Selfishness, the root of all evil

[raistlinflux]

i have a friend, a close friend that i've known for almost two years.
she has been with her boyfriend, who loves her blindly, for about
three years, but recently they broke up. she had a crush on me for a
very long time, but i never alowed anything to happen between me and
her knowing that she was with someone that loved her. i could never
go between two people when there is love in the middle. to me love is
the most important thing in the world. love, wisdom and selflessness!

but now they broke up, because she is sick of his selfishness. he
just won't let her go. she blames her for being the cause of their
brake up, when in fact his own selfishness is to blame. but of course
he doesn't see that. he wants her to love him as he wants, and to
make him happy as he wants, never thinking what is really in her
heart, not to mention that he hates me with a passion, for even being
her friend, for even talking to her.

the truth is that love is wonderful, but people are blind and selfish
when they love another, because they don't understand, and bad things
happen because of that.

i told my friend, to run, not walk, from this guy, and i hope she can
do it. but i have my doubts, because she is a very selfless person,
and i know it hurts her when she sees him hurting. but when someone
is that selfish, you just can't make them understand by giving in to
their selfishness.

i know that all is one, and that selfishness is the root of all evil,
but what do you think she should do? what do you think i should do?

i'm telling you all this, because to me it is all clear, but the most
important question here is how can you make selfish people understand
how selfish they are? can you? or do they have to see it for
themselves? and if they don't, what if they do something that they
will regret first, out of their own selfishness and blindness? how
can you stop selfish people from hurting selfless people?



any thoughts would be appreciated.
and all this story, is the story of a wonderer who's trying to be of
service-to-others, because he has opened his eyes. and that wonderer
is me.


all is one.

[GenoNess1@...]

in a message dated 10/19/2004 5:46:21 pm pacific daylight time,
raistlinflux@... (/group/asc2k/post?postid=uqxdq4k_fjuinshums6zuttiev6ggpcvp32jwv ygvfbmaarws6ljjzspkhmmfj9tgyidkiifou4usud4uq) writes:
i'm telling you all this, because to me it is all clear, but the most
important question here is how can you make selfish people understand
how selfish they are? can you?

if you could there would be no point because they wouldnt understand it. if
you understand something or see something for somebody then they still dont
understand and still dont see. seems like you are being selfish in thinking you
should 'fix' or 'control' the situation somehow to your approval. i realize
that sounds harsh, but i hope it makes sense to you? all things will work
themselves out in truth. and truth is the fabric of existence. so maybe that
will
offer some solace? love, me!


[non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[jesterman]

> i'm telling you all this, because to me it is all clear, but the most
> important question here is how can you make selfish people understand
> how selfish they are? can you? or do they have to see it for
> themselves? and if they don't, what if they do something that they
> will regret first, out of their own selfishness and blindness? how
> can you stop selfish people from hurting selfless people?

hello there!
tuff stories all around, hm? :)

> how can you make selfish people understand how selfish they are?

to make a selfish people understand how selfish they are, as you know, is not
enough tell them "you are selfish!". but their behaviour can be evident to
the eyes.

when kindness is expressed, everyone interacting in the situation will have
their own heart reflected. when reflected, the dirt will be in evidence. from
there, is a matter of personal choice. one can be ashame and try to hide
their obscure heart from the others, or can he be inspired and naturaly
develop the self.

so, any attemp to correct someone is an attempt to control. and that, by
definition, is a selfish act, for try to violate the free will or simply for
try to make someone conforms to our own principles.

> can you?

i can't and i'm embarassed for everytime i tried.


> or do they have to see it for themselves?

i would go for that. :)

> and if they don't, what if they do something
> that they will regret first, out of their own selfishness and blindness?

thats their own path. if they can't do something right, is because they can't
see what is wrong. make mistakes is a constant remind of what is wrong and
nescessary to understand the experience they are living. they can use direct
help or deny it. its up to them.

> how can you stop selfish people from hurting selfless people?

if you can't help the selfish, help the possible "victims" on how to handle
the situation having respect to themselves and the selfish one.
but, to help apropriately, is absolutely nescessary to have compassion and
love for the ones involved. that love and compassion should guide us on how
to do it.
if you can't do this, be there and share their suffering. sometimes, thats all
we can and should do.


thiago silva

[Chris Hamilton]

from: "raistlinflux" <raistlinflux@... (/group/asc2k/post?postid=n7lxq5kr3trospvgd9gr3iju8wrmg_48szbqw8 ciazfscy0g9h_ok4nl7nqilvryzj1giegckpcqy6hr)>
i'm telling you all this, because to me it is all clear, but the most
important question here is how can you make selfish people understand how
selfish they are? can you? or do they have to see it for themselves? and if
they don't, what if they do something that they will regret first, out of
their own selfishness and blindness? how can you stop selfish people from
hurting selfless people?

hi raislinflux,

oh, isn't life somethin else, eh? yeh, applying tloo to what we actually do
in life is difficult. when we want to be a service to other persons it gets
us emotionally involved and then we run the danger of turning it into a
self-satisfying ego thing (gotta save that person or i have failed:). in
reality, ra says that only the individual can really change themself. so,
where do service to other people come in? we provide catalyst to that
person, which they can either accept or not, their free choice. so, you have
nothing to lose by telling that gal exactly what you think will help her,
but mind you, she doesn't have to take that advice. and, you have to also
consider whether the advice you give is actually the best for her-you could
be endangering her by telling her to kick the guy out or whatever-he could
come back at her. so, there are choices you have also of what type catalyst
will be the best you can give her. i believe tloo material could help you do
this-just remember that everyone is responsible for themselves, but
otherselves are such a good catalyst in 3d :). also, a selfish person may
not be totally negative, and your catalyst may show them this. you never
know, but, if you act from your heart with love and compassion, which is
ra's message, you can't help but be catalyst for many. chris

[raistlinflux]

thanks chris, that's exactly what i've been doing. just trying to
tell her my side of the story, how i see things, and let her choose
what she thinks is best.

and you are right, i can't ever know if what i would like to happen,
is really the best thing that needs to happen, only time will tell.
but i do know that i have acted wholy from my heart and tried to be
as self-less as i can right now, so whatever happens i know it's for
a good cause.

and yes, applying the loo to life, is probably the most difficult
thing, and since time in a way is running out, i feel i need to do
what i can, at least as a human, if not a wonderer.

all is one,
love is all.

thanks,
vlad

[raistlinflux]

> if you could there would be no point because they wouldnt
understand it. if
> you understand something or see something for somebody then they
still dont
> understand and still dont see. seems like you are being selfish in
thinking you
> should 'fix' or 'control' the situation somehow to your approval. i
realize
> that sounds harsh, but i hope it makes sense to you? all things
will work
> themselves out in truth. and truth is the fabric of existence. so
maybe that will
> offer some solace? love, me!

i know exactly what you mean, and i try my best. the things that
bother me most, is not that people will eventually understand by
themselves, but me trying to help them understand and not being able
to because that's how things are. but i know very well that no one
can see their own selfishness, and no one can really understand
themselves until they are ready to do so. experience is non
replaceable.

vlad

[raistlinflux]

> so, any attemp to correct someone is an attempt to control. and
that, by
> definition, is a selfish act, for try to violate the free will or
simply for
> try to make someone conforms to our own principles.


well first of all i wasn't trying to correct things. i was just
letting my friend know what i feel, think and believe about the
situation. i never imposed myself on anyone.

so if what you say is true, then you should never attempt to correct
someone? if a selfish person wants to kill someone, because they're
so selfish and blind with hate or whatever reason they have, you
should just sit aside and do nothing. no, i don't believe in that.

if things worked like that with ra and the orions, don't you think
that the orions would soon overcome all the sts entities? there's a
thin line i believe between being of service to others, and not doing
anything because all is one.

we as humans, in third density, can't even begin to understand all
the complexities of the law of one, and i think that just sitting
aside with your arms crossed is just as bad as being of service to
self (not that fundamentally there is anything wrong with that on a
universal scale). but for us humans, there is good and bad, even
though in the universe good and bad are one and the same thing.

i think trying to correct someone by letting them see what you
believe, and showing them options that they haven't yet thought
about, is not selfish at all. when you try to force your thoughts on
them, and try to let them see that that's the only option, and the
right option, then, yes i agree with you, that is selfish.

the story, as you may immagine however, is a lot more complex than
what i could fit in a few lines of message.

but nonetheless thanks for your comments, they were very thoughtful

vlad

[Jeremy Weiland]

with all due respect for your opinion and experiences,
i respectfully disagree that selfishness is "the root
of all evil".

selfishness is what compels me to keep my money and
not give it all away so that i can eat and clothe
myself and go on vacation. is that evil? or do
others have more of a right to the fruits of my labor
than i?

look, people have interests they will protect. that
is what being a human is all about, being vulnerable,
having to stand up for yourself. there are some
people who misunderstand or have a distorted view of
their interests that allow them to believe that being
dishonest with others is a way to advance their
interests. in the long run, i believe dishonesty
results in distortion and, therefore, the associated
balancing corrections that can cause suffering and
destruction. but often, dishonesty is a game played
by both sides in a relationship.

> the truth is that love is wonderful, but people are
> blind and selfish when they love another, because
> they don't understand, and bad things happen because

> of that.

<shrug> people learn. love hurts. and typically,
those who feed distortion in life do so either
unknowingly or they are dishonest about it. your
friend ceased to promote a relationship that was not
in her interests. i imagine that her investment in
that relationship with somebody who was so hurtful was
the result of a bit of self-delusion on her part, too.
but life isn't about everything being clear and easy.
painful moments like this are where the real
potential for development exist. and your friend has
clearly chosen honesty with self and otherself, which
is a cause for celebration! (eventually, at least :-)

people *are* selfish when they love, because people
are always out for themselves. it's simply a matter
of how you define yourself. do you see your fellow
man as an extension of the same god-self that you are?
or do you see yourself as a competitor with him for
god's favor?

either way, you pursue your interests. even mother
teresa got a kick out of helping others. there's no
such thing as "selflessness". but how you define self
determines the interests you will pursue, and whether
or not you promote a sts or sto outlook on life.

sorry, you touched off some old ayn rand genes there
with your condemnation of selfishness. :-)

l/l

jeremy



__________________________________
do you yahoo!?
yahoo! mail address autocomplete - you start. we finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

[jesterman]

on wednesday 20 october 2004 04:05, raistlinflux wrote:
> > so, any attemp to correct someone is an attempt to control.
> > and that, by definition, is a selfish act, for try to violate
> > the free will or simply for try to make someone
> > conforms to our own principles.
>
> well first of all i wasn't trying to correct things. i was just
> letting my friend know what i feel, think and believe about the
> situation. i never imposed myself on anyone.

not, that's not what i mean, at all. that is just what i understood by
"how can you make selfish people understand how selfish they are?"

> so if what you say is true, then you should never attempt to correct
> someone?

no, i think i should neve attempt to correct someone. i think correctness can
only be requested. for example, there are religions/beliefes that compiled
moral and ethical rules. it helps those who are learning and are not prepared
to do the good naturaly. but, there is a free choice to follow those rules.
in the same way, when advice and points of view are requested, opnions can be
showed (as i do now), but they don't have an imperative or restrictive
meaning.

the best way i can resume this:

let's say a friend is talking to me about his problems, and ask me for advice,
and i tell him what i feel that he is doing wrong and could do in order do
develop himself.
if he doesn't care about anything i say, and i feel frustrated, i'm trying to
control. is my small (actually, big) ego who creates the selfish desire to
have him following my advices. or, in the best way, is the desire to see him
better. in anyway, is an apttempt to conform the reality to what i would like
it to be. and that, is me being selfish. no more, no less.

now, if i simply simile after he say he doesn't care about what i have telling
him, then i accept things as things are, respect his personal experience, and
don't fell any kind of frustration.

> if a selfish person wants to kill someone, because they're
> so selfish and blind with hate or whatever reason they have, you
> should just sit aside and do nothing. no, i don't believe in that.

i don't know. when that happens, i'll figure it out. i could call the police,
comfront him, jump in the target so the bullet gets me, sit aside and do
nothing..... it could be anything, but i'll only know, when it happens. my
head can simulate this scenario and give possible answers, not my heart. if
my heart tells me that i sould sit aside and do nothing, and i follow it, i
would die knowing that i did what i had to do.

> if things worked like that with ra and the orions, don't you think
> that the orions would soon overcome all the sts entities? there's a
> thin line i believe between being of service to others, and not doing
> anything because all is one.

i don't really think about this. not doing anything can be something, but it
also can be "i'm afraid to do something".

the bottom line, i belive the heart tells for who we are in service. not the
actions. actions are products of the state and quality of the heart.

for example, is easy to be anger with someone that doesn't do what we expect
him to do in a problemactic situation. later, we find out that he was right.
he did what he had to do, his heart had the best state of compassion for
everyone involved, he had no fear whatsoever, but no one understood him, and
this image of "false", "irresponsable", "afraid" or "betrayer", was created
on him. there are a lot of stories that illustrate this scenario.

> we as humans, in third density, can't even begin to understand all
> the complexities of the law of one, and i think that just sitting
> aside with your arms crossed is just as bad as being of service to
> self (not that fundamentally there is anything wrong with that on a
> universal scale). but for us humans, there is good and bad, even
> though in the universe good and bad are one and the same thing.

again, for me, this is a matter of heart. good hearted soul sitting aside with
arms crossed knowing exacly what he is doing is the same for me as the good
hearted soul in the battlefield helping those who needs medical care. for
example, a hindu guru or zen-master could be the former. or simply a kid
looking at the sky.

> i think trying to correct someone by letting them see what you
> believe, and showing them options that they haven't yet thought
> about, is not selfish at all.

that i agree. after all, i'm doing that right now. but i don't see it as an
apttempt to corret you :)

as you said, i'm just giving toughts, that you may or may not have tought
about.

> when you try to force your thoughts on
> them, and try to let them see that that's the only option, and the
> right option, then, yes i agree with you, that is selfish.

we have the same point of view then ;)

> the story, as you may immagine however, is a lot more complex than
> what i could fit in a few lines of message.

they aways are :)

> but nonetheless thanks for your comments, they were very thoughtful

no, no, thank you!
and sorry my english!

[Michael Bergman]

greetings one and all,

i am going to have to go with jeremy here with the understanding that there
is no path of service to no self, that there is no such thing as
selflessness. "all serve the one creator. there is nothing else to serve,
for the creator is all that there is. it is impossible not to serve the
creator. there are simply various distortions of this service." that quote
to me is just another way of saying all serve the one self. who serves the
other self selflessly? can you really deny that your self exists? only a
self can serve, i hope you see what i am getting at.

i also agree that selfishness is not the root of all evil...greed is. it
is fine to use things in moderation for your own survival which is of
service to your self and can be labeled as selfish; however, when you use
things in moderation it can also be seen as service to others for it leaves
plenty left over to share among the whole. to me it is very simple, you
either share everything knowing that the one self is everywhere or you hoard
everything thinking that your one self is all alone. i am currently reading
"love without end...jesus speaks" by glenda green and jesus has some very
wise comments on how greed is the root of all evil:

"greed is the root of all evil. in the presence of greed, people go to
extremes, and in the presence of extremes, the idea of scarcity is invented.
when scarcity is invented, fear sprouts up like weeds in a garden. every
negative emotion known to man is born from fear. so this is the notorious
family tree, from the roots to the branches. the extremes produced by greed
beget scarcity, scarcity begets fear, and fear is the root of all
destructive emotion and action."

"you can have money. money is just a certificate of exhange. actually,
people are economically healthier when they are doing alot of exchanging. i
like to see people actively exchanging goods and services. when economies
are fluid, the structures have trouble dominating. when people exchange
freely, no one goes hungry, no one goes unemployed, and no worthy idea goes
unproduced."

"greed is an obsessive desire, which attempts to nourish and supply the
needs of life without love. you might say greed is an attempt to
counterfeit and to subvert the power of love. this is why it is the root of
all evil. and it is not limited to material possessions or money. there
can be greed for attention, influence, fame, education, therapy, dependency,
even misery...anything which can establish bonds of attachment without
love."

"the ideal reason for moderation is to share and to collectively participate
in a spirit of abundance. abundance applied to the "self alone" is a
betrayel of the perception. there's a simple guideline which will give you
unlimited potential for expansion without the perils of greed: do not take
more than you can truly love."

peace,
mikey

__________________________________________________ _______________
is your pc infected? get a free online computer virus scan from mcafeeãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ ã‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚âƒãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚ â‚ãƒâƒã‚âƒãƒâ‚ã‚â‚ãƒâƒã‚â‚ãƒâ‚ã‚â®
security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

[GenoNess1@...]

in a message dated 10/20/2004 4:34:57 am pacific daylight time,
greenlantern113@... (/group/asc2k/post?postid=o2lmwd6mmaw9u8z0_pufbyoldm-sg6nlyg2rzh9brrwzmut5a4luxqzw99-aj6p-zzouz34rg7len5_96sj_-rivug) writes:
there's no
such thing as "selflessness".


i agree being that all of existence is comprised of experience contained
within the self. :-)


[non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[GenoNess1@...]

in a message dated 10/20/2004 6:27:58 am pacific daylight time,
raistlinflux@... (/group/asc2k/post?postid=wt_dcwqvxwbvv0iqcbtnxsceqdnuh9ltfpfimd ycap1ltrvxacbjthnujpst1gw7yx-c98k3alm5qawaoeiy-y4) writes:
but i know very well that no one
can see their own selfishness, and no one can really understand
themselves until they are ready to do so.


i think the important thing here is, are you referring to yoruself who you do
have control over, or someone else whom you dont? ;-)


[non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[GenoNess1@...]

in a message dated 10/20/2004 7:51:38 am pacific daylight time,
bergmanmichael@... (/group/asc2k/post?postid=mmkfcanbf46tfc5hgwhxw98dpikeloriq2bzdg omybx1jbbwnolcwx6enkpyzdntb5ydivfy5v5vkat0divf) writes:
"greed is the root of all evil. in the presence of greed, people go to
extremes, and in the presence of extremes, the idea of scarcity is invented.


ooo ooo all i read was greed is the root of all evil, then closed the email
and thought about it, and then i got a great thought - greed is the root of all
eveil, evil = ignorance, greed = ignorance, therefore greed acts out of a
fear of lack of abundance which is our natural state of existence. so greed =
ignoring abundance. but if you arent greedy, and you believe in abundance, then
other people who are greedy shouldnt bother you. then i came back to write this
response and found the rest of the statement "in the presence of greed,
people go to
extremes, and in the presence of extremes, the idea of scarcity is invented.
" and that just kind of exhoed my thoughts. so i must be right on! love, me!


[non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Peter Duggan]

on 20/10/04 9:33 pm, jeremy weiland at greenlantern113@... (/group/asc2k/post?postid=z5ldgg-gmbsi1evcwqykzesbr4xccnwialagh9jdqdvah5jaxsixzkdpm qjsek5synbmgdvr-w1ho3mnrf9e9dfnxne) wrote:

>
> there's no
> such thing as "selflessness". but how you define self
> determines the interests you will pursue, and whether
> or not you promote a sts or sto outlook on life.
>




if selfishness/selflessness does not define sts/sto then what does? is it
more a question of acceptance or control - the sto accepts whatever happens
in the moment as part of the loo; sts fights to control what is happening?

but then there is the example where don asks ra about feeding the starving
or teaching them spiritual truth.(i think i remember it correctly) ra said
to meet their physical needs. but then isnt that the path of non-acceptance
- trying to control a situation. motive of course plays an important part
in choice of polarity but it can get confusing

[NEIL HADDON]

geno wrote - always writes:
>...love, me!<
we do! we do!
love.
neil

[Michael Bergman]

>if selfishness/selflessness does not define sts/sto then what does? is it
>more a question of acceptance or control - the sto accepts whatever happens
>in the moment as part of the loo; sts fights to control what is happening?

sts denies the creator in all others through control and manipulation while
sto affirms the creator in all others through acceptance and love.

>
>but then there is the example where don asks ra about feeding the starving
>or teaching them spiritual truth.(i think i remember it correctly) ra said
>to meet their physical needs. but then isnt that the path of non-acceptance
>- trying to control a situation. motive of course plays an important part
>in choice of polarity but it can get confusing

in understanding the desire of another self, you can accept that another
self is starving and then be love in action by viewing the other self as
your self and then being of service to the other self by the giving of feed.

__________________________________________________ _______________
express yourself instantly with msn messenger! download today - it's free!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

[Peter Duggan]

hi michael

thanks for your reply it was very helpful.


on 22/10/04 11:08 am, michael bergman at bergmanmichael@... (/group/asc2k/post?postid=jqnuk0bv5ioz2s9bqpc6p4hciroy5qhukycric a5x-e-ie6srxdr6ddkqvbycmgsptozraqpgf-ye7gpsa8l) wrote:
>
>
>> if selfishness/selflessness does not define sts/sto then what does? is it
>> more a question of acceptance or control - the sto accepts whatever happens
>> in the moment as part of the loo; sts fights to control what is happening?
>
> sts denies the creator in all others through control and manipulation while
> sto affirms the creator in all others through acceptance and love.
>
>>
>> but then there is the example where don asks ra about feeding the starving
>> or teaching them spiritual truth.(i think i remember it correctly) ra said
>> to meet their physical needs. but then isnt that the path of non-acceptance
>> - trying to control a situation. motive of course plays an important part
>> in choice of polarity but it can get confusing
>
> in understanding the desire of another self, you can accept that another
> self is starving and then be love in action by viewing the other self as
> your self and then being of service to the other self by the giving of feed.