[stadiaKab]

trust what we say in the moment knowing that ultimately we all communicate even when we think we've "failed" in the word part.

penny,

i was going to write a post similar to soup's and markm's - stepping back and re-reading my posts, they seemed to be doing more "preaching" than sharing of ideas. i have no intention of preaching; no one here needs to be "preached at", so i was bothered, and felt the need to apoligize as well.

however, i read your post and these words comforted me - they let me know that my true intentions are being sent, even if my wording is poor. :d

thank you again. :d

art

[VardyCodarexyz]

i seem fairly careless of holding regard for a reader's "free will" in relation to the writings that i share. sometimes it seems as if such carelessness is an oversight that i need to learn about and grow more conscientious of. if i did include some care in regard to a reader's choices it may expand the limit of how far the vehicle of writing goes. and so here i write with a repentant attitude - i'm sorry if there's things that i've written that haven't ressonated well with you and i hope that you can pardon me for "writing my mind" in such ways. my intent is one of benevolence for the growth of the greater good.

do you think that word constructs that acknowledge a readers choice may hold advantage over say word forms that command the choices of the reader?

[stadiaKab]

i seem fairly careless of holding regard for a reader's "free will" in relation to the writings that i share. sometimes it seems as if such carelessness is an oversight that i need to learn about and grow more conscientious of. if i did include some care in regard to a reader's choices it may expand the limit of how far the vehicle of writing goes. and so here i write with a repentant attitude - i'm sorry if there's things that i've written that haven't ressonated well with you and i hope that you can pardon me for "writing my mind" in such ways. my intent is one of benevolence for the growth of the greater good.

do you think that word constructs that acknowledge a readers choice may hold advantage over say word forms that command the choices of the reader?

soup -

no need to apologize my man! i often do the same thing, but, like you, my goal with a post is for the greater good, not to offend, etc. i can't think of anything anyone has written on this forum that has violated my free will or has "rubbed me the wrong way". we're all learning together and bound to make a few mistakes along the way. its through these mistakes and discussion that we learn. with anything, one must use their own discernment. if the "material" resonates with you, great! if not, that's ok too! we all need to remember to be open-minded, welcoming constructive criticism, with an attitude towards compromise. many a forum member has helped me to word things better, and i'm very thankful for their input.

have a good one!

art

[usacomm]

i know how you feel bro. i don't think there is anything one human being could say to another that would violate their free will. however, if you were an extraterrestrial and you materialized in front of someone and handed them a handbook to the universe and blueprints for in intergalactic space shuttle, then you would be violating their free will for sure. you probably chose to incarnate in a human body so that you could help out without violateing anyone's free will. it also sounds like you are a kind-hearted, humble kind of a guy, as well, so i am sure you haven't offended anyone at all. cheers my friend!

[Drysnyaty]

soup, i would like to share the fact that i always look for and look forward to your posts. you're one of the most beautifully thoughtful people i've ever had the pleasure of communicating with.

with kindest gratitude, mark

[Drysnyaty]

as i look back on some of my earlier posts, i wonder if i am guilty of foisting what i might have considered at the time to be a more illuminated viewpoint upon other posters. i have certainly been guilty at times of believing myself to have a better handle on a given topic, based on the topic of someone else's post, and strive to remind myself that each of us here has something unique to offer.

i guess this is an issue of ego, as jo anne has mentioned lately, in her thread 'what the heck', and sort of felt a little chastened upon reading it. i am learning that all these viewpoints are equally valid and precious, as each viewpoint will find a heart with which to resonate. it is not for me to judge the correctness or appropriateness of your personal thought processes as pertains to this forum. if i am guilty of abusing anyone's love and enthusiasm for their own thoughts, i do apologize. i wish to be a source of inspiration for others, but not at the expense of minimizing in any way the sacred insights of others. i will continue to learn to be more sensitive to all your polite and intrinsically valuable posts and recognize more fully the purpose of this forum, in which we, all of who wrestle with the veil of forgetfulness, offer our most beautiful inner truths, as best we can. please don't be daunted by my or anyone else's apparent lack of sensitivity or 'humbility'.

-mark

[iqxdvjgmat]

hey soup, like everyone said up above--you're intentions aren't to foist your ideas upon anyone else, and we "know" that about you through your sharing of yourself. we're all in this together in that we're finding words to communicate with others--in this safe and sacred space--things that were impossible for us to express to others before. we're practicing with our new set of tools. so no apologies necessary by anyone. trust what we say in the moment knowing that ultimately we all communicate even when we think we've "failed" in the word part.

much love and appreciation for all your participation in my own practice.
penny