Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Sedna wrote:Nu Lang wrote:
Sedna wrote:
Ok here, finally...could you please describe this in more detail. I believe this is at the heart of the matter.
The art of stalking is the riddle of the heart; the puzzlement sorcerers feel upon becoming aware of two things: first that the world appears to us to be unalterably objective and factual, because of peculiarities of our awareness and perception; second, that if different peculiarities of perception come into play, the very things about the world that seem so unalterably objective and factual change.
What a trickster can do for example, is they can alter the facts that people rested upon via the disguises they wear. When the facts are altered, people can become upset due to the revealing of being deceived and thus of not having control over the world as they perceived. So what is altered is this very need to have control in the first place, that's what should be stalked to the ap becomes fluid and one can handle any situation with ease and smiling. Takes time of course. So this is how a trickster for example can stalk a person to help them see, but of course no one can make another see, they can only take them to a threshold and then either one's rational explanation is abandoned or reinforced. If its abandoned, the energy redeploys and they see. This has to occur many times over, repetition, due to the flyer's influence which will seek to reestablish that rational fix...(keeps the chicken in the coop).
Better NL, and I appreciate your making the effort. I'd still like an actual example. For example...think of a time when you were tricked Sedna. A time when what you thought was "reality" was not as you thought. Locate this and then let me knwo when you have done this. Then I'll finish my example. But first you have to locate an experience. Everyone can do this. I'll do one myself.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
And the reason I asked for you to think of an example is becasue I sense that hearing another's example is not enough for you. Such as we already have the example of Carlos, and he maintains his interaction with Don Juan was 'real' and Don Juan is a real person. But you still ask me for an actual example, as if what Carlos says is fiction and you need a real example to back it up. I said to myself, well the best example would be one Sedna experienced.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Sedna wrote:datura8 wrote:
One would have to be like some very powerful person to be able to stalk and shift the AP of another for them. Which is one of the main things stalking is for. But I look at it this way, most people with that kind of power are generally impeccable and unconcerned. They do not care about the follies of another. So I don't see a person of power as stalking another in the first place, and what I mean by that is one who has power, if they had it, wouldnt use it. I think alien once referred to some of these stalker types on the internet as kids in capes. Thats generally what the internet stalkers are.
I agree, I do not see stalking another as helpful either...but some have said it is and I want to give that a fair shake, just in case. Although, they haven't shown me how it could be.
I was just reading Spud's intro...and have to agree with Spud that this forum is not noob friendly. There are a lot of agreements about what means what and no one is really posting clearly for anyone outside of that agreement, fwiw. Datura,
Bingo!
Sedna,
I am relatively new here, too and I am having trouble with some of the agreements and defintions, just because they are not what I have learned at other Toltec places or what I've read by CC. So trying to sort it all out to find out who means what, is proving to be a little difficult for me.
I think I've got it that 'stalking others' is more akin to the man on the street stalking, and not so much the Toltec way.
Another Man of Power who is an authority on Toltec wisdom and knowledge and works closely with some IRL Toltec Masters and Schools had this to say on the subject of 'stalking others'
Toltec warriors use a lot of different techniques to dismantle the
layers of the false ego. Stalking is one practice that both CC, Theun
Mares and Kris Raphael teaches. Stalking in Toltec teachings has nothing
to do with "Stalking" other persons. To Stalk is to observe one's own
action without to judge them.
On the subject of the AP shift, it's a real and perceivable thing. Two times recently I have had my AP shifted noticeably. Both times I felt it in my belly, I was unable to speak well and I kind of felt a little broken, but in a good way. So I tend to think of AP shifts that happen while awake as a real and noticeable shift of, not only perception, and awareness, but also power.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
"Other warriors can learn stalking in their normal awareness, although it is advisable that they do it in heightened awareness - not so much because of the value of heightened awareness, but because it imbues stalking with a mystery that it doesn't really have; stalking is merely behavior with people."
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Nu Lang wrote:"Other warriors can learn stalking in their normal awareness, although it is advisable that they do it in heightened awareness - not so much because of the value of heightened awareness, but because it imbues stalking with a mystery that it doesn't really have; stalking is merely behavior with people."Yes, observing your own behaviour as you relate to people.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Also observing theirs. I know you observe mine,...and respond... I observe yours...its natural.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Sedna wrote:Gonzo wrote:
Be simple with the definition. Equate it to fishing. Determine the right bait, set the line in the water, watch the bobber, and when the fish bites, set the hook and reel him in.
Ok, this also seems a good definition of stalking. However, I keep asking how this helps anyone...the stalker or the person stalked?
Sedna, what would you learn about yourself, if, say, you encountered someone playing the shell game and you figured you could win, put down your money, and promptly lost? Would you put down more money and keep losing? Would you some other day play the game with another player? Or would you realize the game was rigged, that you had become a mark, that what appeared to be other players were part of the con? Would you perhaps learn something about your own judgment, about your own abilities, your own sense of self-esteem, or would you just be angry at having been taken?
Regardless, I submit you would have learned something, minimally not to play the shell game again, but perhaps, with some self-reflection, some things about yourself.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Certainly we all people watch. Im trying to find out how that is stalking (toltec sense not street sense)
Nu Lang wrote:Also observing theirs. I know you observe mine,...and respond... I observe yours...its natural.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Enchantra wrote:
Certainly we all people watch. Im trying to find out how that is stalking (toltec sense not street sense)
Nu Lang wrote:
Also observing theirs. I know you observe mine,...and respond... I observe yours...its natural.
Stalking (in the Toltec sense) has been called "the art of controlled folly." The ordinary person actually believes that everything "matters" - so they go through life ruled & controlled by their beliefs, reactions, and so on. The ordinary man lives INSIDE the drama, not realizing he is an actor in a finite play. The warrior, on the other hand, knows NOTHING matters in the big picture, so the warrior's folly is "controlled" - meaning that the warrior does everything with the awareness that it is a script written on water in disappearing ink. The warrior is keenly aware that s/he IS in a play, and through stalking that awareness, learns to be more in touch with the core-authentic-self as opposed to merely acting out the role of her character.
Put very simply, stalking brings the warrior face to face with her authentic self and, in doing so, makes available the option to open one's eyes inside the double (outside the box, beyond the play).
I think Castaneda used the term "stalking" because it's very much like a game of cat-and-mouse. When we first start on the warrior path as newbies, we still hold certain beliefs that are precious to us; but as we learn to not only observe those beliefs but also question WHY we hold to them, we begin to realize that virtually everything about us is "false" as a result of our social/cultural programming and the foreign installation. At first, maybe we're outraged or disappointed, but ultimately, it's like the rabbit hole of perception/awareness. The more we observe and "stalk" our beliefs - literally playing cat-and-mouse with them at times - the more we come to realize that our mortal "identity" is largely rooted in the character we've been playing throughout our lives. It's when we strip away the false attributes of that character that we begin to uncover the true, authentic self - which is the seat of our personal power.
Stalking others through OBSERVATION is one way to learn things about oneself, of course. But stalking others for the purpose of trying to teach them or change them in some way... is just folly, and almost always ends badly.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Nu Lang wrote:
For example...think of a time when you were tricked Sedna. A time when what you thought was "reality" was not as you thought. Locate this and then let me knwo when you have done this. Then I'll finish my example. But first you have to locate an experience. Everyone can do this. I'll do one myself.
I have been doing this since the topic of a trickster first came up. Indeed, I have been pouring over examples of my life of things mentioned here. But I seem to not come to the same conclusions as you about it.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Nu Lang wrote:
And the reason I asked for you to think of an example is becasue I sense that hearing another's example is not enough for you. Such as we already have the example of Carlos, and he maintains his interaction with Don Juan was 'real' and Don Juan is a real person. But you still ask me for an actual example, as if what Carlos says is fiction and you need a real example to back it up. I said to myself, well the best example would be one Sedna experienced.
I get that you think that. However, you do not know this and you haven't asked. So again, if this stalking others thing worked, you shouldn't have all these problems in just answering me.
And I get that you think what things you refer to, although they make it clear to you, should just also make it clear to me. However, I am not you. You are not being as clear as you could be...and I wonder why.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Enchantra wrote:
On the subject of the AP shift, it's a real and perceivable thing. Two times recently I have had my AP shifted noticeably. Both times I felt it in my belly, I was unable to speak well and I kind of felt a little broken, but in a good way. So I tend to think of AP shifts that happen while awake as a real and noticeable shift of, not only perception, and awareness, but also power.
Thanks. However, has stalking ever produced the AP shifts? And, would you characterize the AP shift as causing an emotional change, a mental perspective change, or some other deeper change.
It can be hard joining a group that has so many agreements and concepts that are not clearly defined and explained, especially when there is still argument between them on these subjects. As I read I notice I don't have much use for the philosophy about CC's techniques and find myself wanting to stick to real life examples of what works and how it works. I am not sure that the lack of clarity is noticed by those who aren't very clear.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Nu Lang wrote:
Also observing theirs. I know you observe mine,...and respond... I observe yours...its natural.Then why not just call it observing?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Gonzo wrote:
Sedna wrote:
Gonzo wrote:
Be simple with the definition. Equate it to fishing. Determine the right bait, set the line in the water, watch the bobber, and when the fish bites, set the hook and reel him in.
Ok, this also seems a good definition of stalking. However, I keep asking how this helps anyone...the stalker or the person stalked?
Sedna, what would you learn about yourself, if, say, you encountered someone playing the shell game and you figured you could win, put down your money, and promptly lost? Would you put down more money and keep losing? Would you some other day play the game with another player? Or would you realize the game was rigged, that you had become a mark, that what appeared to be other players were part of the con? Would you perhaps learn something about your own judgment, about your own abilities, your own sense of self-esteem, or would you just be angry at having been taken?
Regardless, I submit you would have learned something, minimally not to play the shell game again, but perhaps, with some self-reflection, some things about yourself.
Not sure how this relates to what you have been claiming, but lets see.
When I was a little girl, my father took me to an amusement park where there were such games played. One such carny hooked my attention, a tic-tac-toe bean bag toss. It seemed simple enough and I asked my father for a dollar. He told me that the games were rigged against me, still I wanted to see for myself (something you should have gathered about me already), so I played...and lost. I couldn't let it go, I played again and again, always losing. My father was very patient, he didn't say anything and let me keep playing. I believe he knew that I would learn on my own what he already knew and I am grateful that he allowed me that space. I did eventually walk away.
What did I learn in walking away? To call my own limit. I am not sure that this is what you were thinking I should have learned. I was not angry, at the man or at myself. I felt loved and accepted and it was as ok to try as it was to walk away. I am pretty sure my father would have let me stay all day. But when I saw how loving he was being to me, I couldn't accept any more of his money. In the end it was a pleasant experience.
Since then, I have played again. I have an affinity for the balloon dart game and win every time. I have also learned a way to consistently go home from casinos with more money in my pocket than when I walked in.
So now tell me how this connects?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Sedna wrote:Enchantra wrote:
On the subject of the AP shift, it's a real and perceivable thing. Two times recently I have had my AP shifted noticeably. Both times I felt it in my belly, I was unable to speak well and I kind of felt a little broken, but in a good way. So I tend to think of AP shifts that happen while awake as a real and noticeable shift of, not only perception, and awareness, but also power.
Thanks. However, has stalking ever produced the AP shifts? And, would you characterize the AP shift as causing an emotional change, a mental perspective change, or some other deeper change.
No, stalking has never produced an AP shift in myself. The change....hard to describe, as each time I seem to be in a place where words just don't seem to cut it. Not emotional, not mental, definitely something deeper.
When I stalk myself, I notice a shift yes, in the way I view things, but I wouldn't say that my AP has shifted, the way it can say, in a dream or with plant allies.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
alien wrote:
Stalking (in the Toltec sense) has been called "the art of controlled folly." The ordinary person actually believes that everything "matters" - so they go through life ruled & controlled by their beliefs, reactions, and so on. The ordinary man lives INSIDE the drama, not realizing he is an actor in a finite play. The warrior, on the other hand, knows NOTHING matters in the big picture, so the warrior's folly is "controlled" - meaning that the warrior does everything with the awareness that it is a script written on water in disappearing ink. The warrior is keenly aware that s/he IS in a play, and through stalking that awareness, learns to be more in touch with the core-authentic-self as opposed to merely acting out the role of her character.
Put very simply, stalking brings the warrior face to face with her authentic self and, in doing so, makes available the option to open one's eyes inside the double (outside the box, beyond the play).
I think Castaneda used the term "stalking" because it's very much like a game of cat-and-mouse. When we first start on the warrior path as newbies, we still hold certain beliefs that are precious to us; but as we learn to not only observe those beliefs but also question WHY we hold to them, we begin to realize that virtually everything about us is "false" as a result of our social/cultural programming and the foreign installation. At first, maybe we're outraged or disappointed, but ultimately, it's like the rabbit hole of perception/awareness. The more we observe and "stalk" our beliefs - literally playing cat-and-mouse with them at times - the more we come to realize that our mortal "identity" is largely rooted in the character we've been playing throughout our lives. It's when we strip away the false attributes of that character that we begin to uncover the true, authentic self - which is the seat of our personal power.
Stalking others through OBSERVATION is one way to learn things about oneself, of course. But stalking others for the purpose of trying to teach them or change them in some way... is just folly, and almost always ends badly.
This would seem to support exactly what Gonzo was saying about the stalker, unfortunately, because before you seemed opposed to Gonzo's characterization of it. This is also much more clear of a description, thank you. When the stalker came and did whatever the stalker did, according to what you are saying here, either everything mattered to the people in the group because they were ordinary people who had not yet reached the understanding that nothing matters or it didn't matter because they were warriors and free of going through life ruled and controled by their beliefs and reactions. Is that what you meant? Although, I would agree with you that doing it to teach others ends badly, I think you mentioned once about teaching pigs to fly on your website and you know that just can't end well. Your description also brings me back to my question, because what you are saying would suggest that the people in this group could really help each other, if they were not free now to become free, so why are there no threads of people asking for help stalking something about themselves?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Enchantra wrote:
Sedna wrote:
Enchantra wrote:
On the subject of the AP shift, it's a real and perceivable thing. Two times recently I have had my AP shifted noticeably. Both times I felt it in my belly, I was unable to speak well and I kind of felt a little broken, but in a good way. So I tend to think of AP shifts that happen while awake as a real and noticeable shift of, not only perception, and awareness, but also power.
Thanks. However, has stalking ever produced the AP shifts? And, would you characterize the AP shift as causing an emotional change, a mental perspective change, or some other deeper change.
No, stalking has never produced an AP shift in myself. The change....hard to describe, as each time I seem to be in a place where words just don't seem to cut it. Not emotional, not mental, definitely something deeper.
When I stalk myself, I notice a shift yes, in the way I view things, but I wouldn't say that my AP has shifted, the way it can say, in a dream or with plant allies.
Thank you for clarifying that. Perhaps it is early to do this but I am going to conclude then that stalking (self or others) has nothing whatsoever to do with AP shifts...unless someone can give a clear example from their actual life where it did.
Now down to the business of distinguishing views and perspectives. In a previous post Alien described those that are free from being ruled by their view and perspectives and how an ordinary man lives inside their views (as though it is real). How does everyone feel they rate in this? What have people here done to get out of their perspectives? Can stalking be of use with this?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Sedna wrote: Your description also brings me back to my question, because what you are saying would suggest that the people in this group could really help each other, if they were not free now to become free, so why are there no threads of people asking for help stalking something about themselves?
Because, 'stalking others' as we refer to here is done surreptitiously.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Sedna wrote:
This would seem to support exactly what Gonzo was saying about the stalker, unfortunately, because before you seemed opposed to Gonzo's characterization of it. This is also much more clear of a description, thank you. When the stalker came and did whatever the stalker did, according to what you are saying here, either everything mattered to the people in the group because they were ordinary people who had not yet reached the understanding that nothing matters or it didn't matter because they were warriors and free of going through life ruled and controled by their beliefs and reactions. Is that what you meant?
I'll try to keep my comments general in honor of Datura's request not to dredge up anymore of the past (and I do agree w/ that!). In GENERAL, the tyrant (I will not call her a stalker) created a false reality through several false identities and used those identities to manipulate the emotions of certain individuals. The individuals were under the assumption that the "person" to whom they were speaking was real, flesh-and-blood - when in reality it was an internet sock puppet. This manipulation went so far as to involve phone calls wherein the tyrant altered her voice and pretended to be a man dying of malaria. The "man" then died, leaving this individual to grieve horribly, because she wholly believed "the man" was real - and at this point, the relationship had NOTHING to do with Toltec, stalking, or anything of the sort. The manipulation occurred WHOLLY on a personal level and what I *saw* was that it was nothing more than an ugly game that got SO out of control that the tyrant had no alternative but to "kill" the sock puppet, because plans were being made to meet in person... which, obviously, could never happen. This was not about "stalking" but simply a case of emotional manipulation perpetrated by someone who desperately NEEDED to be LOVED... but could not manifest those qualities in herself, and so created a plethora of false identities. I honestly think even SHE was surprise by how far it went, and that her big "confession" came in the same way a man who knows he's about to be fired conveniently quits the day before the boss actually hands him his pink slip.
Now, a more direct answer to your question about whether it "matters" and on what level... I will simply say that this occurred primarily on a DISCUSSION forum, not on a role-playing forum. Sure, we can be stalked by unscrupulous tyrants anywhere, anytime, but when Gonzo tries to make it seem that this was some noble effort, the underlying reality is that it was just a cheap trick, perpetrated on unsuspecting individuals who had joined an internet forum to talk about Toltec philosophies and other metaphysical pursuits. No one signed on to have some tyrant stalking them, which is really the bottom line as far as I'm concerned. In order for a real benefactor/apprentice relationship to exist, BOTH parties are aware of it from the start.
I noticed that Gonzo also used the old argument, "Why did anyone respond?" Well, it's kinda like this. If a rogue wolf comes into my house and starts ripping up the carpets and pissing on the furniture, I'll probably have to shoot the wolf if I can't convince it to leave on its own. That, too, is a survival mechanism. At first, people responded believing this person's "story" to be real, when I saw through it from Day One and knew it was nothing BUT a "story" (and a badly-written one at that). The details were truly horrendous and so melodramatic as to be unbelievable (the first clue that it WAS unbelievable). But no matter. It wasn't that it "mattered", but that it was disruptive to what had previously been a working group that was making progress. Nothing more than a wayward Agent Smith.
Although, I would agree with you that doing it to teach others ends badly, I think you mentioned once about teaching pigs to fly on your website and you know that just can't end well. Your description also brings me back to my question, because what you are saying would suggest that the people in this group could really help each other, if they were not free now to become free, so why are there no threads of people asking for help stalking something about themselves?
Ah, an idealist! *big smile* Actually, I agree with you completely, and that's why I had my own forum for years. But unfortunately, it really does seem after many years of *seeing* and observation, that almost ANY Toltec-related forum is rife with trolls and troublemakers, Don Wannabes and Don Juanitas. *shrugs* Point being, I think there's a lot of water under the bridge for almost everyone who's ever spent any amount of time on a Toltec forum - so there is a natural hesitation to reveal anything about one's personal life (such as what might be required if one were going to ask for help stalking something about themselves). If someone says, for example, that their mother-in-law is driving them crazy and they want to stalk the reasons behind it, chances are someone on the forum can be counted upon to say, "It's because you're a self-important twerp and all you have to do is stop caring." Whether that is true at a core level is irrelevant, because at the end of the day we are still in humanform (even those who have lost their humanform - yes, another paradox), and let's just say it gets tedious putting on the hip-waders to get through all that kind of bullshit. Heh. But hey... I'm game if you are!
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Sedna wrote:Nu Lang wrote:
Also observing theirs. I know you observe mine,...and respond... I observe yours...its natural.Then why not just call it observing?
Note the words observe...and respond. The second part is key. To acquire power one must then act, observation alone does not do much. To simply withdrawal without a response would be a hermetic existence in which you leave everyone alone, no contact, no interaction. Interaction is actually valuable, so its not wise to do this. So we see that there is a twofold 'behavior'...observing and then action based on what was observed.
To answer your question specifically, I don't call it observing because this is a discussion about the art of stalking, and the term stalking was defined by DJ and we here at a nagual forum are exploring the implications. The fact that you suggest it be called observing is actually revealing. If you were out in the world with people who never heard of CC you would likely have to call it observing due to the fact they would not be able to even discuss 'stalking' with you. The advantage to us here is we have a body of knowledge to work with and its called stalking, and we have another body of knowledge to work with its called dreaming. And more than just knowledge, these are practices that are maneuvers with the purpose to move and relocate the assemblage point at will and thus make one free from the confines that all those people out there in daily life are most often unaware of. Thats why we are calling it stalking, a term we all know about here. Becasue its more than just what we know, its what we do with what we know that matters. For warriors, action trumps talking any day. To act effectively in this alternative reality (a separate reality), one must comprehend basic sorcery premises well enough to use them. This can be learned in highlighted awareness, but it must be learned. The world at large does not supply such information, it can only show us regular stalking.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Enchantra wrote:The purpose of stalking is twofold: first, to move the
assemblage point as steadily and safely as possible, and nothing can
do the job as well as stalking ; second, to imprint its
principles at such a deep level that the human inventory is bypassed;
for example the human inventory's natural reaction of refusing and
judging something that may be offensive to reason.
Using the above words from Carlos as to the purpose of stalking, I wonder then, how does this fit in with stalking others?
Enchantra, in the first page of this thread, you posted this quote and it says that stalking moves the assemblage point.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Nu Lang wrote:Enchantra wrote:The purpose of stalking is twofold: first, to move the
assemblage point as steadily and safely as possible, and nothing can
do the job as well as stalking ; second, to imprint its
principles at such a deep level that the human inventory is bypassed;
for example the human inventory's natural reaction of refusing and
judging something that may be offensive to reason.
Using the above words from Carlos as to the purpose of stalking, I wonder then, how does this fit in with stalking others?
Enchantra, in the first page of this thread, you posted this quote and it says that stalking moves the assemblage point.
Yes. Perhaps I was unclear, but I was responding to sednas question as speaking of my own experiences. I qualified my statement by saying it hasn't produced shifts (in myself such as those that occur in dreaming or with power plants.
No, stalking has never produced an AP shift in myself. The
change....hard to describe, as each time I seem to be in a place where
words just don't seem to cut it. Not emotional, not mental, definitely
something deeper.
When I stalk myself, I notice a shift yes, in
the way I view things, but I wouldn't say that my AP has shifted, the
way it can say, in a dream or with plant allies.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
The main thing is to know that the assemblage point is moved slowly by stalking and more significantly by dreaming. Moving it via stalking in first attention prepares one for handling the more drastic shifts in dreaming, second attention. Some people who are not prepared but yet are adept dreamers can become 'insane' not in the sense I talked abotu earlier...which was to be trapped in rational logic, but insane due to not being able to stalk a fixed point of reference once their ap is loosened. Stalking is like the take off and landing of airplanes, it both helps us ascend out of a fixed place, and also enables us to come down to earth at will. The shift of the ap through stalking is gradual and its supposed to be, it serves as a buffer and gives us maneuverability in the otherwise chaotic world of loss of reference points (fluid ap).
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
Enchantra wrote:
Sedna wrote:
Your description also brings me back to my question, because what you are saying would suggest that the people in this group could really help each other, if they were not free now to become free, so why are there no threads of people asking for help stalking something about themselves?
Because, 'stalking others' as we refer to here is done surreptitiously.
Yes, but why not do it overtly? Why not a thread?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2019
alien wrote:
Sedna wrote:
This would seem to support exactly what Gonzo was saying about the stalker, unfortunately, because before you seemed opposed to Gonzo's characterization of it. This is also much more clear of a description, thank you. When the stalker came and did whatever the stalker did, according to what you are saying here, either everything mattered to the people in the group because they were ordinary people who had not yet reached the understanding that nothing matters or it didn't matter because they were warriors and free of going through life ruled and controled by their beliefs and reactions. Is that what you meant?
I'll try to keep my comments general in honor of Datura's request not to dredge up anymore of the past (and I do agree w/ that!). In GENERAL, the tyrant (I will not call her a stalker) created a false reality through several false identities and used those identities to manipulate the emotions of certain individuals. The individuals were under the assumption that the "person" to whom they were speaking was real, flesh-and-blood - when in reality it was an internet sock puppet. This manipulation went so far as to involve phone calls wherein the tyrant altered her voice and pretended to be a man dying of malaria. The "man" then died, leaving this individual to grieve horribly, because she wholly believed "the man" was real - and at this point, the relationship had NOTHING to do with Toltec, stalking, or anything of the sort. The manipulation occurred WHOLLY on a personal level and what I *saw* was that it was nothing more than an ugly game that got SO out of control that the tyrant had no alternative but to "kill" the sock puppet, because plans were being made to meet in person... which, obviously, could never happen. This was not about "stalking" but simply a case of emotional manipulation perpetrated by someone who desperately NEEDED to be LOVED... but could not manifest those qualities in herself, and so created a plethora of false identities. I honestly think even SHE was surprise by how far it went, and that her big "confession" came in the same way a man who knows he's about to be fired conveniently quits the day before the boss actually hands him his pink slip.
Now, a more direct answer to your question about whether it "matters" and on what level... I will simply say that this occurred primarily on a DISCUSSION forum, not on a role-playing forum. Sure, we can be stalked by unscrupulous tyrants anywhere, anytime, but when Gonzo tries to make it seem that this was some noble effort, the underlying reality is that it was just a cheap trick, perpetrated on unsuspecting individuals who had joined an internet forum to talk about Toltec philosophies and other metaphysical pursuits. No one signed on to have some tyrant stalking them, which is really the bottom line as far as I'm concerned. In order for a real benefactor/apprentice relationship to exist, BOTH parties are aware of it from the start.
I noticed that Gonzo also used the old argument, "Why did anyone respond?" Well, it's kinda like this. If a rogue wolf comes into my house and starts ripping up the carpets and pissing on the furniture, I'll probably have to shoot the wolf if I can't convince it to leave on its own. That, too, is a survival mechanism. At first, people responded believing this person's "story" to be real, when I saw through it from Day One and knew it was nothing BUT a "story" (and a badly-written one at that). The details were truly horrendous and so melodramatic as to be unbelievable (the first clue that it WAS unbelievable). But no matter. It wasn't that it "mattered", but that it was disruptive to what had previously been a working group that was making progress. Nothing more than a wayward Agent Smith.
Although, I would agree with you that doing it to teach others ends badly, I think you mentioned once about teaching pigs to fly on your website and you know that just can't end well. Your description also brings me back to my question, because what you are saying would suggest that the people in this group could really help each other, if they were not free now to become free, so why are there no threads of people asking for help stalking something about themselves?
Ah, an idealist! *big smile* Actually, I agree with you completely, and that's why I had my own forum for years. But unfortunately, it really does seem after many years of *seeing* and observation, that almost ANY Toltec-related forum is rife with trolls and troublemakers, Don Wannabes and Don Juanitas. *shrugs* Point being, I think there's a lot of water under the bridge for almost everyone who's ever spent any amount of time on a Toltec forum - so there is a natural hesitation to reveal anything about one's personal life (such as what might be required if one were going to ask for help stalking something about themselves). If someone says, for example, that their mother-in-law is driving them crazy and they want to stalk the reasons behind it, chances are someone on the forum can be counted upon to say, "It's because you're a self-important twerp and all you have to do is stop caring." Whether that is true at a core level is irrelevant, because at the end of the day we are still in humanform (even those who have lost their humanform - yes, another paradox), and let's just say it gets tedious putting on the hip-waders to get through all that kind of bullshit. Heh. But hey... I'm game if you are!
I am not sure you read my words. You made the distinction, I am sking for clarification on your distinction as it applies to the other people of this group. I get that you don't like that person, but you keep pointing to the other person assuming that it is obvious. Nothing is obvious. I don't believe things just because someone on the internet says so. Stick to your distinction and apply it to the reactions...including yours.
I am thinking that we are disagreeing on the subject of seeing. I asked elsewhere what people are when seen in their totality. I feel it is unfortunate that you see trolls, beggars, and whatever else. I am not sure that such is seeing, at least not in the way CC described it. I am not really sure what the trouble is in this group with applying things to their real life or making direct correlations. I think you can talk about this without talking about the other person.
|
