The Highest We Know

2006-10-18 06:37:00

Principle of Freedom question (was Re:  Dan's Questions)

Dan writes:

Lately, in analyzing your posts and trying to glean as much from them as I can I have noticed something.

Your posts appear to me to be the epitome of, a paragon for, the (perhaps only MY :-) IDEAL of freedom.

What I mean is they appear to be packed with very specific and detailed information for every reader written in such a way as to not to contain a single IOTA of coercion.

Information is there for every reader to be able to apply to/for himself if he so chooses but at the same time is written so IMPERSONALLY that the person is completely FREE to CHOOSE to:

  1. Apply it ONLY to himself and for his own soul benefit, as if you were speaking directly/only to HIM.
  2. Apply it ONLY to others egoically, as if you were speaking directly/only to THEM.
  3. Some combination.

To be able to do this, it almost looks as if the writer would have to actually take each and every potential reader EVER into consideration and consciously choose one's words so carefully as to not coerce or impose upon freewill.

I'm not sure that's absolutely clear, but I cannot see how this would be possible from any normal human point of view and I know my own present focus upon this very issue is likely "coloring" things, AND this would really only make sense if one is TRULY "in the spirit" but this is something I would really like to learn to do so I was wondering:

Do you think that YOU are necessarily always aware of all the "kernels of truth" in what you yourself write?

Thanks for the comments Dan. If my writings have the effect you mention then I must be doing something right.

In answer to your question, I am probably aware of most of them as I write but often I learn that kernel of truth myself as I am writing it down. Then years later when someone quotes my writings I will look at them and say to myself:   That's not bad. Did I write that?"

Dan:

Do you consciously try to pick your words so as not to impose upon any reader's freewill choice?

I do pick my words carefully. My first objective is to pick the best words to reveal the highest truth I know. I do not usually think about my effect on freedom when I write as the purest possible truth does not impose unjustly. I do try to maintain the mindset that acts as a moderator for my words so, hopefully, the reader will not feel like I am in his face or he is obligated to follow or accept anything I write unless it registers with his soul.

Dan:

Is this ability a "spiritual attainment," for want of a better word, in its OWN right?

It's the result of a decision made to recognize that true progression in others comes not by outside force, but inner force of the soul--which is much more powerful than the outside force can ever be.

Dan:

Is it SIMPLY/solely a side-effect of aligning oneself with "the will of god," spirit, plan, etc.?

That certainly doesn't hurt in any spiritual direction one pursues.

Dan:

Is it a side-effect/benefit of some one or several specific other "spiritual attainments"?

Any virtue or spiritual quality that you or I have is due to following the highest we know.

It may seem obvious that we should follow the highest we know but often the highest we can perceive points to a much more difficult path than an easy path that will take us below that threshold. Then the danger is that the pilgrim will rationalize and convince himself that the lesser choice was his only choice.

If life was fair, Elvis would be alive and all the impersonators would be dead.
Johnny Carson (1925 - 2005)