
Hm, a good friend and I were talking about part of the theme of these articles recently: the idea that all paths are equally valid; that no matter what happens to you, it was what you planned. We have a few objections to the premise, actually:
1) it creates a reductionist attitude towards real human suffering, and --correspondingly-- allows for a negation of any personal/national/species responsibility. It may *feel* good to comfortable First Worlders to say the Thai kid who's been forced into prostitution since age 6 "chose" that, but such a result would strike most people, except for the occasional sociopath, as quite wrong. Thus, I truly suspect that these philosophies are created by people who can not tolerate ambiguity. Sometimes the answer to life's truly difficult questions really must be "we don't know." But for those who find those three words unacceptable, saying that everyone "chooses" their suffering is a convenient fall-back.
2) it contradicts the observed play of action/reaction, and/or karma, that we see it in this life. A bad action might well get pretty fast and intense feedback on Earth (yeah, I've had this happen, actually!), but if the guy passes beyond the veil, suddenly all his wrongs are hunky-dory?
To put it another way:
Do we really think that Pol Pot's energy is equal to Oprah's?
;P
O.K., I'll step off the soap-box now!
1) it creates a reductionist attitude towards real human suffering, and --correspondingly-- allows for a negation of any personal/national/species responsibility. It may *feel* good to comfortable First Worlders to say the Thai kid who's been forced into prostitution since age 6 "chose" that, but such a result would strike most people, except for the occasional sociopath, as quite wrong. Thus, I truly suspect that these philosophies are created by people who can not tolerate ambiguity. Sometimes the answer to life's truly difficult questions really must be "we don't know." But for those who find those three words unacceptable, saying that everyone "chooses" their suffering is a convenient fall-back.
2) it contradicts the observed play of action/reaction, and/or karma, that we see it in this life. A bad action might well get pretty fast and intense feedback on Earth (yeah, I've had this happen, actually!), but if the guy passes beyond the veil, suddenly all his wrongs are hunky-dory?
To put it another way:
Do we really think that Pol Pot's energy is equal to Oprah's?
;P
O.K., I'll step off the soap-box now!
Well, thank you for your in-depth consideration!
Let me ask you a few questions, my dear friend:
When you have a bad tooth and you go to the dentist, do you go because you choose the suffering in his office? Or do you go becasue you choose the healing?
Imagine Jack and Tom looking at you through the dentist office window. Does Jack have a point telling Tom your suffering is real? Does Tom have a point telling Jack there is a larger reality of healing? Does Jack have a point telling Tom he has a reductionist attitude towards real human suffering? Who tolerates ambiguity: Jack or Tom?
Should somebody rush in and stop the dentist?
Should we attend or not attent to bad teeth?
Should we eat less candy?
Is the dentist's energy equal to yours?
I'm sure you see the analogy, and how the suffering<>healing and the choice<>consequence ambiguities play out.
It's all a matter of perspective.

Let me ask you a few questions, my dear friend:
When you have a bad tooth and you go to the dentist, do you go because you choose the suffering in his office? Or do you go becasue you choose the healing?
Imagine Jack and Tom looking at you through the dentist office window. Does Jack have a point telling Tom your suffering is real? Does Tom have a point telling Jack there is a larger reality of healing? Does Jack have a point telling Tom he has a reductionist attitude towards real human suffering? Who tolerates ambiguity: Jack or Tom?
Should somebody rush in and stop the dentist?
Should we attend or not attent to bad teeth?
Should we eat less candy?
Is the dentist's energy equal to yours?
I'm sure you see the analogy, and how the suffering<>healing and the choice<>consequence ambiguities play out.
It's all a matter of perspective.

Interesting analogy, but I'll have to respectfully differ on the application to the nastier sides of human experience. I guess it comes down to almost a predestination argument. With the dentist analogy, we're predestining our souls to whatever comes, no matter how big and bad, to create larger healing. A great model for some people, yes. Doesn't work for me, though. I believe in a more fundamentally random Universe, and actually get part of my sense of wonder from that very belief. Leaves falling in the intended soup, one might say.
You are free to differ, of course, and please do. We are all in the business of creating our own you-niverse, after all.
Even the "nastier sides of human experience" are just a splinter in the finger of the larger being that manages the Book of You, where each lifetime is but a chapter. And then there is a whole Library of You beyond that ... This larger perspective is no excuse to stand aside instead of help your brother and sister, but it does maintain that each being has personal responsibility and that - in the end - I cannot heal you, you can only heal yourself. Same goes for the doctor or the pill. "God helps those who help themselves." That's because you are God.
"With the dentist analogy, we're predestining our souls to whatever comes, no matter how big and bad, to create larger healing." As long as the healing is larger than "whatever comes, no matter how big and bad," then, yes indeed. Are there not many examples of this in daily human life, even apart from medicine? going to work? standing in line? giving birth? taking exams?
"Predestination" is only a choice made on a higher level. When my Soul chooses to experience a life of fame, then within this life, I am predestined to become a star. I could still exercise my "local" free will and choose between singing, acting, writing, selling, or even stealing, cheating, etc.
offered with much love
Even the "nastier sides of human experience" are just a splinter in the finger of the larger being that manages the Book of You, where each lifetime is but a chapter. And then there is a whole Library of You beyond that ... This larger perspective is no excuse to stand aside instead of help your brother and sister, but it does maintain that each being has personal responsibility and that - in the end - I cannot heal you, you can only heal yourself. Same goes for the doctor or the pill. "God helps those who help themselves." That's because you are God.
"With the dentist analogy, we're predestining our souls to whatever comes, no matter how big and bad, to create larger healing." As long as the healing is larger than "whatever comes, no matter how big and bad," then, yes indeed. Are there not many examples of this in daily human life, even apart from medicine? going to work? standing in line? giving birth? taking exams?
"Predestination" is only a choice made on a higher level. When my Soul chooses to experience a life of fame, then within this life, I am predestined to become a star. I could still exercise my "local" free will and choose between singing, acting, writing, selling, or even stealing, cheating, etc.
offered with much love
Quick Links
Latest Comment
Re: Actually, a survey instead.: - Rockstar <3
| Terms of Service
| Privacy Policy
love