Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

894trashing patrick 101

Expand Messages
  • Ramu555@aol.com
    Jan 8, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 01/06/2000 4:48:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, ruy wrote:

      > you have not noted that others like myself just don't see things in the
      > way as you or Patrick.
      Well, Ruy, I have always sort of taken that for granted. You see, I notice
      that I do not agree with most of what has been said lately on this list, and
      so I have posted my opinions. I did not know that it was required on this
      list to state: "Well, apparently we think differently, and do not agree on
      this subject." Again, I just took for granted that people *might* "see
      things" in a different way, or have different opinions from mine.
      > The problem is that lot of stuff about ancient healing and civilization is
      > channelled material which can't be proved to be true or false.
      Uh oh. Here we go... yes, of course, channeled material cannot be *proven*.
      That is why I encourage all my students and prospective students, as well as
      everyone else with whom I come into contact, to *think for themselves* and go
      with what resonates with them. This can apply to choosing a teacher,
      choosing a lifestyle, choosing a modality to study, choosing a college
      career... oh gosh! the list can go on and on. the important thing is for a
      person to choose what resonates with them, what calls to them, not to do
      something because someone else said that it was good to do. Many times I
      have turned away from opportunities because they didn't capture my
      attention... including the first two times that I had a chance to learn
      Seichim - they didn't work for me... then the 3rd opportunity, which, now, I
      can see, is very different from the Seichims of many other people, really
      resonated and here I am.

      > I don't know who you are refering to "stoning Patrick".

      Oh, that is easy. All the people on this list who are busy throwing stones at
      Patrick, for whatever reason, whether or not they consider themselves to be
      throwing justified stones (and I am sure that all of the stones are
      considered to be most righteous)

      > All I those I have seen are people who do not see the things as he does.

      It is one thing to disagree, and it is quite another to attack a *person*.
      If one does not agree with someone's opinions and ideas, fine, we say "I do
      not agree with what you have said." It is another thing to say, "You are a
      this or a that" and attack the person's character. this is what I have
      posted to say. If we do not agree with Patrick's ideas, okay, that is fine.
      But to expect Patrick, as a person, to conform to some sort of arbitrary
      saintliness or sainthood, and trash *him* as a person, is out of line, as i
      see it... oh, and in deference to your earlier request, of course, I realize
      that many people may not see things in the way that I do, and that my
      opinions of course are my own, and even this disclaimer is IMHO.

      >He is not irritating me. I am just saying although I am prepared to let him
      do his own
      > thing and believe what he wants to believe we have a right believe what we
      > all want to believe individually.

      As far as I have ever seen, Patrick has never had any problem (at least not
      in any postings I have ever read, and I am talking from my own experience,
      which might be different from that of others, and my own opinion, which is
      just my opinion and can differ from that of others who have their own minds
      and their own ideas) with anyone thinking what they want to think.
      All the excitement on this list has been in the direction of trashing
      Patrick, as a person, not his ideas. (Now, of course, that is my own
      opinion, which might be different from that of others, and which is just my
      opinion and can differ from that of others who have their own minds and their
      own ideas) with anyone thinking what they want to think.)

      >I know Patrick knows what I mean when I say he does not reflect the image
      that he >can accept that others not not see things his way and that he is
      the one, it appears, >won't let things and people be what they are.

      Now here we are not talking about our own ideas but attacking a PERSON, not
      an IDEA. (Of course, this is my own opinion, which is just my opinion and
      can differ from that of others who have their own minds and their own ideas)
      with anyone thinking what they want to think.)
      When we go after a *person* and start talking about that person's
      PERSONALITY, that is different than talking about IDEAS. (Actually, on some
      lists, it is called FLAMING, and it is not allowed. This is not my own
      opinion, but fact.)

      > trying to lead a group who
      > consider themselves his peers.
      Well, see, now, we have some conflict here.. It seems people consider
      themselves *peers* of Patrick, and then, yet, they expect him to comport
      himself as a *saint* since he has brought out this Seichim/Sekhem stuff...
      wait.. What is wrong with this? Have these "peers" brought out their own
      energy systems which have gained as much recognition and which they are
      teaching as broadly as Seichim/Sekhem is taught? A peer is someone who is on
      the same footing with another. It would seem, then, that these "peers"
      expect sainthood where they do not expect it among their other peers. Not
      fair. Either you are a peer or you are not.

      >In my time I have had to face groups of
      > people, similiarly, and they would be very challenging of your views and
      if you don't
      > have your facts right you are in for serious trouble.

      Simply because you have had unfortunate classes in which your students have
      challenged you, or attacked your personality, does not necessarily justify
      your doing so in another group, nor does it necessarily show you to be a very
      spiritually advanced sort.

      >through my contacts with him here and elsewhere Patrick seems to have
      gradually >changed and it now seems he is the one who needs to look in the
      mirror and within >himself.

      I still find it very difficult to understand why people on this list feel so
      divinely appointed to show Patrick where he is wrong, according to their own
      private views of how he should be.
      All of this seems to be a result, as I have said before, of finding out that
      Patrick is a human, and a subsequent determination to grind him into dust for
      this perceived frailty. How many on this list would enjoy, or could stand up
      under, such assault? And why should anyone have to? What is the spiritual
      purpose? Is there any spiritual advancement to be had from such viciousness?
      A very advanced spiritual being once said, "Let he who is without sin cast
      the first stone".
      Is it that everyone here on this list is so "sinless" as to be able to batter
      Patrick mercilessly, without remorse? What karma is being created here? And
      what is the purpose of doing so?

      You must be the change you wish to see in the world.
    • Show all 3 messages in this topic