The Tea Room

I suppose I have asked this question before, but I still don%rsquot get it %ndash or I simply don%rsquot agree.

The subject is: "if it bugs you, it%rsquos yours". But what does this %ndash "bugs" - really mean? I understand that everything is to be integrated, as we are all All-that-is. I also understand that what I perceive as annoying in other peoples characters are qualities which are of importance for me too, probably because I share them. My area of perception is so to say affected by what are important issues of my own. Thus we all live in different realities.

When a person enters into a room whit several people looking at the newcomer, they perceive entirely different things. Some perceive that beautiful hair, some those wonderful boots, some the clouds, some different parts of the body (eyes, breasts, stomach to big or small etc), some wonder why she seems so depressed, others wonder why she could act that secure while they are always so nervous, and so on.

But does this really mean that only because you are the victim of an outrage, you share the qualities of the perpetrator? Is really being a target of an outrage mean that you are also a perpetrator? What would be the consequences of this hypothesis: If you are a victim of murder, you are (potentially) a murderer yourself; if you are raped you are capable of committing rape yourself; if you are the victim of robbery, you are a robber; if you are the victim of stealing, you are a thief, and so on. If you are killed, you are certainly bugged. But if you managed to survive the attempted killing, does that mean that you have to deal with the fact that you are personally a potential killer? This, I have severe problems to integrate.

As I perceive it, there is a difference between what we perceive as annoying in other peoples characters and the fact that we don%rsquot appreciate the direct consequences un us of certain acts, such as being killed, raped, robbed or stolen from. I think I am able to somehow understand, forgive and love even a perpetrator as a part of All-that-is. At least I can understand there is love at the bottom of it all, although it does not come out that way. But I actually se no need to label (in my mind) their victims as potential perpetrators and forgive them to.

Of course, I understand there is a reason why I have an experience as target of an outrage. At a higher level I have chosen that myself for my spiritual growth. I can even feel grateful for these experiences, when I consider the consequences in that perspective. But, as I perceive it, the reason why I am to have these experience is not necessary %ndash and probably not normally %ndash that I need to confront my own hidden traits as a killer or a perpetrator of another kind.

I disagree with it too, if that means anything to you.

Dr. Phil bugs me, but he does not belong to me.

Scott

: I suppose I have asked this question before, but I still don%rsquot get it %ndash or I simply don%rsquot agree.

: The subject is: "if it bugs you, it%rsquos yours".

You certainly have a point there! :)

: I disagree with it too, if that means anything to you.

: Dr. Phil bugs me, but he does not belong to me.

: Scott

: : I suppose I have asked this question before, but I still don%rsquot get it %ndash or I simply don%rsquot agree.

: : The subject is: "if it bugs you, it%rsquos yours".

Your ego wants to argue for separation. Your pride agrees, so you give more energy to separation... then you wonder what is the point.
 The point is to stop feeding your pride and ego... and accept you are All. To surrender.
Blessings...

: I suppose I have asked this question before, but I still don%rsquot get it %ndash or I simply don%rsquot agree.

: The subject is: "if it bugs you, it%rsquos yours". But what does this %ndash "bugs" - really mean? I understand that everything is to be integrated, as we are all All-that-is. I also understand that what I perceive as annoying in other peoples characters are qualities which are of importance for me too, probably because I share them. My area of perception is so to say affected by what are important issues of my own. Thus we all live in different realities.

: When a person enters into a room whit several people looking at the newcomer, they perceive entirely different things. Some perceive that beautiful hair, some those wonderful boots, some the clouds, some different parts of the body (eyes, breasts, stomach to big or small etc), some wonder why she seems so depressed, others wonder why she could act that secure while they are always so nervous, and so on.

: But does this really mean that only because you are the victim of an outrage, you share the qualities of the perpetrator? Is really being a target of an outrage mean that you are also a perpetrator? What would be the consequences of this hypothesis: If you are a victim of murder, you are (potentially) a murderer yourself; if you are raped you are capable of committing rape yourself; if you are the victim of robbery, you are a robber; if you are the victim of stealing, you are a thief, and so on. If you are killed, you are certainly bugged. But if you managed to survive the attempted killing, does that mean that you have to deal with the fact that you are personally a potential killer? This, I have severe problems to integrate.

: As I perceive it, there is a difference between what we perceive as annoying in other peoples characters and the fact that we don%rsquot appreciate the direct consequences un us of certain acts, such as being killed, raped, robbed or stolen from. I think I am able to somehow understand, forgive and love even a perpetrator as a part of All-that-is. At least I can understand there is love at the bottom of it all, although it does not come out that way. But I actually se no need to label (in my mind) their victims as potential perpetrators and forgive them to.

: Of course, I understand there is a reason why I have an experience as target of an outrage. At a higher level I have chosen that myself for my spiritual growth. I can even feel grateful for these experiences, when I consider the consequences in that perspective. But, as I perceive it, the reason why I am to have these experience is not necessary %ndash and probably not normally %ndash that I need to confront my own hidden traits as a killer or a perpetrator of another kind.

Why am I getting rid of all of these entities if they are not seperate from me?

Scott

: Your ego wants to argue for separation. Your pride agrees, so you give more energy to separation... then you wonder what is the point.
:   The point is to stop feeding your pride and ego... and accept you are All. To surrender.
: Blessings...

I am trying to accept that I am all that is. However, getting there seems to involve some proper understanding of me as an individual. The problem is what is to be included in that self analysis; what to look for when focusing inward. I have some power chakra issues which I need to get rid of. To sort things out, I need to get in touch with what might be repressed. But being %ndash as an individual person (in duality) %ndash a perpetrator doesn%rsquot seem to be one of the repressed issues. I have been delving in that direction long enough, but the feelings of responsibility and shame which I can detect does not seem rational and appears mostly to be caused by other people%rsquos projections and manipulation. Maybe the cause of the whole problem is that I am somehow taking on responsibility for other peoples actions and that the belief that "if it bugs you it%rsquos yours" adds to this irrational response. Accepting me as all that is does not mean that I need to take on personal responsibility on an individual level (in duality) for other people%rsquos actions and to feel guilty for them. If there is only one of us, there is no need for guilt. Therefore, to me the idea that "if it bugs you it%rsquos yours" seems only to have generated self-analyses which do not seem to end up at anything and at least seemingly irrational feelings of guilt. Maybe things would become easier if I could just let go of that belief?

: Your ego wants to argue for separation. Your pride agrees, so you give more energy to separation... then you wonder what is the point.
:   The point is to stop feeding your pride and ego... and accept you are All. To surrender.
: Blessings...

:
: : I suppose I have asked this question before, but I still don%rsquot get it %ndash or I simply don%rsquot agree.

: : The subject is: "if it bugs you, it%rsquos yours". But what does this %ndash "bugs" - really mean? I understand that everything is to be integrated, as we are all All-that-is. I also understand that what I perceive as annoying in other peoples characters are qualities which are of importance for me too, probably because I share them. My area of perception is so to say affected by what are important issues of my own. Thus we all live in different realities.

: : When a person enters into a room whit several people looking at the newcomer, they perceive entirely different things. Some perceive that beautiful hair, some those wonderful boots, some the clouds, some different parts of the body (eyes, breasts, stomach to big or small etc), some wonder why she seems so depressed, others wonder why she could act that secure while they are always so nervous, and so on.

: : But does this really mean that only because you are the victim of an outrage, you share the qualities of the perpetrator? Is really being a target of an outrage mean that you are also a perpetrator? What would be the consequences of this hypothesis: If you are a victim of murder, you are (potentially) a murderer yourself; if you are raped you are capable of committing rape yourself; if you are the victim of robbery, you are a robber; if you are the victim of stealing, you are a thief, and so on. If you are killed, you are certainly bugged. But if you managed to survive the attempted killing, does that mean that you have to deal with the fact that you are personally a potential killer? This, I have severe problems to integrate.

: : As I perceive it, there is a difference between what we perceive as annoying in other peoples characters and the fact that we don%rsquot appreciate the direct consequences un us of certain acts, such as being killed, raped, robbed or stolen from. I think I am able to somehow understand, forgive and love even a perpetrator as a part of All-that-is. At least I can understand there is love at the bottom of it all, although it does not come out that way. But I actually se no need to label (in my mind) their victims as potential perpetrators and forgive them to.

: : Of course, I understand there is a reason why I have an experience as target of an outrage. At a higher level I have chosen that myself for my spiritual growth. I can even feel grateful for these experiences, when I consider the consequences in that perspective. But, as I perceive it, the reason why I am to have these experience is not necessary %ndash and probably not normally %ndash that I need to confront my own hidden traits as a killer or a perpetrator of another kind.

You don't really get rid of them, you recognise them, then offer them up to goddess at which point they no longer are problems, but become assimulated into the all that is.  As a part of that all that is, you actually absorb them.  However, you do so without the ego attachments that were in place prior.

It is a lot easier to say "that was an entity, sure glad it isn't me" than to admit that whatever the entity did WAS actually you.  The purpose is to release the karma from the incident.  You mock up an entity, that makes it easier for you to exam what happened, because now it is "outside" instead of "inside".

One thing I notice when dealing with folks who think they are only a body...they always attach their own faults to others. They love to project their own faults on those around them....If they are habitually liars, they accuse others of lying, if they steal, then they are swift to accuse others of being out to rob them.  What you are doing is the reverse of this process.  Seeing what you have projected on to others....that really belongs to you and letting it go. :-)

Love and Light!!

b0b  

: Why am I getting rid of all of these entities if they are not seperate from me?

: Scott

: : Your ego wants to argue for separation. Your pride agrees, so you give more energy to separation... then you wonder what is the point.
: :   The point is to stop feeding your pride and ego... and accept you are All. To surrender.
: : Blessings...

Well in this course, we do that sort of surrendering in the early part of the course in the matriarch lesson and perhaps others. But in the later part of the course we do entity clearing, which identifies the entity, as not our own, and not the voice of Goddess or the heart, and clear them.

Scott

: You don't really get rid of them, you recognise them, then offer them up to goddess at which point they no longer are problems, but become assimulated into the all that is.  As a part of that all that is, you actually absorb them.  However, you do so without the ego attachments that were in place prior.

I think the understanding differs between the chakras. In the higher chakras, we are all one and the entities are part of us. Therefore we have to integrate them. In the lower chakras we are diverse identities and the entities are separate from us. Entities can be thought forms which take on a life of their own.  

I just don't see it that way.  I see these "entities" as something created in response to my own thoughts/actions.  It IS a part of the all that is, thus a part of me as well.  Anything I do not create or "pull-in" has no power over me so why worry about it anyway? There is ansolutely no need to clear something I did not in some way manufacture or invite in.  Perhaps you mean that they belonged to someone else and you have assimulated them into yourself?  When you do that, you make them yours. To clear them you just throw them back to goddess.

Love and Light!

b0b

: Well in this course, we do that sort of surrendering in the early part of the course in the matriarch lesson and perhaps others. But in the later part of the course we do entity clearing, which identifies the entity, as not our own, and not the voice of Goddess or the heart, and clear them.

: Scott

: : You don't really get rid of them, you recognise them, then offer them up to goddess at which point they no longer are problems, but become assimulated into the all that is.  As a part of that all that is, you actually absorb them.  However, you do so without the ego attachments that were in place prior.

  The entities think they are separate, so they have to be sent into the light to be integrated.

: Why am I getting rid of all of these entities if they are not seperate from me?

: Scott

: : Your ego wants to argue for separation. Your pride agrees, so you give more energy to separation... then you wonder what is the point.
: :   The point is to stop feeding your pride and ego... and accept you are All. To surrender.
: : Blessings...

I'm an entity and so are you.

Scott

: I just don't see it that way.  I see these "entities" as something created in response to my own thoughts/actions.  

Very cool responses guys. These are some very nice insights. I appreciate it.

This is what I have found from my experience:

I don't believe that we have to integrate them in the higher chakras.

If we said we had to integrate them, then it is our responsibility to do so. Responsibility is a lower chakra issue, therefore all of this stuff is really lower chakra stuff.

Scott

: I think the understanding differs between the chakras. In the higher chakras, we are all one and the entities are part of us. Therefore we have to integrate them. In the lower chakras we are diverse identities and the entities are separate from us. Entities can be thought forms which take on a life of their own.  

You are right. What I meant to say was that from a higher chakra perspective, they are part of us and cannot be perceived as separate entities. As you suggest, they only exist in the lower chakras. I hope I got it right this time. The wording is essential here.

: I don't believe that we have to integrate them in the higher chakras.

: If we said we had to integrate them, then it is our responsibility to do so. Responsibility is a lower chakra issue, therefore all of this stuff is really lower chakra stuff.

:
: Scott

: : I think the understanding differs between the chakras. In the higher chakras, we are all one and the entities are part of us. Therefore we have to integrate them. In the lower chakras we are diverse identities and the entities are separate from us. Entities can be thought forms which take on a life of their own.  

Yes! To this I do agree!

: One thing I notice when dealing with folks who think they are only a body...they always attach their own faults to others. They love to project their own faults on those around them....If they are habitually liars, they accuse others of lying, if they steal, then they are swift to accuse others of being out to rob them.  What you are doing is the reverse of this process.  Seeing what you have projected on to others....that really belongs to you and letting it go. :-)

  Yup, that is what it is about!

: Yes! To this I do agree!

:
: : One thing I notice when dealing with folks who think they are only a body...they always attach their own faults to others. They love to project their own faults on those around them....If they are habitually liars, they accuse others of lying, if they steal, then they are swift to accuse others of being out to rob them.  What you are doing is the reverse of this process.  Seeing what you have projected on to others....that really belongs to you and letting it go. :-)

Yes, but this IS an important distinction: "Seeing what you [actually] have projected on to others.... that really belongs to you and letting it go." We cannot presume that just because someone is projecting their own faults on us, or committing an outrage on us %ndash and we don%rsquot appreciate that %ndash these faults are our own in the first place and that the reason why we cannot detect these fault in our own behaviour is that we have repressed them and blocked the knowledge from our conscious mind. There might be another reason why we have these experiences.

I read somewhere a discussion about repressed feelings of love. Does anybody know where that was written? What is coming up for me recently is mostly love. Is it possible that those feelings have been repressed? I mean, repressed because they were perceived as too strong, and not only coming up as a result of other repressed feelings being set free.

:   Yup, that is what it is about!

: : Yes! To this I do agree!

: :
: : : One thing I notice when dealing with folks who think they are only a body...they always attach their own faults to others. They love to project their own faults on those around them....If they are habitually liars, they accuse others of lying, if they steal, then they are swift to accuse others of being out to rob them.  What you are doing is the reverse of this process.  Seeing what you have projected on to others....that really belongs to you and letting it go. :-)