Control Is The Problem And Not The Solution. ♥

in #spirituality7 years ago (edited)

Control implies separation and a division - control cannot exist unless the controller and the controlled both exist. Yet are we not in truth a single entity?

control words

Everything that exists is part of a continuum of unity - the ultimate reality is that while there are an uncounted number of individual beings in existence, they are all ultimately one. The same is true within individual beings, in that we all have aspects and 'borders' within us that denote 'parts' or 'organs' yet they are still all the oneness that is us, simultaneously. The fundamental oneness and unity of 'all that is' reveals the error of choosing the *illusion* of control and especially the error of thinking that the illusion of control is beneficial.

What is Control?



'con' - as in 'reduction in value' or short for 'convict' and 'confidence trick'.

'trol' - lives under a bridge and on internet forums/comments lists. ;)

To the consciousness that defines life and 'things' as being separated from the consciousness itself, the desire to control the 'problems out there' can seem to be the right solution and possibly the only solution available - got 'weeds' growing in your garden? got 'pests'? Many resolve to use some weed or pest control! (For a fee.. that's 'fee', not 'free').

Yet these approaches all contain denials and create death; which is the consistent result of all forms of denial eventually.

To the essentially unified consciousness those 'weeds' are not problems, they are the result of the particular balance of the environment. If we desire different species to be present, we can evolve new approaches and cause greater balance without killing or destroying. Those 'pests' are equally evolvable through collective increases of awareness, intent to balance and making choices to live, love, flow and grow with harmony rather than with overpowering. If we think we are all eternally divided, then it makes little sense to claim that insects can change in response to 'human' evolution - yet in a oneness, that outcome is somewhat inevitable.

The unified consciousness recognizes itself to be present in the 'weeds' and in all life and thus there is no benefit to 'control' since the control would just be another form of self-control and self-control is itself the result of imbalances deeper within self that rely on an incorrect definition of internal division within the thinker. The answer is to seek the imbalances and allow the 'kinks' to 'de-kink' lovingly - ending any control that has been allowed to overpower our own true feelings, will and desire.

The 'pests' and 'weeds' are the wild ones that the self control has been told not to allow - if you look closely you will see the denial encoded into the forms of these beings and feel the terror that they reflect and are holding due to receiving the beady unloving eye of loveless consciousness that designs to cause their demise just for 'not being pretty enough'. They reflect your own parts that don't look and move according to the ways the mind judges that they should and also reflect the feelings that aren't yet being accepted - their reflection is in forms that you will not recognise until oneness is fully understood.

Wishing you well,
Ura Soul

Got Comments?


Does this make Sense In You? Let us know in the comments below. Thanks.

Steemit T-shirts, Hoodies and Many Other Steemit Inspired Products are On Sale Now


t-shirt
Buy your "Steemit, Dreamit, Memeit, Teamit" T-Shirts, Gifts & Other Clothing Here.


resteem


ureka.org

Sort:  

Interesting. I think it's common to want to control things - not just people, but situations and outcomes in general.

There is probably a spectrum involved where directing things the way you prefer them to happen is just a mild type of control.

It is possible to choose outcomes and experiences through attraction, will and desires and in that way there is no control. The differences between the controlling version and the non controlling version are akin to the difference between dragging a child with your hands to force them to go in a particular direction and the child moving in a direction through free will due to understanding being present in them which concurs with your own heart's desire and the true needs of the moment.

If you're consciously aware of what you're drawing in through attraction, and you act with intent, you would be in control.

If the child freely chooses to follow because you have intentionally influenced him or her to see that as the best path, you would be the one in control of the situation and the responsibility for the outcome would be mostly yours.

I say mostly because it is a spectrum, and without divine omnipotence and omniscience to predict outcomes, nobody is ever fully in control of anything.

If you're consciously aware of what you're drawing in through attraction, and you act with intent, you would be in control.

through ultimate understanding that all is one, there can be a total ending of control - that which is being attracted and drawn is also you.

If the child freely chooses to follow because you have intentionally influenced him or her to see that as the best path, you would be the one in control of the situation and the responsibility for the outcome would be mostly yours.

'influence' is the conjunction of 'in' meaning 'not' and 'fluence' meaning easy/flowing - so influence is in it's phonetic essence and roots an inherent altering away from self empowered free thought and action (aka free will). A child that is being influenced is not, in the purest sense, acting from an entirely free will - however, they can AGREE to meet your intention from their own free willl instead and that is what I am pointing at here. Really, the difference must be felt to understood - mental analysis is insufficient here.

I'm not sure I agree with your translation of influence. If you translate the "in" to just mean in - similar to inspire - and keep fluence/fluency to mean flow, it would mean your will is "flowing within" another.

So if everything ultimately is one, yet still broken into components, "influence" would be similar to the heart pumping blood. The heart and blood are both body, but the heart is directing the flow.

Of course this is a closed system where the heart (ideally) just does what it naturally should do. When changing this analogy to people consciously directing their intent, there is a lot more room for interpretation.

I suppose that would be a study of free will - whether directing your intent is an attempt to influence the world, or whether that very intent is just the effect of all of the influences you've internalized and made part of yourself.

Words often have different interpretations that can all be said to be relevant, even the ones not commonly noticed. I'm not really sure it is possible for my will to flow within another in a way that does not overpower their own will. By definition, the will in the other is either mine or it is overpowering their - unless there is agreement - in which case it would be more of a 'matching' as opposed to my will being in theirs.

Study of free will is far from simple and requires us to actually feel the flow of energy and intentions - plus, every case is unique - so generalising is not always helpful.

The way I understand the law of attraction is that it begins with controlling the self, and aiming the self toward what it wants to attract.

I think if you remain conscious of the self, you would feel your will flowing in others, even as their will is flowing in you (influencing each other) and I think there might be a danger in losing control of something you began with intent.

Your will attracts reflections and draws experiences with or without control. Your state of being is the key and a state of being without control is one that most freely draws peaceful and pleasant experience.

The way to understand this is through feeling, not through purely mental analysis. Will is a literal essence that is part of our makeup as beings, so if it is in others then it is not in it's right place.

Interesting analysis. Reminds me of an article I read long ago suggesting that if man has self-will, he gets it from matter, because matter has will, too.

Noted is your discussion of the division within the body, into "organs". We think of ourselves as free-agents in a bag of skin, divided from the universe, rather than a part of a whole.

Would it be surprising then, to find that he universe is an organism rather than a thing to be conquered?

As I think I replied to you recently on the same 'matter' ;)
It is the magnetic Will Essence in creation that manifests 'matter'. 'matter' is as with 'maternal' / 'mother' and the will is the feminine essence. 'Patterns' are the equivalent masculine component - hence 'paternal'. When patterns in spirit are bonded with the maternal will - we have a manifested form in creation.

Yes, exactly, universes are organisms and indeed they are US - we are 'all that is' viewing itself from a temporal viewpoint in order to explore and learn.

This post has received a 8.92 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @ura-soul.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.20
TRX 0.13
JST 0.030
BTC 65527.96
ETH 3466.32
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.52