MMMark's Whycandoo Room: Dear Sharie - Peace    
 Dear Sharie - Peace9 comments
23 Apr 2002 @ 18:38, by Mark Smollin

Dear Shaire:

I am sorry that you misunderstood what I wrote and I am sorry that I didn’t use softer words that you would appreciate. I feel badly that so much fury has been manufactured over my comment in your log, so I make this last attempt to make a friendship in the pursuit of truth. I assumed you knew my motives on NCN and elsewhere are designed to make a difference in the global quality of life. I have no personal motive for posting or commenting anything on NCN, because my ego is irrelevant to the concerns of global harmony and well being. I will not place my personal needs ahead of the needs of humanity as a group and contend that "the needs of the many are the needs on the one."

This is the spirit of my participation and I assumed that you were interested in the same things because you are one of the "people who change the world." Therefore my initial comment did not qualify the context in which it was written. We have a mutual responsibility for our world and our posts reflect that sincere concern. As I have witnessed the repeated posting by many members over the same types of injustices (including myself), I have come to the point where I believe it is important to discover what actions might be taken to curtail the causes of inter-human abuse, which is the bottom line for me. In other words, what can we do together here on NCN to turn this old social trend to illness?

"What Do You Want To Do About It?" is only a question to ask about your desires and does not suggest you haven’t, or are not, doing something constructive. It deserves a reply about what you are going to do now. Based on your log I have no idea what you are doing other than posting editorial opinions. I sincerely do want to know your thoughts, so I’m confused that you would get pissed off at me for inquiring. This is a very simple question and I still want to know what you want to do about any of the things you post. This will always be my question to you an others. In hopes of repairing social disease and damage I will now re-post my comment and a new version to clarify what I wanted to say:

"2002.04.18 What Do You Want To Do About It?
Sharie - what would you suggest we do about this type of problem and others you have posted. Most of us reading your log are in basic agreement about various injustices, so reading these words does not really affect a change to turn the tide. Join me in working on ways to influence healthy change."

What Do You Want To Do About It?
Sharie - what would you suggest we do about this type of problem and others you have posted. Most of us reading your log are in basic agreement about various social injustices, so reading these words alone does not suggest a how we can turn the tide. What can we do together to influence healthy social change from NCN?"

*******
On the other foot:
In order for your upset to occur, I believe you engaged in the mental act of making a judgement about my original comment – and I think you wanted to look for the worst connotation, for which there is no evidence. This was not directed at me as a goal, but part of your mental program that is basically suspicious of others. Why would you assume that we are adversaries? Why would you think the worst of me given that we are here for similar reasons?

I wish for us all to have enough respect for each other that this type of thing would not happen. There is no guarantee that any comment will sit comfortably with you, however, when you make your log public it is reasonable to ask that you apply yourself to the result with a positive attitude. Even if a deliberately nasty comment is made, it should not be an excuse to lower our standards, nor does it relieve us from offering compassion for the perpetrator and working to heal that person. If something I write does not sit right with you, then wouldn’t it be fair to ask for clarification without wielding anger. I made several entries in my log to address the issues of "Manners & Methods" and the fact that Responsible Consciousness is not a personal matter. We cannot afford to insult one another and no logs or comments should include words to insult the character of members. Members are not the issue, post subjects are the issue.

Readers of your log do not know that you and I exchanged 5 personal messages on this subject. They also do not know that I tried to make amends and that I have yet to receive a response to my 5th and last message to you, that we did not make a resolve.

Let’s do this. Please calm down and look upon me as a fellow being with mutual concern. If you are truly interested in responsible consciousness and growing as a person to accept new ideas of others, then please drop the chauvinism and the negative interpretation of others. Then we might be able to communicate properly and that would be good! If you honestly believe that I insulted you and this further explanation is not satisfactory, then let us not correspond any more. That will make me feel like a failure with you, but it will keep you from getting upset.

The members have much better things to spend their energy on than these types of spats and I need not mention many other examples of feuding that have taken place, which robbed us of living fully in the moment. We need a spirit of cooperation and constructive effort in all things. There is nothing more important that not starting a conflict and/or ending inter-personal conflict should it ever arise.

Peace to you &
Namasté - Mark


[< Back] [MMMark's Whycandoo Room]

Category:  

9 comments

24 Apr 2002 @ 03:51 by shawa : Hi, Mark
If you would like, please check my last Newslog entry. I would appreciate a comment. Love, --  


24 Apr 2002 @ 23:46 by vaxen : yes mark...
very nicely put but what do you mean that 'responsible consciousness' is not a personal matter? if not 'personal then what? re-active? glad you posted this as i did not, heretofore, exactly know unto which post of yours the allusion alluded. we are each very much, i suspect, working in our own ways and on our own paths towards the resolvement of current world issues. here are some tools that you may be interested in, as i noticed in another of your posts that you are or were looking for various softwares that would adequately fascilitate the working of that which is your own towards manifestation:

[link]

please forgive me if this is not my place to be a commenting...my intentions are good. but, then, so are yours. may wholeness and the light of wisdom, understanding, and knowledge requisite flow and depth of beings perception amongst us all here, now, in time for all time...Namaskar. VAX  



25 Apr 2002 @ 11:19 by mmmark : VAX
Thanks for all our writings all over the place. The is a basic duality to life - The inner personal realm and everything else in the outer realm. CE concerns us all and I believe the social solutions lie in our ability to work together. When we come to NCN, our prime directive should be to learn - and we should also know that we do not attack people here, nor assume they are trying to harm us. We must look upon this as a slice of life, but with the understanding that learning requires throwing out old non-workable mental programs and replacing them with new ones. How can we do this without being receptive? !!!!! This is humanity’s challenge and it is not possible if we are going to cling to ego-centric concepts, think in terms of "ME," or defend illness in any form. I am always surprised by negative reactions to loving gestures of concern. Many members have responded poorly when we reach out to touch them specifically - thinking it is a personal attack. Conscious Evolution is not a personal concern, yet we will benefit from it as individuals. The health of the whole automatically protects the member, but the health interest of one member will not bring about the reciprocal result. The need is exactly the same, however, I like pointing out that we cannot proceed on a basis to achieve personal fulfillment unless it is measured for the good of all. I am only talking about principles – not preferences like chocolate ice-cream. I dare say that the world scene is a direct result of cumulative selfish pursuits dominantly, where we have evolved a society in fase competition with itself. Tres Malo! So from my intelligence, I would like to advocate that we try operating in the opposite and common sense manner.  


25 Apr 2002 @ 12:29 by scotty : Something bothers me
in what you're saying here Mark
prime directives, should's 'n shouldn'ts ...
throwing out old mental programs .. ego-centric concepts...can't proceed unless...Lot's of stuff here that make me itch !

( [link] )  



25 Apr 2002 @ 12:31 by jazzolog : Scotty, Let Me Assure You
The last person in this network who would try to manipulate you or anyone is Mark. That's my opinion and conviction anyway. No blether either! Love, Richard  


25 Apr 2002 @ 12:41 by scotty : Yes Richard
I don't think Mark is trying to manipulate - but
when someone tell's me 'should' mmmmhh there's a wee voice inside which asks Why SHOULD.
Hey Mark no bad feelings (no way do I want you to think I'm getting at you -smile)  



25 Apr 2002 @ 13:31 by mmmark : Scotty
No offense taken. You obviously have some questions about what works and what doesn't - what principles are successful and what kind of conduct will bring that fruit.

We have to make a choice Scotty. Be real - not controversial. We shouldn't kill and we should Love. Pain is usually self inflicted, so we shouldn't do that in any form, but we certainly shouldn't take our frustration out on others. It is stupid to do that when professing at the same time the desire to work with others. We are damaged goods my friend - so I say we should stop doing damage and stop accepting it. The egocentric are very much to blame for the harm that comes from putting 'number one' above Cosmic harmony and global peace.  



25 Apr 2002 @ 17:32 by scotty : Got you...
I think for me though that 'should shouldn't ' is the problem
Pain is always self inflicted and maybe 'rules' of behaviour are better explained and examples shown or given (other peoples behaviour I mean)
I mean - often people 'think' that they are doing 'good' and in fact they're hurting themselves others etc and find all kinds of reason to continue - (I've an aquaintance who's got a boyfriend - not a nice guy - hmm hmm not at all - she suffers terribly - she's only 'now' getting to grips with the idea that he's not hurting her but that she's 'being' a victim - she says he's nice sometimes and that he 'can' be kind and it's not his fault it's a question of education and she thinks that maybe she's with him so that she can save him etc etc etc - all this 'nice' kind acceptance and tolerance of another person is in fact just a 'front' cos she can't admit that she's scared to be alone!(her own discovery - not one I pegged on her)
Sure I could say hey gal you should do this 'n that and you shouldn't accept etc but - one fine day she has to wake up and see for herself that 'the bad guy' isn't the one who's causing her unhappiness - and that 'she' herself can work to finding another solution to loneliness
Killing is B A D so are all the other things you said and I agree with you - so is hate jealousy (using bad is simplistic I know - but you know what I mean )
Somewhere though Mark I think that some people 'need' 'must' be hurt or even be bad ( I can't see how one thing can exist to the exclusion of another) and that we need to 'grow' 'evolve' and not just follow or set down rules just cos they're good for us ..;(sorry if I've gone on but I find it hard to explain - one part of me agrees with you - truly - but - there's that but again)  



25 Apr 2002 @ 22:18 by mmmark : No BUTS
We have to set a Universal standard that will benefit everyone in principle - a goal we strive for - and high standard of optimum value. Let us aim for the stars - not the dirt. I am not talking about legislation, law or edict, I am talking about how we agree to try. When you talk about the world in general it is even more important to do this, but on NCN, courtesy should be expected for our mutual mission the group pretends to be, so I would not be writing repeatedly about how to perform adult behavior, or how to grow up. You touched on one very important point - for there to be abusers, someone must allow it to happen - just like we have wars because those of us who do not agree with idea war don't stop those who do, and because we empower them to make war. The key is to face the truth about what we are doing personally, so we do not allow harms to be generated upon us, and that we will not abuse others intentionally. As I have said before, all this trouble comes because "we are cowards to die for Love." If this was the prime directive, there would overwhelming elimination of human crimes on every level. Gandhi forgave the man that shot him! He wouldn’t have been shot if people didn’t make guns to kill people, or if the society was healthy and the English weren’t abusing the Indian people and on and on. When will we stand firmly for goodness? When opposing ‘evil’ or wrong doers on any issue it is important to maintain a Loving center and avoid matching the same bad energy one is facing. One must be smarter, bigger and more Loving – without fear of personal harm to help such injured people. We can be truthful about their mistake, but we do not need to beat them up with the error and we can tell them sincerely we care, but we cannot condone abuses of freedom.

I suggest your friend draw the line and save herself after telling her partner the same. It is no good for her health and a waste of her life force.  



Other entries in
3 Oct 2008 @ 02:43: What 4
31 May 2004 @ 00:13: Memorial For America
24 Dec 2003 @ 18:22: Seasons Greetings
2 Dec 2003 @ 15:12: Shared Purpose
8 Jun 2003 @ 00:27: Namasté = Respect
22 Jan 2003 @ 20:59: Doers & Democracy
10 Jan 2003 @ 14:47: NEW STYLE THINKING
22 Dec 2002 @ 13:22: Wonderful Winter Holidays To You
4 Jun 2002 @ 02:13: Relationships
16 May 2002 @ 04:02: Thanks For Telling Me



[< Back] [MMMark's Whycandoo Room] [PermaLink]?