Friday, 3 August 2012

Post No. 395 - Thoughts from a film ...

Last night (well, a few nights ago, now :) ) my partner watched a psychological drama about people who weren't dealing with problems, and a group counselling situation that sometimes didn't work as well as it should, while I read a book. That led to a few thoughts - oddly enough, not clearly related to the film, as far as I could see, but they popped up while I was thinking about the film, so here goes ...

Now, I've written before about "growth orientation", which looks at the different ways people can evolve, which is one or more of the following:
  1. the path of devotion, where one develops love for oneself and a small group and then, as one evolves, one has love for a broader group of people until one has "universal love" - which we, on this planet, know as Bhakti Yoga;
  2. the path of hard work, where one seeks perfection in what one does, until one appreciates the perfection that is the Universe, the path known on this planet as Karma Yoga;
  3. the path of developing the mind, where one trains one's mind to greater levels of ability, which is known on this planet as Raja Yoga (a path many mystics may find themselves upon);
  4. the path of knowledge, where one studies and learns more and more until one achieves enlightenment that (a path scientists and some mystics may well find themselves upon), known on this planet as Jnana Yoga.
In another post of mine, I gave an example of how these different growth orientations could work:

"From point of view of paths, Karma-path-person wants to fix the whole situation, Jnana-path-person wants to know what happened and why (whether this is from a physical or psychic focus depends on the person's worldliness vs. spiritual focus), and so on. Each may not understand why the other is focused on what seems to be not important."

I'm predominantly on the Karma path, whereas my partner is partly on the Karma path but also doing quite brilliantly on the Bhakti path (as many good parents are). As a counsellor, she viewed the film last night from a psychological perspective (what was going on - on varying levels - that should or shouldn't, what was not going on that should be, and what was/ wasn't working in the group counselling sessions that people were attending). I was focused on the book pretty well, but when I wasn't, I was thinking thinks like:
  • "Don't these people realise there is no death and you can't really lose anyone anyway?" (I've been spoiled for death, I once wrote ... maybe I've been spoiled for "non-Priestess" counselling, also ... :) );
  • "Why are they being so possessive? You don't own your children!" (The story was based around the conflict that happens when different characters react differently to the deaths of a couple of children, one an adult); 
  • "Why aren't they accepting that everyone's different and everyone reacts in different ways and handles things in different ways?" (I'm not a good audience member for a drama ... );and then, finally ...
  • "Are they CHILDREN?"  
It all reminded me of a couple of passages from books (hmm ... I wonder if there is such a thing as "book yoga"?).

One was a passage I gave as a reading in a Spiritualist Lyceum recently, which was from the Richard Bach book "Jonathan Livingston Seagull". Jonathon was thinking of returning to the physical from the astral so he could help others, and one of his friends said he would miss Jonathan. Jonathan replied to the effect that, if they conquered time, all they had left was Now, and if they conquered space, all they had left was Here, and wouldn't they see each other now and again in the middle of Here and Now?

The other is a story attributed to Gautama Buddha (a story which, incidentally, wouldn't work in Australia). A woman's child has died, and she begs Gautama to help her (by bringing the child back to physical life). He says, if you can find a mustard seed from a house that has not had anyone die in it, I can do as you ask. She visits every house in the town, finds that every house has had many people die in it and changes her perspective as a result (which is not, I suspect, an accepted counselling technique - and it wouldn't, in at least some cases, be of any use - many people would lack the perspective, and most would still have the sense of loss).

So there clearly is an issue of perspective here, both for the woman over two millennia ago in India, and the characters as portrayed in the film. I'm lucky that I've had personal experience to prove - to MY satisfaction, which is all that matters to me - that we survive death. Others haven't had that, and there isn't likely to be any widespread "proof" in Western societies for some time to come. That doesn't change the situation, as I've summarised it in the basic points section.

In any case, however, there are issues around possessiveness, living through others, fear, insecurity, etc that need to be addressed. The Buddhist perspective (which, for this post, I would simplify and summarise as "non-attachment") is on of how to handle such loss; conventional Western psychological theory provides another, and there are also various religious and spiritual views. Which one is right? Probably ... the one that works best for you :)

I'm often very pragmatic ... nothing if I'm not pragmatic, to pinch a phrase :)

However, I'm going to say that there are other pragmatic issues to consider here as well. For instance, are you able to continue to function as you grieve? If not, then you may need to seek some care - talking counselling, drugs, and possibly live with someone PROVIDED you don't drag them down in your pain as well: that would come perilously close to forcing your will (i.e., your view that not functioning is a valid expression of grief) on to those people, and interfere with their capacity to live their life - neither of which you have the right to do. Ultimately, if you have no dependents, you could, as far as I am concerned, starve yourself to death through being unable to work and thus unable to pay rent or buy food, and that is your choice.I'm not being harsh there: I care that you're upset, but I respect your free will more than my compassion.

I have to say though that, in general, I am very wary of assuming that extreme expressions of loss (whether violence [thumping tables etc], wailing, obliterating a day off a calendar [I know people who have done that - cover the day on their calendar that is the monthly anniversary of their son's death] or rending clothes) are truly signifiers of loss, or are just "doing what one things one should" (i.e. social or culturally expected to show grief) or are, and this is EQUALLY bad from my point of view, an attempt to blackmail the Universe. More importantly, I consider no-one has the right to force others to act in certain ways, and there is a lot of emotional blackmail that I have observed in four decades or so of experience with loss (of people close to me, I mean).

I cope - now - by talking to those who passed over, and remembering the cycles of lives that I have lived. I admit most other people haven't, for a whole range of reasons (some valid, some not), developed the same level of psychic ability as I, but at times, I want to scream out something like "People, you are going to live many, many, MANY times, you are going to passionately, desperately love AND LOSE many, many, MANY people, and it will keep going (I just recently listened to the REM song "Everybody Hurts", which has the phrase "everybody hurts ... sometime"), on and on and on, until you start to realise that, and that there is a greater love to tune into ... so, if you're going to follow the Bhakti path, follow it - don't just sit and be a lump in the way! Realise that life on the physical world, which I consider came about so we could meet and learn to deal constructively with those we weren't in harmony with (and thus were unlikely to meet or have much interaction with on higher astral and even higher frequency levels of reality), will involve ups and downs - you will not be blissed out all the time!"

In terms of the cycles of life, birth-death-rebirth, I'd like to write a novel illustrating this, but, in the meantime, Katherine Kerr's Deverry series (or, at least, the first two series, which I've read) illustrate this quite well. read 'em, and think ...

And now ... more reading :)
Now, a couple of articles I wasn't going to post because I disagree with them, but then I thought, why not post them, and explain what I consider wrong about them? So ...
  • This article talks about the importance of not building negative energy. That is true, but it is important to be balanced about this: if you have some negativity in you, don't suppress it, or it will build up and burst out stronger than ever - acknowledge it, and work with it, including getting counselling where that is needed! It's not just a case of "not thinking negatively" - you may well have to do some very serious, exhaustive, and extensive personal development work, as I have had to for most of my life! The other VERY key factor here is that, sometimes, there are changes that need to be made to society in order for people to be less negative - yes, ideally those people would be saints or more powerful beings who could cope with everything that is thrown their way, but that lets our collective responsibility for the school we have co-created off the hook: for the overall majority to have benefit, for the greatest net benefit overall, it is necessary for some challenges and tests, but it is ALSO NECESSARY for the school NOT TO BE ABUSIVE! How could people evolve spiritually if they are starving to death, malnourished, lacking in basic security, enslaved, or so discriminated against that they cannot do anything? Think on all that as you read this article, which I will describe as simplistic and limited in its perspective:
    "Thoughts Are Energy: "The Dark Knight Rises" "    , by Stewart Bitkoff, http://www.witchvox.com/va/dt_va.html?a=uspa&c=earth&id=15136;

  • Now, I consider the influence of negative entities to be a real problem, one that is far more widespread than people realise - but a problem that is still a tiny, tiny, minuscule minority of the reasons that people have problems. Yes, one can often do much about this (including the suggestions in this article), but sometimes it is a more efficient use of resources overall to get help - and that may result in more benefits for everyone overall. And the terminology! "Black witch"? Why - is the author trying to say people of colour are evil or negative???!!!! If someone is doing evil, call them that - an evil person. Some possibly unaware reinforcement of inappropriate stereotypes, and a failure to acknowledge other possible causes in this one:
    "New Hope for the Demon-Possessed", by Bob Makransky, http://www.witchvox.com/va/dt_va.html?a=gtxx&c=words&id=15125;
And now, a useful foil to the above articles, in my view:
And continuing ...

And now, that mainstay of public service for me, "The Age":







  • On a personal note, this has been so disheartening for me, as someone who has been a lifelong Melbourne supporter, that I have considered stopping barracking (or changing allegiances). More broadly, what has happened to honour? Yesterday, I commented at an interview that I had declined a counter-offer from a former company because I had shaken hands on a new job. Why are so many people so selfish, immature, short-sighted and irresponsible that they don't behave with honour? It's not new, though - has been so for millennia ... "Demons tanked: McLean", 31st July, 2012: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/demons-tanked-mclean-20120730-23akv.html;




OK, dismounting from soap box now ... 

Basic/Underlying Concepts for this Post:
  • we all have a non-physical component; 
  • that nonphysical survives the death of the physical; 
  • furthermore, the nonphysical essence comes back in other bodies - reincarnation; 
  • the purpose of  this is to learn and grow; 
  • emotions can help or hinder that process; 
  • experiencing powerful emotions is not necessarily a hindrance, even if they're upsetting, distressing or incapacitating: you need to take a long term perspective on it; 
  • when you develop a long term perspective, you may seem unnaturally calm to other people, but the issue is that you have a different perspective, not that you are less caring; 
  • some emotions are an attempt to blackmail the Universe (or people), and should be treated the same way as a toddler's tantrum;
  • one of, if not the, ultimate goals of evolution is unconditional Love, which is an emotion (and a few other things, actually, such as a way of thinking, a guiding principle, a concept, etc); 
  • "mundane" or "conventional" ways of dealing with emotions, such as counselling, can be perfectly valid tools for spiritual growth, but the outcomes may not, if they are spiritual, be the mundane, conventional outcomes (e.g., finding "the right person", falling in love and living happily ever after - which is a nonsense).

Love, light, hugs and blessings

Gnwmythr
(pronounced "new-MYTH-ear") 
My "blogiography" is here. 
May the world of commerce and business be recognised to be a servant, not a master, of the lives of people. 
A home is for living in, not feeling, becoming or being rich or a “better” class than others. 
The International Labour Organisation's definition of "full employment" is wrong, useless and misleading. 
Armageddon is alive and well and happening right now: it is a battle between the indolence of "I only ..." and/or "I just ..." on one side, and perspicacity on the other.

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good [people] to do nothing. EDMUND BURKE

Your children are not your children. ... They come through you but ... they belong not to you ... for their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow KAHLIL GIBRAN

We didn't inherit the Earth from our ancestors, we only borrowed it from our children ANTOINE DE SAINT-EXUPÉRY

Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes the personality and eats away its vital unity. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.

Those whom we cannot stand are usually those who we cannot understand P.K.SHAW

Tags: about me, attitudes, death, fear, insecurity, proof-of-survival, reincarnation, society,

First published: Frysdagr, 3rd August, 2012

Last edited: Saturday, 4th August, 2012 (added the basic points)
Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , ,