However, I don't feel it is our place to make a judgement about the praiseworthiness of any soul, on regards to spiritual growth. As only Supreme Spirit really knows what makes any of us tick.
One makes all kinds of judgements about oneself, others, the world, actions, and so on... and this includes individuals' spiritual growth. Without this judgement, based on a preconceived set of standards, it would be impossible to teach others, ourselves, or even know how to act properly. However, judgement should include
compassion, and
open-mindedness, allowing for the possibility we may always be wrong or incorrect. It is not necessary to know the incarnational history of a Soulspirit to judge where they are at now, what they need, what they lack, or where they excel. I would also note that an individual Soulspirit is not merely a thread in the greater tapestry of humanity, but is his or her own tapestry within a greater tapestry, which may be judged without examining all the minute single threads of Karma, Enidvadew, character traits, and single lessons learned and unlearned. A person's overall praiseworthiness, regarding spiritual growth, may in fact be judged by looking at this entire tapestry or makeup of an individual. At least Gwineva, Celestina, and Rowena say so... (All of Chapter 7 in Rowena should be read here, but I could only quote so much.)
A person is good, bad or indifferent because of his personality make-up and should be judged solely on that basis.
You shy away from judging others, claiming your non-judgementalism to be right, and you are ready to believe that all judgements are wrong. The issues are confused and you are like a ship lost at sea without a compass. Your young people, not being taught the difference between right and wrong, are not immoral anymore, they are amoral.
There are those who sit on the fence, who are lukewarm about everything; who are patrons of averageness and judgemental about nothing. They condone, by an attitude of non-condemnation, things they know to be wrong and are anti-nothing and activist against nothing. They constitute the great apathetic mass of the people who sit in pitiable mediocrity at the point of balance on the scales. They are the acceptors of the unacceptable and are generally convinced that their middle path of non-involvement, non-commitment and non-condemnation is the best one. It may be for them, because it panders to their mediocre minds, but for your society it spells disaster.
To rise above this state requires the cultivation of convictions, the establishment of personal standards and codes which are made clear to the world. It means calling a spade a spade, and affirming that according to your standards this is right and that is wrong. Stick hard and fast to your principles and convictions and do not be reluctant to make them known and to defend them. Only thus can you become a positive person. It is the shilly- shalliers who have contributed most to the present deplorable state of your society. Of course, between black and white is an area of grey and with the great majority of people there is an overwhelming mass of greyness and very little black and white, whereas it should be the opposite.
You will often hear the expression, "I am not going to be judgemental", and you can be sure, when you do, that the person expressing this is non-judgemental because he or she has no standards to be judgemental by. Those with a high set of standards cannot help but judge all things in the light of their standards and convictions. They will do this automatically. Without such standards and without convictions, obviously one is in no position to judge anything or anybody, Generally speaking, however, the claim to be non-judgemental is just a convenient way of not having to condemn something of which disapproval is felt.
As you rise out of the mire of mediocrity you will find that many of your former acquaintances will become estranged. They may even accuse you of becoming 'uppish', 'stuck up' or 'pretentious', and this is because they recognise that you are rising above the state which they find compatible and comfortable. You are becoming superior to them.
Yet, as you rise on the positivity scale, so will you notice a widening gap between yourselves and those whose attitudes previously seemed to accord with yours. Selectivity yes, exclusiveness no. Learn to discriminate.
My point being that sometimes, it is by design, or even by subconscious choice, that somebody might be experiencing their "wilderness experience", so to speak.
Subconscious choice is still choice, and it is no one's responsibility but our own to bring that unexamined part of ourselves into the light, and transcend...
If it is by design, I ask, who's design? Are we not willing partners in the manifestation of Creation? If we choose to be but mere threads on another weaver's loom, we have surrendered (at least partially) our Divine inheritance as Children of God, made after His image.
My life has sucked for a while now, spiritually speaking, I have learned much, but lost even more, camped here in the desert of my own wilderness experience, I find, that even in this, I can still look up at the stars, those luminaries that travelled this desert road before me, for guidance and inspiration.
Its not so bed, being on the desert road, for at least, I am a traveller on the road, at least I know there is a road, and a destination.
You are growing, and will get there... get many places in fact! Just do not give up, keep your heart, and learn and practice the tools of Self Mastery. You definitely have one fan and believer in your future and potential!
*********************************
In the final equation, Sha'ul, people either "prefer" to wallow where they are or pull themselves out of the muck, as difficult as that can be.
I would also like to add that this may not necessarily be the case. If people need to experience what others may class as wallowing in muck then this is what they need to experience. Eventually they will move beyond this state of being, but there may well be a very appropriate reason why this should be experienced for a period of time. Nor, do I believe, that pulling themselves out of the much to be difficult - unless, of course, one chooses it to be so.
I think we are saying the same thing, Lance. If one needs to experience something for a time, this is where they go, or choose to go. And of course you are correct, it need not be difficult to pull oneself out. Usually that is best understood in hindsight… but remembering that, it can make the next challenge easier to face.
but I ask you, who is the one that is greater, stronger, and more wise; he who is led by the hand with every advantage, or he who had nothing but acquired everything from the sweat of his brow and blood on his feet?
Both are just as strong (or weak) and wise (or not) as each other. The task(s) to transcend the so-called tests of either are equal as, I believe are the outcomes or rewards (should one look at this in either light).
It is not simply that you win the game or that a test is passed, value is added or lost in
how you win the game, or
how you passed a test. One can buy a plane ticket to fly over the mountain, while another can climb the mountain. Both may have reached their destinations on the other side, while only the one who climbed has gained strength, awareness of the mountain and himself, while having an experience of desperation and sorrow, joy and having known what it is to overcome.
Hardly equal, and hardly the same rewards…
Reread the opening post of this thread, which is another similar example… knowledge learned out of a book vs. knowledge seared into the soul, and known with a deep memory. One can win a game or pass a test with each… yet how different are the rewards and final sacrifices…
I tell you truly, it is the second man that God will favor beyond the stars...
I cannot agree with this statement for two reasons:
- the level of work for those who have everything is just as difficult (and one could argue moreso) as it is for 'he who has nothing'.
- this type of thinking denotes a need for someone wealthy to keep others from attaining the same kind of wealth (in its widest concept). This, in itself, is an age-old tactic to keep the wealthy wealthy and the poor poor. Take a look about you in today's society; the same game is still being played.
You mistake me in that I am not talking about money. However, we can use money as an analogy to make my point more clearly.
There is nothing wrong with getting rich, or being rich, but
how one becomes rich and the lessons that these entail will determine whether you will
stay rich. People that come from nothing, but are entrepreneurs, hardworking, and disciplined that rise to wealth generally continue to amass wealth throughout their lives; understanding the value of a dollar while learning the lessons it takes to preserve and grow what they have. On the other side of the coin, the vast majority of those who are born into wealth or win the lottery end up squandering what they have. In the case of lottery winners, on average they end up poorer than what they were before their windfall, often with drug addictions and broken marriages to boot.
Why is this so? The hard fought lessons haven’t been learned. Value, discipline, and responsibility haven’t been learned.
The tests actually do in fact become harder once wealth (in its widest sense) is attained. But these tests have little likelihood of being passed unless the lessons of the poor (and rising entrepreneurship) are learned first, which are, not coincidentally, the lessons taught to the youth in families of multigenerational wealth, as opposed to the youth in families of the nouveau riche.
Learn to crawl before you walk. Learn what it is to be poor before becoming rich. Learn arithmetic before algebra. Learn to climb a mountain before flying over one. (And getting back to the example at the very beginning of this thread) Learn knowledge from within, searing it into your heart and soul, before learning to read what someone else has said in a book.
Topic: Forgetting Our History (Read 5739 times)