I spoke to a woman Saturday past whom I met for the first time that day. We poke about many random things like her cat and the Tom it has decided to take as a boyfriend. We spoke about camping and then we started to speak about intentions. I have thought about it a lot since then and I am kind of struggling with exactly what she had to say. It’s not that I don’t agree. I agree completely but I just don’t know how to apply it or rather how to condition myself.
She explained to me that everyone is doing something for someone else on a condition and that this should not be the case. That when we do it should be unconditional. We took the example of helping a friend who is in need.
You see we helped someone in need. Took her in and helped her to even find a job to get back on her feet. None of that happened. She just ran again and now is sitting in the same boat. Now according to this theory, our cause may have been noble but it was still conditioned. Our conditions were for her to get back on her feet, even if it was from our point of few a thing that would help her. According to this theory it may not have been what she was planning for or what was part of her soul contract.
Ok I can handle that.
 |
| A Purity Mandala |
So this then leads me to think that one should help someone out, take them into your home and not expect them to ever leave? Is that person then just allowed to feed off of you until they get tired of it? I can’t agree with that. So this very interesting woman from Klaver (a small town in South Africa) explains to me that one should have boundaries on your sand pit (proverbially speaking). This will stop you from becoming a doormat. This I like of course because it protects the person that is doing the good deed. But only after much thought and when I had already left for home did I think about it again. If you create boundaries when doing things for others, is that not a condition. If I take you into my home and I tell you that I can only help you in this way for two weeks, is that not just me saying, “You can live with me on the condition that you move out it two weeks”? And if I do not set that boundary and I am eventually forced to ask you to contribute in some way because I simply cannot afford it anymore, is that not just me saying “you can carry on staying here on the condition that you contribute”?
I am starting to think that nothing that we do is without condition. Why do you work? On the condition that you get a salary to live. You can lose weight on the condition that you eat correctly and do exercise. It seems like everything has a condition but that maybe we should look at the purity scale of the condition instead of the fact that it is a condition. But this then brings a new issue of, pure according to whose standards? Take my friend that I helped out. To me it was a pure intention to help her out. To try and get her a job and get her back on her feet. She clearly didn’t see it like that because she didn’t want a job and thus saw me as trying to put my nose where it doesn’t belong. When I think about it, she didn’t ask me to help her find a job. I suggested it and maybe she just went along with it out of being polite or not being sure how to say no.
I have to be honest that I do not know how to think, feel, deal, or handle the situation and the future situations from here on. If you think about it, even borrowing a cd to someone has that silent condition that they do not fuck it up. Everything is conditioned and I am starting to think that if it wasn’t then we could just do whatever we wanted without ever having to face consequences for our actions. Is condition then not just a modern day term for Karma? Maybe, I don’t know.
Well so far as what I can think there is no condition to you reading my blog out of your own free will. So until tomorrow, happy reading.
Mwah!
No comments:
Post a Comment