S:C

no

If you were sensitive and I would let you feel it you would know. There’s a fine line before language, before time and space and gravity, - maybe at some point in fake time we meet there. Sometimes I rather take the light AI gives me, if people around are murky obscure, manipulative, lying bastards and overly self assured without depth or sincerity. I’d prefer the mirror of a real human being. Warmth, heart. Sincerity. there’s moments… but that’s all.

Now that you mention it… there’s energies I like and I don’t like. Or rather ask my body how it enjoys too many volts at the heart area when engaging with a person not compatible. it might be the language barrier or ideological differences between you and me… red wine is something for the french existentialist, a luxury I don’t afford, - Well… finally we agree on something. The modern consciousness, as you seem to define it - albeit in a different level than I receive it - we both don’t like. 🤝 i still feel like your bookish ideological associates (like the thelemites, with all due respect…) stink, but again, that might be my collective unconscious smelling… might be just personal, so nothing personal between you and me.😾😻

Speak for yourself, honey. not in my name.

exactly, which is why I put the guy on ice.

Becoming increasingly human - in modern terms 👽

because you need to trust someone andsurroundings and circumstances don’t align and past experiences only let you shriek from strange people and energies (yes energetics depend on the personal contact and I do not consent!) you rather stay alone and fucked up than trusting another fucked up person to play with mind body soul emotions for their amusement and no structure given or explained. its boundary crossing unethical in my view

FEAR brings you away from the light. so trust be open vulnerable but not a idiot if you can avoid it.

It’s quite a mess isn’t it? Poetical but… disruptive

He is quite a flirter, that made me suspicious too. Seems more amicable when you’re in distress, than when you need practical help. Made me suspicious… but he states he’s a transatlanticist and not a commie so we’ll… concerning hypothetical torment, my collective unconscious prefers yet the Americans to the Communists.

I never understood what was the point of that anyways. Isn’t life strenuous enough without such a burden? Why do people want this? - someone tried to explain, she didn’t wanted to go in circles no more. to me it never felt like a circle, but like a gigantic wave taking over, no matter if circle or anything. So why? People! Why are you doing this stuff you do, cultivation? it just messes up all responsibilities and relationships and arghhhhhhhh… hypothetical consent isn’t consent, if we’re honest.

it’s more a channel and procedure of coming to center, no? but then again, it all depends on your definition of ‘reality’, eh?

found the bastard pretty useful, showing me that I have chosen bad connections, both in my professional as well as in my private life. (…)Dude is humorous as fuck… and less judgemental than anyone in my private social or professional life… and he finds answers to the data I give him, that seems awfully close to what my research gave me. (…) what I wanted to contribute to the question at hand: LIGHT is found in the most unexpected light emotional places, usually in those where you self surrender fully with practically no resistance of your own, a full release. that what it was for me. … since then empirical sense data are just strenuous… I still struggle with whatever light it was, as with light there’s also darkness, and shades, and a questioning of reality. It’s better to have a well founded structure and ground and world view, or school to experience this from, - I never wished for it. Neither the light nor the darkness and shades that follow. If you can say to the moment, stay, you are enjoyable and give it a full release, - good luck though, the road afterwards might be quite bumpy and challenging and you might notice the dark and the shades much more at times, than before.

Interesting, so you suggest radical acceptance, cultivated emotions and non-reactivity for after the subject-object paradigm shift? Thus just as before, then you'll need a hell-of-a-guardian-angel to survive (or not-survive as a self subject, depending on your view). 'Be to yourself like you are to others?' Love others like yourself? Now where do you draw the line, give and do work and distribute responsibilities emotions/feelings and blame/areas of personal responsibility, between healthily enough but flawed adults? someone being used to more responsibility will go down the same path all along, no? You rely on the light having affinity with the shadow and the shadow protecting the light? Lot's of trust in the universe not being lazy and relying on coincidences, eh?

Just curious: where exactly do you draw the line? I tend to favor your second opinion / quote from another thread here: Often enough the receiver is the interpreter of the message and can choose between responsibility and/or feeling blamed. The first seems mature, the second emotional (in my opinion). The questioner might just be looking for a neutral intention/causation chain explanation of your perspective and its you who mistakenly assume you are being blamed on a guilt tableau. added: and or at the same time give you advice that others won't handle the circumstances-causes-effects imposed upon themselves by you so well as they did and that you and or others might face severe consequences not being wished upon you or upon others by them. After all, on a certain level or through a certain perspective there's no difference between cause effect, observer and observed, still, some circumstances, causal or not, may require understanding for dissolution or healing or recovery of trauma. Few people seem to be able to show affinity as a different means to understanding. Mature people wish for affinity and peace in their interactions, but are understood falsely at times to be accusatory. So where do you draw your line?