Understanding that there may be some exception or context, for example, if you are part of a group or council in which a decision must be made for a population because you have an active role to play in different positions, otherwise what need is there to give rise to controversy? I am referring above all to the personal. I can imagine that whoever advances in their spiritual path or reaches the point of being a master in this world would hardly move in contexts where controversy is generated, different from the fact of a particular moment or that exercising its function presents something inevitable depending on how it is resolved.
If it were considered in a certain way that someone could exercise some mastery in this world, the one who has to follow can do it simply as a referent and with the premise that things are validated in the interior and in his own experience. You would not need to accumulate marked beliefs because in the path of life you will be able to validate what is identified with your essence and in that there must not be obstacles but self-discovery. I have realized that there are even occasions where two perspectives are correct from each point of view, each one poses something real but each one does it from where it is located in its process, perhaps one goes a step forward identifying something new or need to live something different regardless of the orbit in which they are.
Case apart, I have validated in my life teachings of Master Jesus and clarifications in the texts of Gary Renard, Kenneth Wapnick, Gerardo Schmedling (who belongs to another school), as well as the contribution of Carl Gustav Jung and aspects of Neville Goddard, among others. Some as a more privileged referent for me than others or without forcing me to sympathize with everything, but still have fulfilled a function that I appreciate.
Also by resonance you don’t need to validate much when you come across on the internet such a pseudo-religious galactic commander that you feel is a facade (surfing the web or using youtube you may notice things that make you laugh but maybe there is no lack of those who take it seriously, like the flat earth idea that has its followers), or not to go far a spiritual leader of a local group that claims to speak on behalf of the spirit and makes a call for obedience in front of the Inner Master, different would be if that is what you seek or need because it might be good for you and would also be respectable. Precisely no polemics are needed in your personal perspective.
“He who has ears to hear, then let him hear”
In the world there is time for recreation, times when words come and go or can be carried away by the wind, times when you are humanly occupied talking about things, verbiage, some productive things others can be rubbish, even busy writing, that’s part of the experience. But you don’t need what you don’t need, at least for those who don’t need it.
Of course you need good teachers in academic classrooms and some topics lend themselves to critical training and give rise to some controversy as this is a dual world where you find poles. Also in this world there is a need for upright judges to evaluate a situation or case the best that applies, but I return to the point where a spiritual master would hardly move in a context where he would have to make a judgment on people in such a way that he would have the power to execute sentence, as well as in a context of place of controversy, unless it is his style of critical reflection on something particular as mental training in a circle of relatives. The Inner Master is the one who will take you, beyond all reflection, to an assimilated learning and does not have to do with the exercise of reason, although it may play some role that for some is evidenced as light instead of obfuscation.
Vibration should be spoken of here, or resonance. For example, when communicators dedicated to sport instead of falling into old patterns handle a good expression and respect when talking about a sporting event, it feels like you can hear them in a way similar to the spontaneous moments you share with good friends. However, when you watch certain television programs whose critics or attitudes don’t sympathize with you, it’s a gauge that you don’t need that environment and you would stop watching it or move on to something pleasant for you. This is how you can get to notice a difference in the energy of the environment being free to press the off button or switch channels.
It is common that one person with respect to another does not turn out to be very consistent with their things being easier than another to identify, but it is possible a path to inner coherence, this would be reflected in some way. First of all, it is important that you know and understand yourself, and also accept that in the personal aspect there may be minutiae in which some things are solved in one way and others similar in another way. There is a tendency in the context of personality in which an observer might find contradictions in attitudes or words but they do not always have to be sensible, to begin with I would be walking in the realm of judgment. The important thing is that independently of the world you achieve an understanding of yourself and of the present moment in which you develop, being possible to feel in your interior that you walk with coherence, basically you feel at ease with yourself in such a way that you are authentic. This can be a way of identifying coherence in the midst of any apparent contradiction since in many things we can update ourselves internally given experience and learning.
Inner coherence is a terrain for your self-criticism and updating, of course you can listen to some external commentary and generally those who arrive in a good way are better received, in this sense an open mentality helps. An open mentality and an authenticity can be key attitudes, from there it is possible to reach a certain defenselessness where polemics are not needed, but being authentic and trusting in yourself you will know how to read or feel if it is a moment to interact in the context of some polemic. Trust, helplessness, tolerance, patience, gentleness, generosity, honesty and open-mindedness are characteristics of a master in this world, of someone on the path of inner coherence, but not to be applied in mental schemes, pretensions or malicious contexts, so I consider it important to be authentic, an aspect that helps to resolve being part of generosity and honesty with oneself.
With regard to criticism between people, a certain attitude is expected from someone consistent but should be considered a practical sense not to fall into denying the world of people. Generally, the criticisms in their great majority tend to be condemnatory, that’s why we talk about avoiding judging, since it would grant a personal sentence that can ultimately be returned to you. However, sometimes someone observes something, he indicates it with good intention doing the best he can from his person without having the pretension that the other assumes it as an imposition or sentence, otherwise nobody would say absolutely anything to anyone, that’s practically impossible.
Of course an observation can be made, sometimes an intervention could knock on the doors of daring and should be evaluated if necessary according to its context. When a condemning criticism takes place it can also be distinguished and obviously can have effects in this world. Certainly, to the extent that a mind opens itself to be benevolent with its limitations, it would also be benevolent with the limitations of others.
In many cases, giving advice is to be careful. If there is a manifest pretension in the advice could mean that someone wants to be another person’s god, when you can see that it is with good intention there will be those who tolerate it. If you are not being asked for advice and you are not involved in a matter being someone else’s then why give it? You would be on the tightrope of acting like a false god forgetting free will, it is not up to a person to carry the threads of his brother’s life, he does not even usually know the threads of his own history. This is why when a child reaches his or her majority, he or she can make use of free will or his or her position in front of the world.
On the other hand, before thinking badly of someone it is convenient to see if there are really reasons for it, it is not to think badly when there are facts or manifest intentions, although this depends if the interpretation is disoriented, vitiated or inclined by a pretentious expectation, so that in the end it would be thinking badly of another, a judgment that can be returned to you. In the world of gradualities, even naivety has a point, to live unsuspecting and without fear is very beautiful, but it should not be denied that you pay attention. If you are counting on a true Inner Guide you do not have to deny his voice. Perhaps soon we will have access to telepathy, would we be prepared?
Being a dual world where you find poles, resolving your position in certain situations in life is the result of learning, being personal does not necessarily coincide with another, hence if you talk about a master’s degree in this regard is first referred to an intimate field, understanding that in many cases writing or teaching some information can be part of learning to be a teacher since you re-validate things or enrich the learning.
If in this world someone comes to fulfill the role of teacher, would rather be a facilitator, the one who has to follow him will follow him simply as a referent and with the premise that things are validated in the interior and in his own experience, otherwise it would be like history with religions and that is not needed either, there are already too many sects for that taste.
Here’s a rhetorical question inspired by something I found on a Social Network: From what perspective do we see who we are? From mine or someone else’s?
Although it suggests the premise that we are essentially one, I think that we are dealing with two different levels, when posed from a world with dualities, mirrors and opposites is a bit of both perspectives, mine and the other and in an order. An individual context can take place as well as an opening to the transcendental, each aspect or each one will gradually resolve the issue with duality and the vision of unity. In addition, I believe that when the true Light is lit in a mind there is a correspondence in the universe for those who are passing through the same orbit, so that they would understand, perhaps reflections and memories of that unity.
Since we are confronting the issue with the polemics, I feel that there is a path to a personal spirituality, different from what is presented looking for labels although it may not escape from it. In other words, if you live a personal spirituality in which you are struck by the vision of some “stellar brothers” or angels, you might accept that this is part of this world in the same way as a medicine or a book, or a sign of something related and nothing else, so you don’t have to look for identification with one group and they don’t have to label you as being in the “new age” when you don’t even have an interest in such a “galactic commander” or things like that, which act like a new religion, that might be good for another.
It seems that the man has a need to label everything that gets in his way, in certain contexts such as the professional would understand that it may be convenient to know how to classify something, but what to expect when it comes to a position of the individual who does not see himself in a religion, should I then say that it is indifferent when it is not so either? Remaining silent may be an alternative.
On the other hand, if you begin to feel that there is a higher force in you or that you have access to that higher aspect at the same time you live an experience as a human, then you can honestly say: “I am unconditional love with myself” or “I am thanking the presence of my Being who never moves”. There is no place for polemics something that connects with you, just as others also begin to experience it. Recognizing that Great Aspect or your Soul is a step in the right direction, different if you are trapped in the context of duality, for you must know that even expressing yourself in terms of “I Am” is in that context, it approaches unity being inclusive but not necessarily that which simply is.
In other words, God being Spirit of Love and Perfect Unity needs no integration, no signs, no awareness of a language or anything else in the world, perhaps He does not even see himself as God. The memory of That Love gives us that vision without denying what filters corresponding to this universe. What can we say of the God of opposites, so generous with duality and suffering? Would those who call themselves atheists be right? How many unnecessary polemics if a false God has been followed?
To take the absolute and apply it to the world by imposing it on the individual, such as a regime or what happened to radical characters who, with the use of power, justified devastating others, may have taught us that it is not practical in the world to seek a sense of peace or personal development. Around society, common sense is convenient in the world of relative, degrees or dualism. To judge the world by its gradualness is incoherent, different is that something demands attention at the level of a society, but the egalitarianisms do not have consistency, it would be better the overturn of the society to open to the capacity of the individual giving him the best possible, but egalitarianisms do not have consistency, it would be better the overturn of society to open to the capacity of the individual giving him the best possible, but neither has case if it is done under the mentality rooted by those who have controlled our planet.
Another thing is the internal resolution of the individual with his own life and his position in relation to the world, his own conflict or internal emotions. Here is an opening for the absolute around the inner position of the individual, in principle could be seen as an idea or a vision where is found Love, Goodness, Beauty, Truth, Well-being, Wisdom, Harmony, Fullness, Abundance, Joy, Fortitude, Innocence, Peace. Those who are idealists to the world, even inspired artists, creative people, committed sportsmen, business entrepreneurs, very kind people, some thinkers or those who question the world, without speaking who sympathizes with the spiritual, find the wall that this is not usually the case in a world of contrasts. But why is it that this tendency is identified in man?
It seems that the frame of reference for the absolute transcends or filters into the individual mind as if it were a remote memory that cannot be erased. For those who somehow experience this, it is good to know that there is no point in denying the Being and neither does this universe, there is no point in denying your essence or the personality that represents you, nor the voice of intuition nor experience in the world, at least not from its own level. They are two different levels, two systems of thought, as each one in its context opens the doors for the understanding of the individual, without imposing itself decontextualized radicalisms while gradually being honest with one’s inner feeling and voice regarding one’s own life with an oriented mind, no one else intervenes there.
It doesn’t matter if someone else sees you incoherent in a moment, what if there’s no one but a dreamer? Coherence can go at your own pace and deeper and deeper without the need to generate resistance. The process is experienced gradually, it is possible to be coherent with yourself while taking your own verifications. For example, if you require a medication you use it until you honestly feel without basilar that you are prepared to leave it, you use techniques that have worked for you until you stop needing them, in the universe of magic you can make good use of it until you feel ready for the Miracle. Remember that in gradualness one understands a step forward and sometimes as if you were exposed to a backward step, a coming and going until you achieve what great Enlightened Masters achieved, who, being practical, in turn kept a radical position regarding the ultimate Truth to the point of feeling a coherence such that the world could not retain them.
Understanding this, there is no one more radical within than a Master who has remembered what he is. On the other hand, if this world is like a dream, it would not be good for the dreamer to wake up and of course to prescience him, there is the starting point of his thought system and also his weakness. As an alternative, we are knocking on doors to introduce the other system of thought which has at one time been referred to as “pure non-dualism”.