Ah!  Neville Goddard's pruning shears of revision are a powerful
tool!  And I was instantly on the shore of the lake near my home when
you described your contentment watching the water lap the earth.  One
of my favorite places.  And a good place to let your life flow through
your heart.

On May 13, 3:46 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
> A lovely post- thank you. Furthered yesterday by a very long
> converstion with my daughter- who knows me so well. She thinks my
> problems were boundaries and delayed reactions- back to the hoop skirt
> image. It wasn't a glum conversation- lots of laughter and
> affirmations along with the serious stuff.// I had my first child at
> 20 and my last at 40 so I was too busy to reflect but it seems I am at
> the age where reflection is considered normal. And one may have to go
> through several revisions. Cuts. Perspectives.// I can close/sell the
> house and move across the globe in two directions or remain- I haven't
> decided. I am in flux. One day I am happy the tide washes in- the
> next, that it washes out.//Anyway, I am happy for your outcome. I
> guess might start by answering the phone, opening the front door and
> responding to invitations? lol
>
> On May 12, 8:42 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I must say I agree with your insights, here, rigsy.  We are formed and
> > reformed as we go through life loving and those first years with are
> > family are very formative.  Getting a perspective on them that allows
> > us to witness ourselves as if in a movie, objectively, can be key as
> > it allows us to let go of the emotion and see ourselves operate in the
> > scenes.  From here, we can make our adjustment and fill in the empty
> > spaces.
>
> > I also understand first hand the difference between lonely and alone.
> > Although single for nearly fifteen years, I was never lonely, and
> > preferred a solitary life that allowed me the freedom to make my own
> > choices and be myself always.  Then I found someone who would allow
> > and support this all ways.  We still shadow dance, as everyone does.
> > But I finally said yes because I believe he can move beyond it, and
> > has no attachment to some vision of who I should be.  He can take the
> > point of the witness that transcends object and subject, and allow
> > love to be what it is.  Very rare and well worth the yes.
>
> > Like you, when I look back at past loves, I can smile at the journey
> > and enjoy the rich tapestry - can appreciate them, and am very glad to
> > be where I am now.
>
> > On May 12, 6:03 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > We are somewhat stuck and molded, Molly, by our original family and
> > > often our adult choices are attempts to repair or fill in empty spaces
> > > even if it is destructive. There is a difference between being lonely
> > > and alone- a big difference. I smile now to think of remarks made
> > > while I was in two unhappy marriages and other sub-plots, based on
> > > their presumptions of what love looked like.
>
> > > On May 11, 11:29 pm, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > So, selfish love would be making people into (in your mind) what you
> > > > want them to be to satisfy your own needs.  I suppose this would be
> > > > selfish, as it does not leave much about the other in the equation but
> > > > what you make of them.  Of course, I have seen relationships like this
> > > > work, because there are those folks who would rather be used and
> > > > abused than lonely and don't think more of themselves to know or care
> > > > that there is more to love.
>
> > > > On May 11, 8:10 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Selfish aspects are difficult to recognise Molly, yet perversely
> > > > > obvious much of the time.  Clearly, many people show a professional
> > > > > persona to the world - whether lawyer, teacher or magical bulldunger -
> > > > > yet one can also present innocence in a skilled manner.  Gabby, at
> > > > > least in my view, is often good at reminding us of this - perhaps
> > > > > jolting some sense into how selfish aspects may be hidden even in
> > > > > professions of concern.  Gabby can get away with pretty much anything
> > > > > for me because I never feel there is an attempt to utter the last
> > > > > word.  There is some selfish love here - I want her to be a real
> > > > > version of my held images - yet I want no one to conform to any
> > > > > dreamed-up stuff of mine, and yet again there is a clear non-
> > > > > conformity that conforms  with my desire.  If I make you into an Angel
> > > > > Molly, I would probably merely be confirming some desire for you to be
> > > > > everything I would hate if I could hate!  Though an alternative would
> > > > > be to fall from grace together!  "Silly boy", I hope you both might
> > > > > say, though even that might just be said in a tone I might desire.  I
> > > > > guess, to a fair degree I can't hit at what I mean in that the real
> > > > > selfishness brings the paranoid-schizoid position with itself and
> > > > > exclusion zones that prevent love as a process that can wander its own
> > > > > course and touch us all.  Attracted by an Angel one finds a Devil,
> > > > > projecting a Devil one finds and Angel in real deeds.  Finding that a
> > > > > politician has charged us £340 for horse manure we might be upset at
> > > > > having to pay his expenses, until discovering he means to pour it over
> > > > > the other bastards!  My guess is that there is very little positive
> > > > > affirmation of human motivation and that most people falsely believe
> > > > > they can tell what is honest from what is not - explaining why we are
> > > > > conned over and over again by dross.
>
> > > > > On 11 May, 14:43, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > in a Tim Buckley frame of mind:
>
> > > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34FFcI98_Qs
>
> > > > > > On May 10, 9:47 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > An old friend of mine wanted something of a return to primitive 
> > > > > > > 'New
> > > > > > > World' relations in her life.  I sent her something on Kikuyu
> > > > > > > adolescent sex huts and some other anthropology - all readable as
> > > > > > > patronising male dross (the girls were not supposed to turn down 
> > > > > > > any
> > > > > > > boy who asked etc.) - she sent me some William Goulding that might
> > > > > > > equate to Mills and Boon for the literate, perhaps a tale of love
> > > > > > > before the Fall.  I do think we might find something worthwhile in
> > > > > > > loving another and finding the place of this in a wider form - 
> > > > > > > the and
> > > > > > > seeming very important.  One can give oneself and others a decent
> > > > > > > measure of unconditional, positive affirmation - this being a 
> > > > > > > complex
> > > > > > > set against Molly's 'habits'.  Love may be traumatic in the sense 
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > only dawning on us after an event, only available in the 
> > > > > > > differment
> > > > > > > of self.  This differment seems to entail not thinking to badly 
> > > > > > > of the
> > > > > > > other in disagreement, perhaps in viewing this in terms of 
> > > > > > > necessary
> > > > > > > honesty and a need to consider personal change.  Ad hominem rules 
> > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > prevent this and a wider concept of more personal feedback is 
> > > > > > > probably
> > > > > > > needed to stop us taking personal attack into polite agendas 
> > > > > > > hidden by
> > > > > > > rhetoric and never say the very things that need to be said in 
> > > > > > > order
> > > > > > > to understand them in differment.
>
> > > > > > > On 11 May, 00:59, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > How ironic in a thread about the Nature of LOVE!
>
> > > > > > > > On May 10, 6:19 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> 
> > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Actually, Gabs, the rules have always been to attack the 
> > > > > > > > > idea, and not the person. Simple enough for you to follow.
>
> > > > > > > > > [ Attached Message ]From:gabbydott 
> > > > > > > > > <[email protected]>To:"\"Minds Eye\"" 
> > > > > > > > > <[email protected]>Date:Sun, 10 May 2009 14:31:50 
> > > > > > > > > -0700 (PDT)Local:Sun, May 10 2009 4:31 pmSubject:[Mind's Eye] 
> > > > > > > > > Re: What is the nature of Love?
>
> > > > > > > > > To get an answer instead of this evasive insult. You're not 
> > > > > > > > > really
> > > > > > > > > dead yet, that's why I thought I might dare to ask you 
> > > > > > > > > directly why
> > > > > > > > > you wrote what you wrote, with you being a professional 
> > > > > > > > > writer I
> > > > > > > > > thought you might be able to access the self-reflective level 
> > > > > > > > > I was
> > > > > > > > > addressing. Yes, Chris, I know, I should have read the posting
> > > > > > > > > guidelines more carefully which had better advised us to 
> > > > > > > > > stick to
> > > > > > > > > quoting Plato always.
>
> > > > > > > > > On 10 Mai, 20:44, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > I was wondering out loud about Neil's idea of selfish love. 
> > > > > > > > > >  Wondering
> > > > > > > > > > out loud is part of what we do here.  Why the abrasive 
> > > > > > > > > > tone, Gabby?
>
> > > > > > > > > > On May 10, 2:05 pm, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > And I think it is wonderful that people
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > can find their comfort zone in life and be satisfied 
> > > > > > > > > > > > with that.  But I
> > > > > > > > > > > > wonder if it isn't part of what Neil refers to as 
> > > > > > > > > > > > selfish forms of
> > > > > > > > > > > > love, aside from the more exploitative kinds.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Right, let’s talk about beginnings. Why would Molly, our 
> > > > > > > > > > > mastress of
> > > > > > > > > > > embrace-the-paradox, end her concluding sentence with 
> > > > > > > > > > > this schismatic
> > > > > > > > > > > “but”? To establish the paradox she makes out to make it 
> > > > > > > > > > > embraceable?
> > > > > > > > > > > Well, why would Molly want to create some extra work when 
> > > > > > > > > > > she sees
> > > > > > > > > > > that we don’t even handle our everyday work the way it is 
> > > > > > > > > > > meant to?
> > > > > > > > > > > No, that’s not Molly style. Molly, let me ask you 
> > > > > > > > > > > directly why you
> > > > > > > > > > > opened your last sentence the way you did. Would you care 
> > > > > > > > > > > to explain,
> > > > > > > > > > > and I don’t mean justify.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On 10 Mai, 16:55, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> 
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Which gives us a nice blending of threads on love here. 
> > > > > > > > > > > > Is Eros
> > > > > > > > > > > > selfish, relating only to the pleasure that I am 
> > > > > > > > > > > > receiving, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > overall feeling of being loved that it may bring?
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to