Weakness is strength??

A re-introduction to self has a familiar ring to it. In the early years … after my watershed moment … a look at my former self revealed that my former self was not my true self. The demands of society/culture pounded some of my true self into oblivion. Since that time my true self has percolated to the surface.

At times … too many to count … coping was a serious struggle. Eventually the following strategies took hold …

  1. Surrender

  2. Wu Wei

Does that suggest you haven’t read all my babble yet? :open_mouth:

Happy to learn you are making some progress.

Can’t remember the details but Youtube/Google algorithms triggered the visit … first to the movie and later the article.

Every once in a while Guiseppe …the reluctant saint … talks to me … or I talk to him. :slight_smile:

Happens when I’m reluctant to feed my wife’s geese, chickens and ducks … 21 in total. I’m usually totally spent at the time from helping with my wife’s farming project.

Guess that means Guiseppe encourages me to be more thoughtful towards animals … kindness to animals must surely lead to an uptick in kindness to people … no?

…and now I have joined you in that percolation of true self… it’s a less-stressful self to be, and simply means taking a step back from society and once again observing rather than partaking, and only partake of life with those of a similar ilk or not partake at all… I simply cannot not afford to do that any more.

…once the decision is made, and wheels set in motion, coping isn’t a struggle anymore. The decision to please others at the expense of self has come to an abrupt end, for they are happy when we suffer discontent… my mother would be so pleased. :icon-rolleyes:

If you only hang out with people of “a similar ilk”, then you don’t grow.

One becomes better by being challenged.

[b]

[/b]

Reminds me of John Lennon … the community he sings about is growing steadily … one individual at a time … in their own way … on their own terms … at the appropriate time.

[b]

[/b]

[b]

[/b]

Cave dwellers, desert fathers, the monastic culture were born of the same sentiment. Some people lament at the decline of church and monastic patrons … I see it as positive. The institutional church continues to fulfill it’s role and “death” is a part of the process … the last phase. As Augustine said … each successive word we utter must die to make room for the next word.

The “death” of the institutional church has created empty space as a womb for the next paradigm. For the past several centuries secular institutions filled this space … though they have chosen to play the same game … expecting a different result … ergo Thucydides “The strong will do as they wish and the weak will suffer as they must.”

[b]

[/b]

Ah yes … the “decision” … the mysterious inflection point … a decision so many contemplate … a decision so few make. NT “many are invited … few are chosen.”

I like Augustine’s metaphor …

[b]

[/b]

I watched a documentary on part of the life of Ste Teresa of Avila … yesterday was her Feast Day.

youtube.com/watch?v=A9xJe_aabaI

Seems it took her 20+ years to reach the deflection point … and she wrestled with church leaders all along the way … she wanted to “wake up” and church leaders wanted her to go back to sleep.

[b]

[/b]

Anything less would be suicidal.

[b]

Your comment triggers … at least in me … a torrent of empathy and compassion. Like so many others your mother lived a life conscious of her misery yet without the blessing associated with “waking up”.

If you “wake up” you will feel differently … and feel much better.

Wake up to what? Wake up how? :sleeping-sleeping:

Maybe THIS is my true self. Why not? O:)

Why should weakness be strength? Don’t you know that weakness is already weakness and that sterngth is already strength?

Phyllo … it’s usually recognized by looking back … some time after the mysterious inflection point. Like our birth … we have no idea how or when we were born … the recollection is buried in the shadows of memory. We accept what other people tell us about our birth. Ditto for conception … I wonder at what age Steve Job realized his caretakers were not his biological parents.

“Self” is a transient entity … never remains the same for one instant.

pilgrim-seeker_tom

…and do you find this to be a positive?

pilgrim-seeker_tom

So what are you saying here - that the above-listed are part of our “true” Self?

The notion of “Collective Consciousness” has not graduated from the realm of ideas into the realm of generally accepted reality … yet! Although it is gaining more traction and new adherents every day.

Collective Unconsciousness —> Collective Consciousness —> Collective Will

I find the above ‘idea’ positive.

If one accepts that “self” is a transient entity … logic compels us to believe the “true” Self is the product of many life times … each lifetime building on the aggregate of previous lifetimes. This idea dovetails nicely with the Buddhist notion of reincarnation … the connection is not so clear in the Arahamic traditions.

Well, for me, at first glance, the Borg, Nazi Germany and Isis come to mind.

Is THAT positive to you?

Can be a very dangerous concept or ideal.

[b]

[/b]

Well, if Confucius was before me at this moment, I would tell him the same thing I am telling you.
I was not telling you what to see. I was simply telling you what could also be seen - another direction, if you will - giving another perspective.

There are many perspectives since many things are open to interpretation. We all see things differently and from different angles and one size does not fit all. You are certainly entitled to your own perspective but it is not the only one.

I agree with Nietzsche: that things need to be turned inside out and upside down and this way and that. I am paraphrasing here.

per·spec·tiv·ism
pərˈspektəˌvizəm/Submit
noun
1.
PHILOSOPHY
the theory that knowledge of a subject is inevitably partial and limited by the individual perspective from which it is viewed.
2.
the practice of regarding and analyzing a situation or work of art from different points of view.

Incidentally, I did say that…

The phrase, for me, suggests that it is only my viewpoint.

One more thing before I go. This is only my perspective of course but it is somewhat aggravating when someone hides behind the quote[s] of another (Confucius in this instance) in order to issue an insult under the guise of a so-called argument.

Have a nice day.

[b]

[/b]

[b]

[/b]

[b]

[/b]

Seems you do not go along with d) as well. :slight_smile:

Since what you said here is kind of ambiguous, at least to me, I will not assume/presume what you meant.
A little clarity is called for.

[b]

[/b]

  1. Within the framework of our e-exchange Confucius and Nietzsche are saying the same thing. The differences in expression are rooted in cultural differences.

  2. Anger is a complex emotion. Like an erupting volcano … we see the manifestation of bursts of anger yet we rarely fully understand the underlying factors that lead to an eruption.

  3. Words are woefully over rated … words taken out of context often leads to serious misunderstandings.

But Nietzsche within his statement was not insulting someone. He was telling us to take another look, and then another look, and then yet another look ~~ that there are other perspectives, interpretation, representations, ad continuum to things. You, on the other hand, were, by using Confucius as your shield to insult.

You are welcome to your perspective but I see it the other way. Words are actually woefully underrated.
Words do have meaning and they have great power.

It was up to you to clarify YOUR meaning. It was up to you to apply the right context. But I intuit a purpose in your not doing so. It is a pattern.