Kundalini on-list. We are welcome to discuss issues and topics not related to Kundalini off-list in personal, member-to-member emails.

``````````````````````````Not pointing a finger at anyone, just clarifying. FYI, 'no worries,' as would say!

 

Blessings & love,

Claudia--- On Wed, 8/6/08, Sharon Grubb <sharongrbb2000 wrote:

Sharon Grubb <sharongrbb2000Re: possible rules of messaging Date: Wednesday, August 6, 2008, 10:04 AM

 

 

My only response to this post Shahin is that this group is different than most, I think... and the people here genuinely care about one another. Like any family oriented group, I think you will have that kind of cordial small talk, anywhere. Now... if it were ever decided to make the group more formal, and strictly business, than I could see how that would be totally appropriate to limit the discussion to only kundalini related issues. But I for one hope we never go in that direction, as I enjoy getting to know the entire essence of the person, including the details about their cat, diet etc. That is just me.Kind Regards,Sharon--- On Wed, 8/6/08, Shahin <sh1963sh > wrote:Shahin <sh1963sh >[Kundalini-Awakenin

g-Systems- 1] possible rules of messagingKundalini-Awakening -Systems- 1 Wednesday, August 6, 2008, 7:31 AMBuddha said: (do not reveal your state.) I think there exist lots of non-sense communication here, from old commers, new commers, about my cat who is sick or my dog's diet, etc. It is non of my business, but if it were, i would suggest that people do not talk <useless> talks. also sensorship is necessary. freedom of talk causes waste of internet bandwidth.

[Guest guest]

I think God is messy. There will always be loose ends and if we try

too hard to tie them up then we lose what was precious and have only

dogma. Like it or not the posts from dissenting voices are still

sacred and represent something that we need to understand. It is a

gift to see how others see us, and recently we have been more gifted

than usual. I prefer to think Shakti has a sense of humor than that

we must cut ourselves off to find consensus. I suppose we could have

a separate group for more privileged communications, but we would

still have dissent; it comes with duality.

 

I don't particularly like seeing attacked or anyone else but I

think it comes with the chicken suit. My feeling is that there is

some karma being burned off here. We all need to make our peace with

the people in our lives who do not understand and want to criticize,

convert, guilt-trip, and waste our energy.

 

I want to learn and I have this cockamamie idea that what I am aware

of now and now and now is exactly what I need to be aware of

enlightenment. Unfiltered uncensored reality.

 

Peter

 

 

 

, Sharon Grubb

<sharongrbb2000 wrote:

>

> My only response to this post Shahin is that this group is different

than most, I think... and the people here genuinely care about one

another. Like any family oriented group, I think you will have that

kind of cordial small talk, anywhere. Now... if it were ever

decided to make the group more formal, and strictly business, than I

could see how that would be totally appropriate to limit the

discussion to only kundalini related issues. But I for one hope we

never go in that direction, as I enjoy getting to know the entire

essence of the person, including the details about their cat, diet

etc. That is just me.

>

> Kind Regards,

>

> Sharon

>

> --- On Wed, 8/6/08, Shahin <sh1963sh wrote:

>

> Shahin <sh1963sh

> possible rules of messaging

>

> Wednesday, August 6, 2008, 7:31 AM

>

Buddha said: (do not reveal your state.) I think there exist lots of

> non-sense communication here, from old commers, new commers, about my

> cat who is sick or my dog's diet, etc. It is non of my business, but if

> it were, i would suggest that people do not talk <useless> talks. also

> sensorship is necessary. freedom of talk causes waste of internet

> bandwidth.

>

[Guest guest]

" But I for one hope we never go in that direction, as I enjoy getting

to know the entire essence of the person, including the details about

their cat, diet etc. That is just me.

Kind Regards,

Sharon "

 

Same here!

V.

[Guest guest]

At 10:34 AM 8/6/2008, you wrote:

I think God is messy. There will

always be loose ends and if we try

too hard to tie them up then we lose what was precious and have only

dogma.

I know someone who has written a book with the ironic title of

" Controlling Others for Love and Profit " . The inside flyleaf

says " If you believe that, then you better wake up. Controlling

others is not the solution - It is the problem. " . Whenever we are

talking about rules and guidelines that are aimed at controlling our

environment, we are in fact trying to control others. Of course, there

are already guidelines and rules here, and I don't object to that. I

don't object at all to pre-moderation of new members. I'm just saying

let's take a deeper look, we can mine gold from this situation.

Like it or not the

posts from dissenting voices are still

sacred and represent something that we need to understand. It is a

gift to see how others see us, and recently we have been more gifted

than usual.

I have noticed a theme about how this is a sacred place and how certain

people are longing for a spot in their lives that is free from intrusions

from " others " , from those they see as " abusive " .

While part of me totally understands this, part of me knows that if we

choose to wait for others to treat us well before we have peace, we will

never have peace. We all have very different ideas of what constitutes

" abusive " . I have seen the word " vitriol " used to

describe recent posts, and I just didn't see them as vitriolic.

Illogical, irrational, fear-based and accusatory ... but vitriolic? See

alt.astrology on the Usenet if you want an eyeful of vitriol (warning to

the sensitive, there is a flame war going on for nearly a decade there,

last time I looked). I see this group as both sacred and mundane. It's a

public discussion group. We are never going to be able to ensure that

only the highest minds can participate. I don't even want that,

personally. I've gotten a lot out of this discussion, warts and all. I

consider these people teachers - they just are teaching lessons other

than the ones they intended <g>. And I can see they actually have

what they believe is our best interests somewhere at heart.

I prefer to think

Shakti has a sense of humor than that

we must cut ourselves off to find consensus. I suppose we could have

a separate group for more privileged communications, but we would

still have dissent; it comes with duality.

People can't grow well in hermetically sealed bubbles. Such things may be

useful in the early stages of a recovery, and for those who are stuck in

fear, but at some point we need to get past our fears and reactions. The

cast has to come off at some point. In the real world, people are

ignorant, opinionated and contrary ... on a good day. We all know this.

We also know we can't completely control that. What we can learn to

control is how we react when people are ignorant, opinionated and

contrary. I learned to do it at times even when people have been abusive

to me. I can't say I'm perfect, but I do think that's the only goal

that's really achievable. To large measure I think this particular group

of people overwhelmingly responds with love, reason and compassion when

attacked, and that's a sign of a good deal of spiritual growth, so

something is working for them.

We all need to make

our peace with

the people in our lives who do not understand and want to criticize,

convert, guilt-trip, and waste our energy.

People can only waste our energy if we give it over to them. We have

other choices. If you are reading on and see a thread with an

incendiary topic, and you know you are sensitive, don't click on it.

There are filters in virtually every form of email reader. If I see a

thread that is offending me and I can't find a way to bring reason and

compassion, I filter it out. Let the moderator deal with it. I have yet

to meet an abusive person who responds well to criticism of their bad

behavior, and believe me, I've tried! (laugh) ... It just doesn't work. I

feel the overwhelmingly positive, reasonable and respectful response to

this small flap has worked remarkably well so far. That's the way to

handle it going forward.

I want to learn and

I have this cockamamie idea that what I am aware

of now and now and now is exactly what I need to be aware of

enlightenment. Unfiltered uncensored reality.

I agree. Our job isn't to change " them " . It's to change our

reactions when our buttons get pushed. That's the far more valuable,

lasting impact, because we can take that with us everywhere we

go.

Brandi

[Guest guest]

and me!

julie--- On Wed, 8/6/08, Valarie Vousden <vjvousden wrote:

Valarie Vousden <vjvousden Re: possible rules of messaging Date: Wednesday, August 6, 2008, 11:19 AM

 

 

"But I for one hope we never go in that direction, as I enjoy getting to know the entire essence of the person, including the details about their cat, diet etc. That is just me.Kind Regards,Sharon"Same here!V.

[Guest guest]

In the end we're the only ones we can control.

 

Peter

 

 

 

, Brandi Jasmine

<jazztalk wrote:

>

> I agree. Our job isn't to change " them " . It's to change our

reactions when our buttons get pushed. That's the far more valuable,

lasting impact, because we can take that with us everywhere we go.

>

> Brandi

>

[Guest guest]

Add me in here, if you are at " one " with the universe, what could be off

topic?

 

Don

>

>

> and me!

> julie

>

> --- On Wed, 8/6/08, Valarie Vousden <vjvousden wrote:

>

> Valarie Vousden <vjvousden

> Re: possible rules of messaging

>

> Wednesday, August 6, 2008, 11:19 AM

" But I for one hope we never go in that direction, as I enjoy getting

> to know the entire essence of the person, including the details about

> their cat, diet etc. That is just me.

> Kind Regards,

> Sharon "

>

> Same here!

> V.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>